Economic impact

Local activity.
Public return.

Count civic benefits honestly—and show which dollars can actually pay the public bills.

Updated September 8, 2026Sources & corrections ↗

The short version. Economic output, net new tax revenue and available debt-service cash are different measures. A sound public decision needs all three distinguished.

The test that matters for the budget

01Start with receiptsShow the actual payer, source and timing.
02Subtract prior claimsOperating costs, offsets, restrictions and reserves.
03Compare with obligationsDebt service and continuing public commitments.

A positive economic-impact estimate does not, by itself, balance the public financing plan.

Economic activity is not net fiscal return

An event can support local businesses, jobs and civic enjoyment without generating enough net new tax revenue to repay its public cost. Separate existing activity, genuinely additional activity, displacement from other local spending, visitor spending and the share of each receipt available to the government that pays.

Public value may justify an explicit subsidy. The analysis should disclose that policy choice rather than count gross output as money available for debt service. Construction activity is temporary, and public money has alternative uses.

Read the FY 2022–23 economic-impact study. Its historical activity estimates should not be treated as a guarantee of the proposed renovation’s incremental fiscal return.

Use the full financing model

The City and County funding assumptions need reconciliation. Show existing and new receipts separately, after costs, offsets and restrictions. Compare annual cash flow with debt service under lower receipts, higher rates and delayed construction. Preserve legally conditioned continuing contributions.

Sources: August 12 City term sheet · County Resolution 2026-050 · City CFO financing memo

A correction to the former comparison

The $252.9 million workbook sum is reproducible at its 2024 cost basis. The former comparison of that sum as a verified transformation “need” with a modeled all-in public cost conflated scope, timing and dollar basis; that interpretation is withdrawn. Use the assessment analysis and complete workbook, funding ledger and independent cost model.

How these numbers fit together

$573MProposed public renovation portion: State $365M, City $120M, County $88M. The adopted negotiating documents still need a reconciled funding plan and complete project budget. Proposal verified

Up to $288.6MContinuing contribution ceilings: City $275M plus County $13.6M. Annual limits and actual-receipt conditions matter; these are not unconditional cash commitments. Proposal verified

$861.6M$573M + $288.6M: combined nominal framework ceilings before financing costs. This is neither a present value nor a binding all-in expenditure. Do not add repayment of the same borrowed principal twice. Calculated

$3.17M + $3MProposed initial annual rent and tax-offset payment. Rent begins at the specified post-renovation commencement and escalates by the lesser of CPI-W or 3%; the tax offset grows 5%. Start dates, recipients and credits still matter. These are not the public’s only receipts. Proposal verified

UnvaluedThe maintenance claim, new commercial rights and operating alternatives require legal, engineering and financial valuation. A lifecycle cost estimate is not a damages award; gross venue revenue is not profit.

Verified describes what a source says, not that a proposed obligation is signed or funded. The reconciled ledger and sources →