What happened with our Moda term sheet, why I voted no, and what’s next

Hey Portland,

Last week, we stepped into a new chapter of the Moda renovation negotiations after months of debate, work sessions, listening sessions, and council meetings. Portland City Council approved our non-binding term sheet, 8-4, to move into the next phase of negotiations with the Blazers. I voted no, along with my colleagues Councilors Green, Morillo and Koyama Lane. But before I get into why I voted no, I want to take more time to zoom out and consider where we’ve been, and where we’re going.

Links to Bluesky livethreads of term sheet meetings:

• Day One
• Day Two
• Day Three

Link to read a longer version of this newsletter on the web here.

How the term sheet changed

In the original (non-Council approved) draft term sheet that got sent to the Blazers on July 16, these were the key terms:

• Non‑relocation commitment: A binding 20‑year agreement requiring the Trail Blazers to play all home games at Moda Center.
• Labor harmony agreements: Requirements for labor‑peace agreements to support a stable workforce.
• Financial protections: Clear caps on public funding, limits on eligible expenses, and safeguards for the City, State and County against cost overruns.
• Payment: A $3 million annual payment for property tax offset payment from Rip City Management, escalating over time, with proceeds shared among the City, County, and Portland Public Schools.
• Community benefits commitments: Requirements for community event access, local hiring, sustainability standards, and partnerships with Albina‑based organizations.

At the August 6 council meeting, I put forward 12 amendments that would have strengthened protections for Portland taxpayers and increased the financial return on investment, among other things I believed Portland needed in this deal that simply weren’t there. Most of those amendments didn’t have the votes on August 6.

But when the negotiating team came back with their crafted amendments on August 12, a significant number of the concepts I had proposed were now reflected in their package — including rent, stronger protection of the City’s development rights, protections for other Moda tenants, stronger maintenance and Bridge Agreement protections, and greater Council oversight.

The biggest new addition is the inclusion of rent. After my Avalos 6 amendment to add rent failed in the first meeting on August 6, the negotiating team added it in the amendment package that Council passed: $2 million a year plus 3% or inflation, (Consumer Price Index for Urban Wage Earners and Clerical Workers) whichever is less. That got bumped up again to $3.17 million through Councilor Novick’s amendment, after we failed to pass Green - Avalos 1 which would have tied Moda rent increases to the maximum rent increases that residential landlords can charge renters under state rent control.

Is it the private contribution I was seeking? Not entirely. But I appreciate that Portlanders were able to push us to try getting more out of their investment. And I appreciate that the negotiating team listened to a significant amount of what some of my colleagues and I raised last week. Those are real wins, and they didn’t happen by accident.

Out of the 12 amendments I put forward (many that failed in our first meeting), here’s a rundown of what specifically got included in Council’s approved term sheet:

• Avalos 5 & 6 were related to getting rent from the Blazers. The approved term sheet explicitly includes rent, as detailed above.
• An amendment I brought with Councilor Green intended to prevent us from committing all future revenue from Moda and the Rose Quarter to Moda Center improvements. The resolution now says that the City MAY (not will) put future Moda revenue back towards Moda.
  • That same amendment also sought to clarify the duties and authority of the Joint Authority (the new City-State-County joint negotiating body). The term sheet now says the Joint Authority will have final approval of the public contribution to the Moda Center renovation.
• Avalos 1 was to make sure the City keeps development rights in the Rose Quarter. This term sheet makes the City's continued ownership of development rights of the Arena Site and all adjacent City owned parcels explicit.
• Avalos 3 was about preserving our protections and rights under the current Bridge Lease. The resolution makes it clear that final agreements should provide the City with rights, remedies, protections, and enforcement authorities comparable to those in the existing Bridge Agreement.
• Avalos 4 was about giving other tenants like the Portland Fire and the Winterhawks their fair due in the Moda deal. This term sheet strengthens protections around the other professional sports teams that use this publicly owned arena.
• Avalos 9 and 11 were about strengthening oversight and accountability of community benefits agreements, so we actually have insight on whether Portlanders are getting what they were promised. The term sheet now says the Blazers will report annually on its compliance with the Community Benefits Agreements.

My goal was always to make the deal better, not to have my name attached to every provision.  I’m glad that some of the same ideas that were rejected on first pass got there in the end. But I also think it matters to accurately tell Portlanders where those ideas came from and how Council pressure changed this deal.

