The Queen City is paying a King’s ransom for renovations to Bank of America Stadium, home of the Carolina Panthers NFL franchise, and it’s earned them an award of which taxpayers should be wary.

The “Worst Economic Development Deal of the Year” award, which has been given annually by the Center for Economic Accountability (CEA) since 2018, highlights state or local government subsidies for private enterprises that exemplify wasteful and ineffective economic development efforts.

Charlotte’s $650 million subsidy for the privately-owned stadium, also home MLS’s Charlotte FC, is 2024’s big winner, standing out among a competitive field of finalists, which included other sports stadium deals and corporate megaprojects across the country. The Charlotte BofA stadium renovations deal pulled away from the pack due to a combination of factors that included its high cost, lack of transparency, poor returns, questionable economic justifications and the Panthers ownership’s checkered history with subsidized projects.

High Costs and Public Backlash

The deal’s enormous cost and lack of transparency have drawn sharp criticism. City taxpayers are set to fund $650 million of the project’s total $800 million price tag, with team owners Tepper Sports & Entertainment contributing the remaining $150 million and covering any cost overruns. To put this into perspective, the $650 million allocated for the renovation exceeds the Charlotte city government’s entire FY 2025 General Fund budget for public safety services, including police, fire, and waste management.

“If you asked the average Charlotte taxpayer whether they think renovating the Panthers’ stadium is as valuable to their city as a year’s worth of cops, firefighters, and garbage pickups, they’d look at you like you were nuts,” said John C. Mozena, President of the CEA, said in a press release. “Yes, people love sports, but not at the expense of things that truly matter.”

Moreover, the $650 million price tag is only a fraction less than the cost of building an entirely new stadium, critics argue. Mozena pointed out that for almost four-fifths of the cost of a new facility, taxpayers are getting little more than a 15-year commitment from the Panthers and an option for future negotiations in 12 years.

A History of Questionable Partnerships

The Panthers’ ownership, led by billionaire hedge fund manager David Tepper, has a track record of controversial projects, including the failed headquarters and practice facility in Rock Hill, South Carolina, which collapsed in acrimony and litigation in 2019. Tepper’s companies were also involved in the cancellation of a $21 million redevelopment project in 2022 for Charlotte FC’s youth academies.

Mozena further highlighted Tepper’s history of financial mismanagement, citing that Tepper contributed just $150 million toward the stadium’s renovation while spending approximately $70 million to buy out two unsuccessful head coaches in back-to-back seasons.

“At some point, Charlotte taxpayers – even the suffering Panthers fans among them – need to question just what it is they’re paying for here,” he added.

Poor Transparency and Public Opposition

The approval process for the renovation deal has drawn criticism for a lack of transparency and rushed timeline. City officials reportedly worked on the agreement for almost a year before announcing it in June 2023 — just three weeks before a final vote by the City Council. Several council members expressed concerns about insufficient time to review the deal, and public backlash was strong. An online public feedback form showed a 4-to-1 opposition to the deal, and during a public meeting, opponents outnumbered supporters by a reported 3-to-1 margin.

Charlotte Mayor Vi Lyles attempted to defend the closed-door City Council sessions as “public discussions” before admitting that they were not open to the public, adding to the sense the deal was being rushed through without adequate public input.

Questionable Economic Claims

Proponents of the deal, including the Charlotte city government, justified the renovation with an analysis that predicted a $22 billion economic impact over time. However, independent experts have questioned the reliability of these claims. A study by journalist Neil deMause estimated that fans would need to spend an additional $1,100 per game to reach the predicted economic benefits.

Mozena also criticized the tourism justification for the deal, pointing out that sports stadiums typically have minimal impacts on tourism. “A dollar spent on the stadium is a dollar that could be spent on any number of other public facilities or services that are far more related to tourism,” he said.

Looking Ahead

The renovation, which is expected to be completed over five years, is set to prolong the life of Bank of America Stadium for another decade or more. However, the deal includes a provision that would begin discussions for a subsidized stadium replacement in 2037, which could cost taxpayers yet another billion-dollar round of public funding.

“While this certainly isn’t unique to Charlotte, the idea that sports stadiums are disposable and need to be replaced every 30 to 50 years is ridiculous,” Mozena concluded. “Just look around the state, where UNC’s Kenan Stadium is approaching its centennial and NC State’s Carter-Finley is almost 60 years old. Somehow, it’s only pro sports stadiums for teams owned by billionaires that need expensive replacement every few decades.”

As Charlotte moves forward with the renovations, residents and critics alike continue to question whether the deal will deliver on its promised benefits or become another example of misallocated public funds. The last time the undesirable award went to North Carolina was in 2021, when the State’s massive Apple subsidy won the top spot. Looking to 2025 and beyond, Panthers nation will have to settle for winning this award, as one of the worst teams in the league seems incapable of generating wins of their own.