City Officials Slam Secret Settlements in Arena Funding Debate

Portland Councilors Condemn Use of NDAs in Talks for Moda Center Public Funding

Portland city councilors are raising significant concerns over the use of non-disclosure agreements during closed-door negotiations regarding a proposed major public investment into the Moda Center arena. The discussions, which involve allocating public funds for extensive renovations to the aging venue, have been criticized for a lack of transparency.

Secretive Negotiations Spark Backlash

The controversy centers on negotiations between city officials and the arena's ownership group. Several council members have publicly condemned the "backroom" nature of these talks, arguing that the use of NDAs prevents the public from understanding the terms and potential risks of a deal that could commit tens of millions in taxpayer dollars. They insist that such significant financial decisions must be made in the open.

"When public money is on the table, the public has a right to know," stated one councilor, who expressed frustration with the secretive process. The push for transparency highlights a growing tension between the desire to secure economic development deals and the obligation for governmental accountability.

Questions Over Arena's Future and Public Benefit

The proposed funding package would support substantial upgrades to the nearly 30-year-old Moda Center, home to the city's professional basketball team. Proponents argue that modernizing the facility is crucial to keeping it competitive for major concerts and events, which generate economic activity and tax revenue for the city and region.

However, skeptics question the wisdom of using public funds to subsidize a privately-owned venue, especially without clear, publicly-vetted guarantees of community benefit, job standards, or a direct return on investment. The lack of accessible details due to the NDAs has fueled these concerns, leaving many to wonder about the deal's finer points.

A Call for Open Governance

The debate in Portland reflects a larger national conversation about public financing for private sports and entertainment facilities. The councilors opposing the NDAs are demanding that all future negotiations be conducted openly, with draft terms and financial analyses presented for community scrutiny before any vote is taken. The outcome could set a precedent for how the city handles large-scale public-private partnerships in the future.

What do you think?

• Should the use of Non-Disclosure Agreements ever be permitted when elected officials are negotiating with private entities over public funds?


• Is investing in modernizing a privately-owned sports arena a legitimate use of taxpayer money to drive economic growth, or is it corporate welfare?


• Does the potential for losing major concerts and events justify secretive negotiations, or is transparency always more important?


• If you were a Portland resident, would you support this kind of public funding package without seeing the full details first?