What is the latest on the new Vikings stadium?
The Vikings stadium bill that was unveiled on May 3, 2010, failed to pass through the Legislature before the Session ended on May 17. However, a bi-partisan group of legislators have stepped up to work on securing the long-term future of the Vikings in Minnesota. This group of leaders has acknowledged that having an NFL team in Minnesota requires a stadium solution. This solution must be found in the 2011 Session.
What is the Vikings current stadium situation?
The Vikings have just 20 games remaining on the lease at the Metrodome, and team officials have been firm they will not sign a lease extension without a stadium solution in place.
The team currently ranks at the bottom of the NFL in stadium revenues due to the challenges of the Metrodome. Since 1992, 28 of the 32 NFL cities have either built new stadiums or significantly renovated their existing facilities, making it difficult for the Vikings to remain competitive. While the Metrodome has been a great asset for the State of Minnesota for 28 years, the reality is the facility is obsolete for use for NFL games. It no longer provides fans with the experience they expect or deserve, and because of its revenue challenges, the Vikings receive subsidies from other teams (between $15-20 million) each year, a controversial situation among NFL owners.
Where is the team looking at building a new facility?
The current Metrodome site offers the necessary infrastructure for a 65,000-seat stadium – roads, light rail, utilities – and is likely the most cost-efficient site. The Vikings have also been approached by a number of communities outside of Minneapolis with potential stadium sites to consider. These suburban sites may offer more acreage, as well as much-needed political support and potential financial investment. Ultimately the team's goal is to “build the best stadium in the most advantageous location at the lowest cost.” The site question needs to be resolved quickly.
What are the amenities for fans?
While the Metrodome has been a great asset to the state of Minnesota for nearly 30 years, the reality is that the stadium no longer provides the experience Vikings fans expect or deserve. NFL games are meant to be day-long events, but because of the challenges of the Metrodome, once inside fans want to just get to their seat, watch the game and get out. The sad truth is that fans have to make a decision to either go to the bathroom or buy something to eat at halftime because they can’t do both without missing a significant portion of the third quarter. A new facility would include wider concourses, more restrooms and concessions with better food options, increased sideline seating and an overall better game day experience. The Vikings goal is to make the stadium a destination for fans to enjoy the entire game day experience.
Will the stadium be open air, fixed or retractable roof?
While the Vikings do not require a roof for the team’s use of the new stadium, the team recognizes a roof will benefit the State by allowing significantly more events during winter months. With the Twins and Gophers stadiums both open-air, some State and local leaders are advocating for a major climate-controlled facility. In fact, the current bill making its way through the Legislature includes a fixed roof.
The cost of having a roof, however, is approximately $160-200 million (depending on fixed vs. retractable) and the Vikings consider the costs of the roof to be a public expense because the benefits of a roof would accrue to the State of Minnesota and the local community, not to the Vikings.
What is the cost of a new facility? What will be the team’s financial contribution? The public’s contribution?
Because of lower interest rates and construction costs, the approximate cost of a new stadium has dropped nearly 9%, bringing the cost of an open-air facility to approximately $670 million. With a retractable roof - something the Vikings do not need for 10 games a year but understand the benefit to the State for hosting year-round events – the cost increases to approximately $870 million. The current bill moving through the Legislature is for a fixed-roof stadium with a cost of $791 million. (That total, however, does not include a parking structure that must be included with any NFL stadium).
Vikings ownership has committed to contributing 1/3 of the cost of an open-air stadium, or $223 million. (The benefits of a stadium roof would accrue to the State of Minnesota and the local community, not to the Vikings). This is in line with the average public-private breakdown of NFL stadium deals throughout the country (1/3 private, 2/3 public). In Minnesota, the Twins ballpark legislation required the team to pay less than 30% of the initial cost while Hennepin County covered the remaining 71%. Using those numbers, financing on the public side would be between $29-42 million annually to cover the bonds, depending on roof vs. no roof, interest rates, etc.
Why is the proposed Vikings contribution a reasonable amount?
Around the country, public-private partnerships have allowed communities to retain their professional sports teams and benefit from modern facilities for other events throughout the year. Because these stadiums are used for other events throughout the year, a public-private partnership is the best option. In truth, modern stadiums are expensive, which is why neither the team nor the community can fund them alone. Both parties have to work together to achieve a mutually-beneficial outcome. The team is also committed to funding 1/3 of the cost of an open-air stadium because the benefits of a stadium roof would accrue to the State of Minnesota and the local community, not to the Vikings.
What are the team’s 2011 Session goals?
While the Vikings understand and respect the many challenges facing the legislature, the stadium issue must be addressed in 2011. The Metrodome lease expires after the 2011 season, interest rates and construction costs are down significantly from previous years and this project will spur economic development and add 7,500 construction jobs at a critical time for the State’s economy.
Why a new stadium during tough economic times?
While the Vikings understand the current economic environment, the team believes this project should be viewed as an economic stimulus and job-creation package. With the Twins and Gophers stadiums complete, 5,300 construction workers are looking for their next project. As Conventions, Sports & Leisure, International (CSL) and Mortenson Construction reported in a recent Jobs and Economic Impact Analysis related to a new facility, this project will create 7,500 construction jobs and support approximately 13,000 jobs during the construction period. Over $286 million will go toward construction wages; in addition, the fabrication of project materials (cost estimated at $467 million) will create a separate substantial number of jobs and wages. Of the total materials and labor subcontract value ($754 million), 95% will go to local tradespeople within Minnesota.
