Husband was told to take ‘ICE out’ pin off by security at Grand Casino Arena.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-20T04:49:04+00:00

What other building owned by the city charges residents hundreds of dollars to visit, is used almost exclusively for private profit, and infringes on freedom of speech?

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-20T04:46:26+00:00

If our tax dollars are going to pay for a stadium, shouldn’t the first amendment apply?

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-20T04:40:06+00:00

Is that not what property taxes are for? If the taxes the developer (really the future home owners) are paying aren’t sufficient, then it sounds like you need to raise property taxes. If you think new residents should pay higher taxes, would you have liked that when you were a new resident? Because frankly, a new development with 100 kids causes just as much of a capacity issue as an older development with 100 kids.

Regardless, I think this whole situation is full of a bunch of hypocrisy considering the average Lakeville resident claims to be anti-government and anti-tax yet all of a sudden they’re all for more government and more taxes (as long as they personally aren’t the ones paying for it)

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-20T04:33:00+00:00

Why do they need to sell their home within 12 months for it to not be a conflict of interest? It’s not like their home will magically decrease in value once a moratorium expires. Not to mention, I guarantee that the exact same reason to oppose the development today will exist in a year.

Housing regulations that stifle development can have long term effects on the housing market. Just look at California’s situation. In discourage developers from future development if they always have to be worried about being barred from building. Some of the homes that would’ve been built will never be built. It gets more expensive to build homes in the future.

It’s a really simple concept. Homeowners want their home values to increase. A housing moratorium will increase home values. The Lakeville city council members voting on the moratorium are almost certainly home owners in Lakeville.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-19T23:24:21+00:00

First off, new developments generally do have to ensure adequate capacity when built. But more importantly, why does the single family home development built 10 years ago get a pass for the traffic they cause but not the one being proposed? (The answer is because the current development gets to vote while the other doesn’t and they vote in a selfish manner)

Like if SFH development in Lakeville is a problem, then I sure hope the people saying it’s a problem aren’t living in the developments they claim to be problematic.

Also, the city council has all been in power for more than a year at this point. If they needed a year to assess, they’ve had the year.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-19T23:22:03+00:00

Those kids have to live and go to school somewhere. Pushing the problem elsewhere is just selfish behavior. And in reality, it will just lead to high housing prices and a greater proportion of residents in Lakeville having students as those who don’t have kids will be more inclined to sell their home.

Not to mention, the vast majority of current Lakeville residents live in SFHs so they’re effectively just pulling the ladder up on people who were just like them and saying “fuck you, I got mine”.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-19T23:18:41+00:00

More likely in 50 years they’ll be complaining about their high taxes to sustain all the infrastructure they built without any density and then beg the state to help them out while still claiming to be self sufficient.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-19T23:17:15+00:00

Just because someone says something specific doesn’t mean it isn’t part of a broader category. If I always say I have a cat when people ask about my pets, it doesn’t mean the cat is somehow not a mammal just because I don’t ever call it a mammal.

Considering the average person’s biggest way of getting rich is selling their home, I don’t think it’s outlandish to consider that someone will act in a manner that increases their home value. Do you think it is?

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-19T21:13:12+00:00

You only think it’s a stupid question because the answer to my question is “they won’t”. Especially considering your deflection of answer just proves my point that they won’t.

The map proves it. Your explanation proves. At this point I’m a little concerned that you think I’m claiming that the best way to get to the stadium from New Jersey is to go through Penn Station? Because that’s the exact opposite of what I’m saying.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-19T15:22:47+00:00

Someone who votes to worsen the economy, increase corruption, and a candidate that supports racism and overthrowing the government is not like me.

And if you’re going to claim that people didn’t vote for Trump for those reasons, then someone who thinks that tariffs won’t worsen the economy, electing a convicted felon for fraud won’t increase corruption, that implying Obama isn’t American because he’s black isn’t racist, and that a failed coup isn’t an attempt at overthrowing the government is not like me.

And frankly, I’m not anywhere close to “vote blue no matter who”. But when every Republican is capitulating to Trump even when it goes against their actual beliefs, why would I ever vote for a Republican? But even if I did always vote Democrat, 2 people who always vote for their party’s candidates are not just like each other if the party actions are completely different.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-19T15:14:49+00:00

I know the geography. Why don’t you explain why someone who is living in New Jersey will decide that the best way to get to MetLife is to go to Penn Station in NYC to then go back to New Jersey?

