Is an investment in the Mayo Clinic project a good use of state money?

The Mayo Clinic is seeking more than $500 million from the state as part of a $6 billion growth plan for the clinic. Part of the funding would be used to make Rochester a more desirable destination. Today’s Question: Is an investment in the Mayo Clinic project a good use of state money?

  • reggie

    It would be a much better investment than a football stadium.

  • T


  • sb

    Better than any sports stadium, and I’m not the first to say it.

  • GregX

    in certain ways and under certain limits.
    infrastructure spending to support the greater private sector development investment. but that should also serve a greater community need. AND .. there should a factoring in of life-cycle cost of the infrastructure…. not the old bury it and wait.
    Also – the cities, counties, state that may participate cannot be held to some artificial business driven timeline – the communities havre to pace their investment $$ based on their ability to fulfill other community obligations.

  • Elijah the Tishbite

    I agree, it’s much better than another temple to the Baals (Footbaal, Basebaal, Basketbaal, Hockey [that’s a Baal, too]).

  • James

    Better than the stadium, but still a bad use of state funds.
    If it is a “destination medical clinic” the Mayo could easily put a modest surcharge on out-of-state and out-of-country patients and pay for the infrastructure itself.
    If their new patients are from in-state, they are just competing with other in-state clinics and should not be assisted.
    I hope our state negotiators remember that The Mayo has been trained by Alex Karras. “You don’t get what you deserve; you get what you ask for.” They asked. Now we say “No.” Then they pay the bills themselves.

  • Jim G

    Yes. They’re not asking for $585 million in upfront money from the state but the ability form a new, special taxing district around the Mayo Clinic campus. This district will raise $30 million a year over 20 years to allow Rochester to expand infrastructure, transportation, and land acquisition. Mayo Clinic has 32,000 employees earning good wages and is in competition with other nationally known clinics for national and international patients.

    State residents benefit from having this world class clinic in our backyard. My sister has traveled to Rochester over the past year seeking treatments unavailable at her local medical facility. These treatments might just save her life, and would not have been available without the Mayo Clinic Model. This is a win-win for Rochester, the Mayo Clinic, our state residents’ health, and economic growth. It’s an opportunity to re-brand our state so that when people hear of Minnesota they don’t immediately think of bone chilling cold, but of the Mayo Clinic, life, and the best it as to offer.

  • RockyRoad2

    Yes. It will help Minnesota strengthen its position as a health care leader. Health care jobs tend to be good paying jobs, and this investment has the potential to help Minnesota in many ways (employment, increased tax revenue, prestige, to name a few.)

  • SN

    Anyone questioning the wisdom of investing state dollars in Mayo Cinic would do well to analyze the stabilizing effect of Mayo in regards to these recent years of recession. My husband is local business owner (who services Mayo employees among others) and we have said time and again how grateful we have been for the presence of Mayo as a regional employer during this time. Many private businesses have benefitted from Mayo’s strength during this time.

  • Sharon

    Yes but only if Olmstead County and Rochester contribute to the need for infrastructure expansion. I do think it is a conflict of interest for Sen. Senjum, a Mayo employee, to carry this in the Senate.

  • Ann M

    The constant news reports about health indicate that everyone is interested in good health now. Since everyone will be healthy soon (a recent report said that childhood obesity just went way down) the Mayo Clinic won’t be needed as much. There will also be less business for Medtronic, health ins claims companies, drug treatment centers, drug companies, and pizza joints.Maybe Minnesota should start looking for some new employers to invest in. The people in my small city are used to driving to the Twin Cities for culture and events. So money spent on these things seems to have limited success. I think Rochester has the same situation. Rochester citizens are used to driving to the Twin Cities for many things. Visitors to the Mayo Clinic have limited interest in entertainment. Also, aren’t more and more of their patients treated in Rochester for a short time and then follow up in their own hometowns?They probably aren’t interested in entertainment while on short intense visits to the clinic.Many of their patients probably prefer going to Mayo Clinic in the Arizona and Florida locations. I would..

    • Steve the Cynic

      “Since everyone will be healthy soon” will probably turn out to be wishful thinking.

  • Ann M

    Usually a city has to have some natural beauty or a special attraction to become a “destination.” Rochester has several kinds of birds that poop on your head and in the parks.Maybe they are thinking that if Minnesota gives them money, then they can spend their own money to expand their Arizona and Florida locations.People in East Coast cities think of Minnesota as a backward, frozen tundra. They will go to Johns Hopkins. Where are all the extra patients going to come from? Are they being realistic?

  • Dmr

    This is one of the best investments the state could make. It wold be just that, an investment, not a subsidy..

  • Nimbus

    The Mayo Clinic draws the world to Minnesota: the best doctors, the most difficult cases, as well as the rich and famous. It is representative of what America is at its greatest, science freely applied to improving life and curing disease. If we wish to lead the future, this is exactly the kind of community partnership that can do it.

  • Gene

    No. This is what we have banks for. And ‘no’ we should not have funded the Vikings Stadium either!

  • Lawrence

    Welcome to the 21st Century where corporations, with Republican lawmakers chained to their side, rail against individuals needing government services and programs and talk us to death about how their multi-billion dollar businesses will suffer if they have to take social responsibility like the rest of us, only to come right back to OUR, the individual citizens’ legislature, begging for —– wait for it —- a government handout. And I say it’s time we stopped buying the age-old American capitalism trumps all speech. If the market is that great, why do you need my tax dollars? And where, by the way, are your’s? Why must be give you ZERO tax liability AND fund your bs plazas and campuses too?

  • Linda

    Yes! Mayo is already here and provides good jobs. It has a good reputation and is entity we want to remain here.

    It is far better to invest in existing organizations such as May than to spend tax dollars to lure new companies here.

  • georges

    We once upon a time received a warning about the Military-Industrial Complex……

    ……which turned out to be a wise warning…..and still is.

    Now, what we need to be on our guard against is the now-forming Government-Health Insurance-Clinic-Doctor-Drug Company Complex…….

    The next big rip-off of the middle class….and it is here, now, just getting a grand birthing, a healthy but breeched gigantic baby, the Affordable Health Care Act coming out first, buck naked, butt ugly.


  • belize boy

    Nearly on the dot, 99% of workers in Minnesota do not work for the Mayo. The state of Minnesota should be investing in people, not places.

  • TML

    This is absolutely a good use of state funds and a much better use than some others I can think of. The money would not be funded up front but over 20 years, only if the tax revenues from the clinic are there and would go towards community infrastructure improvements. I can’t blame Mayo for requesting that if they invest $3+ billion dollars into the Rochester campus that they know that the infrastructure to support the investment will be there. They could just as easily invest it in the AZ, FL or GA campuses. That they want to focus on MN should tell us something.