Upon completion of the facility, 3,400 full and part-time jobs will be supported and over $21 million will be generated per year in tax revenue, an increase of $3 million over the Metrodome. Acting now also allows Minnesota to benefit from lower construction and financing costs.
What are the benefits to the State of Minnesota and its citizens of building a new facility?
Along with the economic benefits that are outlined on this web site and are included in CSL’s recent Jobs and Economic Impact Analysis, Minnesotans would have a publicly-owned and operated major, multi-purpose facility available to host large events. Despite losing the Twins and the Gophers, the Metrodome is still used over 200 days a year; the majority of that usage involves less-known events such as high school and amateur baseball, high school football and trade shows.
Building a new stadium also retains the Vikings in Minnesota for at least the next 30 years. As the most popular team in the state, the Vikings are a part of the fabric of Minnesota. The team gives us a common bond, something to discuss at work and enjoy with our families. In 2009, nearly half of the state’s 5 million people watched, listened to or attended Vikings games on Sundays. The Vikings truly do impact Minnesota’s quality of life.
Isn’t the team making enough money in the current stadium?
The Vikings rank at the bottom of the NFL in revenue due to the team’s lack of revenue at the current stadium. Each of the NFC North opponents – Chicago, Detroit and Green Bay – generates $30 million more annually than the Vikings, making it more difficult for the team to compete each year.
What funding package/proposal does the team support?
While the Vikings are not committed to any one solution, the team believes there are several viable finance options and supports those that are user-based, meaning those who use or benefit from the facility should contribute. In the end, lawmakers will need to balance the public interests with a bill that is workable and actually ensures the Vikings remain in Minnesota for the next generation of fans.
Will the Vikings move without a new facility?
This is the third ownership group that has sought a stadium solution. The NFL and other NFL owners have made it clear that in order to have an NFL team in this market – and to secure the Vikings for the next generation – we need to resolve this issue.
Is renovation of the Metrodome an option?
The Vikings have researched and eliminated renovation as a viable option based on analyses by prominent architects and contractors. Renovation is not a long-term solution for Vikings fans. It is too costly, it will not meet the program requirements of the team or the NFL, and it greatly limits other economic development from taking place in the surrounding neighborhood.
Why does a football stadium cost so much more than a baseball stadium?
All in, the Twins facility cost approximately $550 million. An open-air Vikings stadium is estimated at $670 million, $120 million more due to the size and cost inflation from 2006. The Vikings stadium has a larger footprint and includes more square footage and programmable space than the Twins ballpark.
Why can teams like the Cowboys and Patriots pay for their stadiums with mostly private money?
Larger markets can generate more stadium revenues than markets similar to Minneapolis. For example, Dallas raised $475 million in personal seat licenses to go toward stadium construction financing, something the Vikings cannot, and will not, do. Those teams can also charge more for amenities and use those revenues to help finance stadium construction. In this sized market, we need the increased revenues from a new facility to field a competitive team.
The polls say people don’t want to fund a new stadium; why should we do it this year?
Building stadiums around the country has always been a contentious issue, but 28 of the 32 NFL cities have found ways to do it since 1992, and each of those communities has benefited from retaining its team. While economic conditions present a challenge, the Vikings believe 2010 is the year to find a solution for several reasons: interest rates and construction costs are significantly lower than previous years, the project will support 13,000 jobs, including 7,500 construction jobs, and provide significant economic activity. When the building and construction trades is suffering from nearly 40% unemployment, now is the time to put those people back to work, and a Vikings stadium is the largest project on the horizon to do that. We can’t do business at the Capitol via public opinion polls. If we did, we never would have built the Hiawatha Light Rail Line, the Twins ballpark or the Guthrie Theater. This project needs leadership and action at the state and local level.
What is the situation with the MSFC? Why won’t the team extend the lease?
The Vikings’ situation with the MSFC is complicated. The team and the Commission have a working relationship surrounding the business operations of the stadium; however, the MSFC, without any prior discussion with the team, passed a resolution that would require the Vikings to extend the lease through 2013. If the team refused to sign this lease extension, the MSFC would begin charging an additional $4 million in rent for the next two years on top of the $6 million the team currently pays. Because the team has the most onerous lease in the NFL, the Vikings have long said an extension will not happen without a stadium solution.
Does the team need to have a local partner?
Some State leaders, including the Governor, insist on the need for a local partner to help fund the cost of a new stadium. However, no local community other than Hennepin County is large enough to support the entire financial burden, and because Hennepin County is already helping pay for the new Twins ballpark, it is unrealistic to think the county can, or should, be solely responsible for a local partner’s contribution.
What are the team’s feelings on the Racino or gambling to pay for the facility?
The Vikings appreciate legislators bringing forward the racino proposal but have no position on the complex issue. The Racino bill was voted down earlier this Session, but if that is the path the State ultimately chooses to pursue to fund a stadium, the team would certainly participate. The idea would have to be vetted with the NFL because of the league’s regulations on gambling.
What is the Vikings position in a new St. Paul Saints stadium?
The Vikings firmly believe all our professional sports teams, including the St. Paul Saints, enhance the quality of life in Minnesota. The Vikings supported the building of both the Twins and Gophers stadiums in 2006, even though it ultimately led to the Vikings being asked to wait (four years and counting). Without knowing the details of the Saints request, the team believes the baseball team provides another family event for the citizens of Minnesota and it’s important for that tradition to continue.