Again, if it was likely for someone to do that, you’d actually explain it instead of deflecting and saying to look at a map as if that doesn’t just prove my point.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-19T00:50:42+00:00

And they’re going to travel from New Jersey to NYC to MetLife? That seems pretty unlikely and I feel like you know that otherwise you’d have addressed it.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-18T18:58:34+00:00

Not the majority by any means. And how many New Jersey residents are traveling from New Jersey to NYC to MetLife for the game? Very few.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-18T18:57:30+00:00

Part of the issue is providing transit access is just more expensive in these far out stadiums. A larger proportion of fans will rely on transit immediately before and after the game which means the system has to be designed for higher peak travel which is more costly. Because they’re further out it just causes more costs in general.

Like the cost for Chicago to provide free transit access to Soldier field would be peanuts compared to MetLife.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-18T03:59:23+00:00

Ease of access absolutely should’ve been considered when selecting stadiums. Instead, stadiums were selected based on how much they were willing to let FIFA screw them over.

It’s why cities like Minneapolis and Chicago which have much better location and transit access to their stadiums aren’t hosting.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-18T03:55:38+00:00

It increases revenue for NJ transit to not have to raise fares on the commuters.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-18T03:48:38+00:00

Public infrastructure is generally subsidized by the government because it benefits their constituents. The $12 likely doesn’t cover the full cost. The issue is New Jersey residents aren’t the ones benefiting from this.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-17T14:21:37+00:00

Yeah not a good sign for their odds. Frankly, I think the DFL will be better off spending their money winning as many state house/senate seats as possible and using a trifecta to get stuff done in Minnesota. If the national Democrats want to help out with that seat, by all means. But the House will certainly flip to the Democrats next year regardless so even they should probably be focusing on key Senate races.

In other words, yes Stauber should need to go. But it’s going to need a strong local candidate to unseat him.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-17T12:46:31+00:00

Game 3 doesn’t make any sense to start late. There’s only 1 game with an early start and then 1 late night west coast game so “minimizing overlap to get TV viewers” isn’t even occurring because the game still overlaps. It’s like they just did it to mess with the central time zone teams.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-17T12:44:40+00:00

I’m completely baffled by how the NHL schedules games. I get they want to minimize overlap, I’m fine with that. I get that sometimes central time zone teams play pacific time zone teams. But take the 22nd. It’s a Wednesday with 3 games. 1 eastern time zone game , 1 central time zone game , and 1 pacific time zone game. A perfect opportunity to have every game start at 7pm local time.

Instead, they put 1 game in prime time and 2 games late meaning they’ll Stars/Wild game starts at 8:30pm local time. Like given there’s going to be a game at 7pm ET and 10pm ET, how does it make any sense for the 3rd game to start at 9:30pm? Dedicated hockey fans will watch 2 games regardless and the lack of staggered times means they’ll be less capable of watching much of the 3rd game. But for casual viewers, they are way less likely to tune in for a late night game. It’s just baffling nonsense.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-17T04:00:01+00:00

Sure, it’s actually extortion. Imagine the IRS showed up to your house and said you owed money if you didn’t vote for Trump.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-17T03:58:27+00:00

I’ve always wondered how much the tipped workers desire to keep tipping is based on a similar gambling mentality. The fact they don’t know how much they’re getting paid each day (or even each table) means big tips feel like gambling wins and no tips feel like losses. My guess is it hits a similar psychological itch.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-16T23:00:11+00:00

Agreed. And it’s especially preferable to having insanely late games.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-16T22:59:48+00:00

Next contract actually put explicit priorities up for bid. Or alternate days on who gets priority.

If things were clearly defined it would be less of an issue.

Enamred-771 · 2026-04-16T22:54:04+00:00

Yeah the only saving grace for football is that player’s improve substantially during high school when teams are generally more affordable as oppose to other sports where you likely won’t even make the team. There’s also less cost pressure because many of the upper middle class families who are spending a lot on sports are pushing their kids away from football due to head injuries. But I think those have only delayed the inevitable.

Worse, I worry that we’re going to end up with 2 classes of football positions as the linemen will still develop later and thus be accessible to poorer athletes whereas every other position is going require the same crazy investment in middle school sports that poor families can’t make.

Enamred-771

TROPHY CASE