Prepared for Councilor Angelita Morillo
Relocation Diligence: Costs to Leave
Rip City, Not Rip Off | May 2026 | Public-record and reported-source brief
What would ownership actually have to overcome to leave Portland?
Losing the Blazers would hurt Portland. That is why Council should negotiate hard, not rush. Even after the current lease expires in 2030, relocation still requires NBA approval, possible league fees, a superior destination package, local revenue rebuilding, and economics that beat staying in a publicly renovated Moda Center.
1. Itemized Cost Stack
| Cost / risk | Low case | High case | Confidence | Why it matters |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Lease termination, settlement, damages, delay exposure | $0 | $500M+ | Timing dependent | Lower after 2030 under the current lease, but new public-financing agreements could add clawbacks, liquidated damages, non-relocation penalties, or injunction risk. |
| Legal fees, NBA process, consultants, public affairs | $5M | $25M+ | Model estimate | Realistic after-2030 litigation/process spend if Portland contests the move or the league process is contested. This excludes any damages or settlement payment. |
| NBA relocation fee | $250M | $2B+ | Board discretion | The NBA Constitution lets the Board attach conditions, including a reasonable relocation fee based on the business opportunity and franchise value increase. |
| Destination arena / lease / control package | $500M | $2B+ | High | A credible move needs an NBA-quality arena and economics better than a renovated, publicly owned Moda Center. That could mean new construction, major renovation, lease payments, or revenue concessions. |
| Local revenue reset | $100M | $200M+ | Model estimate | National media money travels with the team. Local sponsorships, suites, premium seats, naming rights, season-ticket demand, and local media economics must be rebuilt. |
| Smaller-market or weaker-package risk | $250M | $650M+ | Market risk | Seattle is larger, but is being explored for expansion. Most other floated metros are smaller TV markets or lack a disclosed NBA package superior to Portland. |
| Forfeited state-backed renovation opportunity | $365M | $365M+ | Confirmed floor | SB 1501 authorizes up to $365M in state bond authority contingent on local commitments. The full value depends on city/county participation and the final lease/revenue waterfall. |
| Illustrative full-friction range | ~$1.47B | ~$5.72B+ | Scenario only | Not every line applies in every scenario. Relocation is not automatically free or accretive after 2030. |
Before 2030 vs. after 2030
Lease termination exposure is materially different before and after the current lease date. But no lease-termination fee after 2030 does not mean relocation is free. Council should also model public losses: athlete tax revenue, arena jobs, Central City activity, and the value of a public arena without an NBA anchor.
The NBA gate is real
Article 7 requires a relocation application, Relocation Committee review, Board consideration, and a majority vote of all Members. The Board may also impose a relocation fee and other conditions.
Vote standard: do not treat relocation as proven leverage unless proponents disclose the city, arena, ownership group, lease/control package, NBA approval path, expected relocation fee, and the cost of leaving against the value of staying.
Prepared for Councilor Angelita Morillo
Relocation Diligence: Alternatives by Metro
Deal proponents should identify a superior destination before asking Portlanders to accept an unnamed threat.
Where would the team actually go, and on what terms?
Seattle and Las Vegas are attractive markets, but the NBA is treating them as expansion opportunities. Austin, Raleigh, Nashville, San Diego, Kansas City, Vancouver, and Mexico City all deserve analysis, but no public record shows a completed package that clearly beats staying in a renovated Moda Center.
Metro-by-Metro Reality Check
| Metro | TV market | Arena / package status | Relocation reality | Read |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Portland | #23 ~1.28M HH |
Existing NBA market; city owns Moda Center; state bond authority depends on local commitments. | This is the baseline to beat: established fan base, local sponsorship base, existing arena, public renovation pathway, and league preference for staying if the arena issue is solved. | Baseline |
| Seattle | #13 ~2.10M HH |
Climate Pledge Arena is a major arena; Seattle has strong NBA history. | Strongest market on paper, but the NBA has formally authorized expansion exploration for Seattle. Relocation would consume the league's clearest expansion asset unless owners are made whole. | Expansion conflict |
| Las Vegas | #40 ~0.90M HH |
T-Mobile Arena hosts major events and basketball, but a final NBA arena/control package is not public. | Attractive growth and sponsorship market, but smaller TV market than Portland and also an active NBA expansion-exploration target. Relocation would need to beat clean expansion economics. | Expansion conflict |
| Austin | #34 ~1.03M HH |
Moody Center is a 15,000+ seat venue, but its listed basketball capacity is 10,000+ and it is built around UT/concert use. | High-growth Texas economy, but smaller DMA than Portland, close to San Antonio/Spurs territory, and no NBA-exclusive arena-control package disclosed. | Spurs conflict / unproven |
| Raleigh-Durham | #22 ~1.35M HH |
Lenovo Center has a $300M renovation/district path and Dundon's Hurricanes connection. | Comparable TV market and the most Dundon-adjacent alternative, but no public NBA lease, subsidy, Hornets/territory analysis, or Board path has been disclosed. | Dundon nexus / unproven |
| Nashville | #26 ~1.20M HH |
Bridgestone Arena seats roughly NBA scale for basketball but is NHL-anchored. | Fast-growing and plausible long-term sports market, but smaller TV market than Portland and no disclosed NBA ownership, subsidy, lease, or arena-control package superior to Portland. | Unproven package |
| San Diego | #30 ~1.12M HH |
Midway Rising contemplates a new 16,000-seat arena; current package is not a completed NBA relocation deal. | Large region, but smaller TV market than Portland, no public NBA-ready package, and Southern California market/territorial issues would require league analysis. | Unproven package |
| Kansas City | #33 ~1.03M HH |
T-Mobile Center is an existing downtown arena without an NBA or NHL anchor tenant. | Turnkey building helps, but the market is materially smaller than Portland and no public record shows an NBA lease, ownership, or subsidy package that beats staying. | Unproven package |
| Vancouver, B.C. | No U.S. DMA | Rogers Arena is a former NBA building and current NHL venue. | Large cross-border market, but the NBA left in 2001; currency, tax, media, sponsorship, and league-operations issues need years of visible league work. Not a credible 2030 pressure point without a public package. | Cross-border / unproven |
| Mexico City | No U.S. DMA | Arena CDMX hosts NBA games and the G League Capitanes. | Huge long-term market, but current expansion focus is Seattle/Vegas; travel, operations, currency, tax, security, and player-relations issues remain unresolved publicly. Not a credible 2030 relocation timeline without years of advance league work. | Long-term / speculative |
Why Seattle/Vegas are different
Reported expansion bids could land in the $7B-$10B range per team. If one relocation consumes Seattle or Las Vegas, owners may give up a $7B-$10B expansion sale, or roughly $230M-$330M per existing team if split evenly among 30 owners. If both markets are preserved for expansion, the combined pool could be $14B-$20B, or roughly $467M-$667M per owner before league adjustments.
Why floated metros are not enough
A market can win if it offers a clearly better arena-control and revenue package. No such package has been disclosed. Council should not negotiate against a blank map.
Council should ask a narrow question: compared with staying in Portland under a fair public-return deal, has anyone shown a specific alternative metro, arena, lease, ownership group, subsidy, relocation-fee treatment, NBA approval path, and 2030-ready timeline? As of the public record, no.