PORTLAND, Ore. (KATU) — A new state-commissioned report found most comparable NBA arena renovation deals included significant private investment or long-term revenue sharing — unlike the proposal currently being negotiated for the Moda Center.
The report, required by the legislation authorizing Oregon’s $365 million commitment to the project, also highlights disagreement between the state’s consultant and the Trail Blazers over which NBA cities should serve as the best comparisons for Portland.
The 15-page report looked at arena deals in all 30 NBA markets and settled on six as market comps as the city, state, and county negotiate a $600 million renovation of Moda Center.
The state’s consultant – PFM Financial Advisors – broke down deals in Cleveland, Milwaukee, Minneapolis, Orlando, Indianapolis, and Memphis.
The full report is included below.
Four of the cities in the state’s analysis received private contributions ranging from 18% to 62% of the project. Some cities secured annual rent payments or other revenue sharing to offset public funding.
Among the state’s six comparable projects, only Memphis, where negotiations are ongoing, and Orlando relied entirely on public funding for construction.
In Orlando, the state report said the city’s roughly $225 million investment is offset by annual rent payments, a share of naming rights, and a share of corporate suite sales. The city of Orlando also operates the arena – meaning it makes money off non-NBA events at the arena.
The Blazers, though Rip City Management, are the current operator of Moda Center.
THE TEAM’S COMPARISONS FOR A DEAL
The team, through internal documents shared with city and state leaders, largely chose different cities for its market comps.
The team pointed to Salt Lake City, Memphis, Charlotte, Oklahoma City, Indianapolis, San Antonio, and Washington D.C. as arena comps.
READ MORE | Portland leaders debate public investment in Moda Center renovation project
Three of those cities – Salt Lake, Memphis, and Charlotte – saw no direct private investment in the arena projects. Even so, two of those deals included other financial concessions from the teams.
The owners of the Jazz agreed to invest in development projects around the arena. Charlotte’s investment was partially offset by naming rights revenue, which covered the cost of the team’s practice facility, according to public reporting. The Hornets also agreed to pay rent and cover cost overruns on at least parts of the project.
Blazers owner Tom Dundon has not publicly committed to investing in a redevelopment of the Rose Quarter, like he did outside the arena his Carolina Hurricanes play in in Raleigh, N.C.
THE CITY AND TEAM HAVE DISAGREED IN THE PAST
City records show the team and city have previously disagreed over what deals to look at as a benchmark.
In January 2026, the manager of the city’s Spectator Venues and Visitor Activities Program emailed the Blazers’ consultant and asked the team to include Milwaukee and Sacramento as comparisons. Teams in both cities contributed significantly to projects costs.
The team’s consultant – Dan Barrett with CAA Icon – pushed back.
“As the lead negotiator for the public sector in both Sacramento and Milwaukee, I can say that the market has clearly changed, and these comparables are dated. The market has even changed since the time we represented the Charlotte Hornets,” Barrett wrote.
The back-and-forth along with the differences in comparisons by the team and state show how difficult it may be to settle on market comparisons.
Dundon provided his expectation of a deal in his introductory news conference in April.
“We’re going to negotiate and do a market deal, and they should do a deal — the people that represent the city and the county and your tax dollars — are going to do a deal that’s great for them I hope,” Dundon said.
The big question remains how to define “market deal.”
SOME COUNCILORS WANT TO SEE PRIVATE INVESTMENT
The lack of private investment in the Blazers’ renovation proposal is a red line for some city councilors.
“That is probably my number one issue. I am going to have a hard time agreeing to give public money if I’m not seeing a private investment. That is what public-private investment means, and I will be demanding that that comes true,” Councilor Candace Avalos said in a work session in June.
Other councilors want the team to pay rent, share arena naming rights revenue, or split money made from non-NBA events at Moda Center to offset the city’s investment – like other teams have agreed to in other deals.
KATU asked the Blazers if ownership was open to any of that in a long-term deal.
“I can’t speculate at this point on terms the city may propose in negotiations,” a spokesperson said. “It is worth noting that Moda Center was built and maintained for 30 years with $350 million in private money, or $730 million in today’s dollars, exceeding the combined private investment in original construction and renovation for arenas in comparable markets. On top of that, through ticket fees and parking revenue, the team has contributed over $160 million ($240 million today) to the city’s spectator fund, which the city used to renovate and maintain other city-owned facilities—Providence Park and Veterans Memorial Coliseum. Essentially, the team has prepaid its contribution to this project: keeping Moda Center in excellent condition while subsidizing the City’s maintenance of their other venues.”
READ MORE | Portland councilors eye Blazers’ current lease to secure private investment
As the debate continues at city hall, and both sides look to other deals as blueprints, critics of the current deal believe it takes a more detailed analysis to settle on comparable deals.
Edan Krolewicz – a Blazers fan and critic of the deal as it’s proposed – said just looking at who pays for a renovation doesn’t give the full picture.
“You need to actually look at all of the possible revenue streams that come in through the arena and then compare that, because every deal has slightly different revenue streams that are captured by the public and the private parties,” Krolewicz said.
Without council approval, the entire deal could fall apart. State funding is contingent on the city agreeing to pay its part. Councilors will discuss this in two more public meetings in July ahead of a possible August vote on tentative terms of a deal for the city.
The negotiations are expected to wrap up sometime later this year.
