Colts: Getting a stadium 101

September 22, 2008
Back to TopCommentsE-mailPrint
vikingBefore the Indianapolis Colts beat the Minnesota Vikings on the field Sept. 14, they were schooling them off the field.

Vikings owner Zygi Wilf and his top lieutenants spent two days the week before the game with the Colts’ top brass talking strategy about obtaining legislative approval and financing for a new stadium. They also toured Lucas Oil Stadium. Vikings officials said they came away with a plan to finance their own new stadium involving hotel, car rental, a multi-county restaurant tax and a sports event admission tax. If that sounds familiar, that’s because it’s the formula local city and state officials used to fund LOS.

With their lease expiring in 2011, the Vikings hope to move into a new stadium for the 2012 season. Colts owner Jim Irsay said he would support awarding Minnesota its second Super Bowl if the new stadium gets built. The timing is right to for the Vikings to pursue a new stadium deal, and without it they won’t stay financially viable, Irsay said.

“Any negotiation is about leverage and I think this is a good situation because the Wilfs and the Vikings have tremendous leverage with the lease expiring,” Irsay told the Minneapolis-St. Paul Star Tribune. “At the end of the day, it needs to get done here.”

Without a new stadium, Irsay fears the Vikings will be forced to move. “The thing we have here in Minnesota, we have a great tradition, and I’m a traditionalist,” he told the Star Tribune. “I wish we never had to leave Baltimore. I grew up there as a kid and it’s a tough thing when a team leaves.”
ADVERTISEMENT
  • ToddSeptember 22, 2008 3:06 PM
    If Irsay said this, than he is a jacka**. This guy gets a new stadium, paid by the tax payers and then slaps us in the face by saying I wish the team was still in Baltimore. Somebody needs to drive up to Carmel and smack the taste out of his elitist mouth. Talk about biting the hand that feeds you.....This former drug addict is a pompus jerk. next time he wants a free lunch, the public should remember this statement.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • IndyCarIU fanSeptember 22, 2008 7:49 PM
    Irsay did not say I wish the team was STILL in Baltimore he said I wish we never HAD to leave Baltimore Those are two very different statements.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • ToddSeptember 23, 2008 7:09 AM
    Still, not a very smart statement. Who are you IndyCarl, his accountant?
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • IndymanSeptember 23, 2008 11:23 AM
    Amazing how someone has a differing opinion or view and Todd attacks him. I have no problem with what Irsay said. It tore the heart out of that City and as we have seen, they are still not over it. The same would happen in Minnesota, here in Indy or most any City. Franchise stability is best for the league and the fans. But sometimes it does not happen that way. Bmore refused to support the team so Bob moved them.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • ToddSeptember 23, 2008 12:02 PM
    You guys keep drinking the grape kool-aid. Someday you might wake up and realize the Irsays of the world do not give a crap about their cities. It is just a business that makes them very rich. I think even if Irsay feels the way he stated, he should never have put himself in a position for his statements to be printed. After all the tax money put forth to keep the Colts. If you cannot see this point, I do not know what to tell you. The fact is I struck a nerve, because you know it is true.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment
  • DanSeptember 24, 2008 8:16 AM
    So you're trashing Irsay saying he doesn't really care about his city, and your advice is for him to lie and keep his true feelings out of the press. I think Irsay cares about Indianapolis, but not more than his bottom line. I love Indianapolis, but if I had to chose between Indianapolis and a better business opportunity elsewhere, I would choose the opportunity. I don't think that's a bad thing, it's just how it is.
    Reply to CommentFlag Comment

Post a comment to this blog

COMMENTS POLICY
We reserve the right to remove any post that we feel is obscene, profane, vulgar, racist, sexually explicit, abusive, or hateful.
 
You are legally responsible for what you post and your anonymity is not guaranteed.
 
Posts that insult, defame, threaten, harass or abuse other readers or people mentioned in IBJ editorial content are also subject to removal. Please respect the privacy of individuals and refrain from posting personal information.
 
No solicitations, spamming or advertisements are allowed. Readers may post links to other informational websites that are relevant to the topic at hand, but please do not link to objectionable material.
 
We may remove messages that are unrelated to the topic, encourage illegal activity, use all capital letters or are unreadable.
 

Messages that are flagged by readers as objectionable will be reviewed and may or may not be removed. Please do not flag a post simply because you disagree with it.

ADVANCED SEARCH
Sponsored by
ADVERTISEMENT

  1. First, the Athenaeum is going to have to get past the hurdle with the Lockerbie residents and the agreement that the parcel would be residential. Second, and in my opinion, this prime piece of property should include parking, PLUS, a black box theater(s), some market rate and affordable artist housing and a plan to renovate and reconfigure the second story theater. I would negotiate to add the DeHaan property surface parking lot into the development mix, place a one story surface parking garage on the DeHaan lot on the street level (for the Dehaan tenants use during the daytime) and add a second story to the garage that would become an addition to the current second story theater and then change the direction of the theater by moving the stage across the alley and on top of the DeHaan lot parking. You can add all the stage elements that are currently missing from the Athenaeum stage to make it more attractive for use by Ballet, Opera and traveling productions. Plus, the theater changes would probably help solve some of the soundproofing issues. Alas,it does not seem to be a part of the strategic plan to conduct a study to determine best use of the property. Seems like the current plan is a quick and easy move that ignores the property best use/potential and any strategic property planning for the effect on future generations.

  2. I recall that MSA's pilings are still in the ground and hard to remove. It’s not likely any proposal will include significant underground construction/parking because of this. Start adding 2 floors of retail, 8 floors of parking and 5-10 floors of possible hotel, and/or 10-20 floors of residential, and you are at 30 floors already with possible expansion of all the uses. But then again I could be wrong.

  3. Accoriding to their website there is no deadline to the Do Not Call list. What is this article referring to??

  4. On what planet are they entitled to this largesse from the stockholders? These people make multi-million dollar salaries: Pay for your own personal travel.

  5. It matters because they're already paid enormously fat salaries: Pay for your own personal travel. Being "taxed on it" isn't a valid excuse--so what? They're still being gifted a raft of luxury perks from somebody else's money on top of an enormous, lavish salary.

ADVERTISEMENT