What should be the public contribution to a Vikings stadium?

Each Monday now through the election, we’ll pose a question on an issue that’s pertinent to the race for Minnesota governor. Today’s Question: What should be the public contribution to a Vikings stadium?

Independence Party candidate Tom Horner:

Leadership requires candidates to offer details, especially on controversial issues. I’m the only candidate to offer a specific plan for a stadium — the details of which are available at Horner2010.com. My plan says that those who benefit the most from a new stadium and those who use a stadium will pay for it. The proposal I’ve put together allows taxpayers who don’t want to support a stadium to avoid paying one cent. But I’ve also said that we won’t take up this issue until after we have dealt with the far more urgent matters of the budget, jobs, education and other key issues — and we won’t use a single penny of general revenue money to pay for a stadium.

Democratic candidate Mark Dayton:

Any new stadium must be a “People’s Stadium” where the financial benefits to all Minnesotans from the taxes paid by 8,000 people working for three years to build it and other public benefits are greater than any public cost. As governor, I would try to negotiate that good deal for the people of Minnesota.

Republican candidate Tom Emmer:

We need to recognize that our sports teams are businesses, and every business is important to Minnesota. As governor I would work as hard to keep the Vikings in Minnesota as I would to keep 3M and Cargill here. Like every other business we want the Vikings to be successful and we should help them facilitate potential local partnerships that will ensure their future success in Minnesota. Nobody wants to see the Vikings leave and I am committed to keeping the Vikings in Minnesota.