Stepping back

In some ways, the Moda renovation talks started the moment the Blazers changed hands. The current bridge lease that goes to 2030 was negotiated and agreed to in 2024 with the knowledge that a long-term lease agreement would take more time to hammer out and that the person sitting across the table wouldn’t be Jody Allen’s Blazers. And as OPB’s reporting shows, the mayor, and many other stakeholders within the City have been talking about the Moda renovation deal behind closed doors for many months. But Council wasn’t formally brought into those conversations until months later.

And at the time, I didn’t understand that Mayor already had reached a handshake deal with representatives of the Blazers, state, and Multnomah County that our contribution would be $120 million out of roughly $600 million in total renovation costs— with the city also on the hook for an additional $275 million in ongoing costs.

Throughout the state funding conversation during the 2026 short session, the Blazers were actively lobbying and flying in Rip City legends like Terry Porter to get the deal finished. All of that went away after the bonding headed to the Governor’s desk. And our questions about incredibly basic aspects of the deal – like, say, some sort of spreadsheet or document explaining the line items we’re paying for – continued to go unanswered by the team.

The Blazers might not have been talking to us, but they were certainly talking to their favorite members of the media. Council was getting hit with quotes from anonymous sources and editorials calling us unreasonable for wanting the bare minimum back. The message was: “just pony up the money.”

Fast forward to our first work session with the Blazers representatives at the end of July. By then, it was pretty clear to everyone that councilors were not the unreasonable ones here.  Example: Our negotiators were asking for simple answers in writing and apparently that felt like a “trap” to the other party. You can read my recap of the meeting here.

To summarize: the Blazers owners feel like just being here is already a pretty good deal for Portland.

I’m looking for something more for East Portland.

...Which gets to why I voted no on the Moda term sheet

Portlanders, I am so grateful to each and every one of you who has shown up and spoken out during this long process. You’ve moved me, and you moved the conversation. We now have a term sheet, our first proposal, with some teeth and some money back for the City: rent, developmental rights, lease protections and recourses, stronger oversight of community benefits agreements. That’s because of you.

But when I was looking at the term sheet in front of me and comparing it to what East Portland neighbors have said they needed, it just wasn’t adding up. It hadn’t moved far enough.

We needed to make sure that the investment is worth what Portland is giving up to make it.

Because we will be giving something up – there's no such thing as no tradeoffs when we’re talking about hundreds of millions in funding.

Existing public dollars are still public dollars, and they’re public dollars that could be used on essential City services. We just closed a $170 million budget gap, and we expect more difficult budgets ahead. If we spend existing City resources on Moda, those same dollars cannot also fund parks, housing, public safety, transportation, climate investments or other basic services.

I keep hearing that this deal requires ‘no new taxes.’ But that doesn’t mean there is no cost to Portlanders.

And so that’s why I voted no. It wasn’t because I don’t want the Blazers to stay in Portland, or because I don’t value the personal ties and memories of Blazer fans. This is our team.

My no means I want the negotiators to keep pushing — particularly for actual owner-paid private capital — and come back with a final agreement that earns my yes.

They have to earn yours as well.

Where we go from here

From here, Council will take a step back. The Joint Authority, made up of representatives selected by the City, County, and State will be the primary point of contact managing negotiations, along with our professional negotiating team. They’ll be the ones directly talking with the Blazers.

Councilors will be briefed along the way, and the Council President and DCA Oliveira have committed to having work sessions to share information publicly. But for the most part, the Moda renovation deal is out of Council’s hands until the definitive agreements come back in December for a vote. In the next regular budget cycle (Spring 2027), whatever amount the city decides to commit will be deliberated during normal council proceedings.

In other words: if nothing changes from this initial term sheet to the final agreement we vote on in December, we will be committed to finding at least $120 million at the same time that we might have to cut core City services.

My promise to you is that I will continue to push for the best possible return for Portlanders: a deal that respects our City and keeps the Blazers in Rip City. In particular, I’m dead set on getting a real private capital contribution for the Moda renovation. I don't want charitable giving substituted for money owed to Portland. I don't want public subsidies, credits, offsets, or revenues generated by public assets described as private investment into the renovation.

People who have a lot should pay their fair share. People who don’t have a lot shouldn’t be expected to pay the way for a profitable big business.

Those are pretty basic principles, and I will be sticking to them - no matter what happens next.

Key Moda Dates

• August 12: City Council meeting, term sheet approved 8-4.
• Early Fall: City, State, and County finalize the Joint Authority described in SB 1501.
• September-October-November: Lease negotiations.
• December: Council votes whether to approve the "Definitive Documents," a formal operator lease agreement.
• Spring 2027: Council formally allocates funding for the Moda Center renovation through the regular budget process

In solidarity,

Candace Avalos