News
Broncos ‘Private’ Stadium Plan: How Tax Breaks and Infrastructure Can Still Cost the Public Millions
Broncos ‘Private’ Stadium Plan: In September 2025, the Denver Broncos announced plans for a new privately financed stadium. However, scrutiny arises as public funds often subsidize these projects, obscuring true financing sources. This raises concerns about the long-term financial impact on taxpayers, who may shoulder broader costs beyond construction, including infrastructure and social ramifications.
Geoffrey Propheter, University of Colorado Denver
Broncos say their new stadium will be ‘privately financed,’ but ‘private’ often still means hundreds of millions in public resources
The Denver Broncos announced in early September 2025 their plan to build a privately financed football stadium. The proposal received a lot of attention and praise.
Across the five major sports leagues in the U.S. – the NBA, NHL, NFL, MLB and MLS – only 20% of facilities are privately owned.
I’ve studied the intersection of state and local public finance and pro sports for two decades. This experience has led me to approach claims of private financing with suspicion.
Private dollars are often masked as public dollars in these arrangements. https://www.youtube.com/embed/zwv34Lpo0ec?wmode=transparent&start=0 A Fox31 Denver news report aired in November 2025 about the Broncos’ plans for a new stadium.
Private vs public dollars
In theory, what counts as private or public dollars is uncontroversial. Dollars are public when government has a legal claim over them – otherwise, they are private.
The public versus private dollar distinction matters when accounting for who is contributing how much to a sports facility. When public dollars are allowed to count as private dollars, a project proposal looks more enticing than it is, in fact.
For instance, lawmakers regularly allow team owners to count public dollars as private dollars. The Sacramento City Council agreed to let the NBA’s Sacramento Kings count their property tax payments for the city-owned arena as private contributions to the overall cost of financing the arena. But property taxes are public dollars that in other instances go toward public services like schools and road repairs.
Team owners building private facilities also typically receive public dollars through tax breaks, which is government spending in disguise. Property tax exemptions, sales and use tax exemptions on materials and machinery, and income tax credits are common forms of government givebacks to sports team owners.
I’ve estimated that property tax exemptions alone, among facilities in the five major leagues, have cost state and local governments US$20 billion cumulatively over the life of teams’ leases, 42% of which would have gone to K-12 education.
Rental payments spent on facilities are not private dollars
Many facilities and their infrastructure are funded through public debt secured in part by team rental payments. Lawmakers, media and consultants often view projects secured by rents as privately financed, in part or whole.
However, rental income in exchange for use or operation of public property should not be counted as private dollars.
Here’s a thought experiment. Suppose state lawmakers allocated the rent paid for use of campground sites in a state park to pay for new campground bathrooms. Are the bathrooms privately funded?
The flaw in concluding “yes” arises from a failure to appreciate that lawmakers, through policy, create legal claims over certain dollars. All dollars start as private dollars, but through the tax system, lawmakers transfer ownership of some dollars to the public.
It is the government landlord’s choice, a policy decision, to spend the rental income on the rented property, a choice available to them only if they own the rental income in the first place.
Yet lawmakers regularly allow teams, both professional and minor league, to count rental payments as private contributions. This accounting makes sports subsidies look less generous than they actually are.
Looking beyond construction
Facilities not only need to be constructed but also operated, maintained and eventually upgraded. Roads, sewer lines, overpasses, game-day security and emergency response and public policies to mitigate gentrification caused by a facility are all common taxpayer-funded touchpoints. In addition, facilities have preconstruction costs such as land acquisition, soil remediation and site preparation, as well as later costs such as demolition and remediation for the land’s next use.
Focusing on privately financed construction and ignoring all other aspects of a project’s development and operation is misleading, potentially contributing to lawmakers making inefficient and expensive policy decisions.
By way of example, the Council of the District of Columbia approved a subsidy agreement last year with the NFL’s Commanders. The stadium would be financed, constructed and operated by the team owner, who would pay $1 in rent per year and remit no property taxes. In exchange for financing the stadium privately, the owner receives exclusive development rights to 20 acres of land adjacent to the stadium for the next 90 years.
The stadium is expected to cost the owner $2.5 billion, with the city contributing $1.3 billion for infrastructure.
But the city also gives up market rental income between $6 billion and $25 billion,depending on future land appreciation rates, that it could make on the 20 acres.
In other words, the rent discount alone means the city gives up revenue equal to multiple stadiums in exchange for the Commanders providing one. It is as if the council has a Lamborghini, traded it straight up for a Honda Civic, and then praised themselves for their negotiation acumen that resulted in a “free” Civic.
The Broncos’ proposed stadium
As of January 2026, Denver taxpayers know only that the Broncos stadium construction will be privately financed and that public dollars will be spent on some infrastructure.
Being enamored with such a proposal is similar to being offered a $1 billion yacht at a 75% discount. In my experience, there are two types of public officials: one will want to spend $250 million to save $750 million, while the other will ask whether $250 million for a yacht is an appropriate use of taxpayer resources given existing needs elsewhere.
My hope is that lawmakers better appreciate the many ways government participation in sports facility development, including privately financed ones, imposes serious risks and costs for current and future taxpayers. What is the expected total cost of the stadium project over its life? How much of the life cost would public resources cover? Could public resources generate greater benefits in an alternative use? How much will it cost to mitigate or compensate those affected by a project’s expected negative side effects, such as gentrification, congestion, pollution and crime?
Read more of our stories about Colorado.
Geoffrey Propheter, Associate Professor, School of Public Affairs, University of Colorado Denver
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Artemis II Astronauts Capture First Moon Flyby Images from Lunar Far Side
April 7, 2026 — NASA has released the first breathtaking images from the historic Artemis II mission, offering humanity a rare look at the Moon’s far side—including views never before seen by human eyes.
Captured during a seven-hour lunar flyby on April 6, the images were taken by astronauts aboard the Orion spacecraft as part of NASA’s first crewed mission to the Moon in more than 50 years.
🌕 A Historic View of the Moon
The newly released images reveal stunning details of the lunar surface, including impact craters, ancient lava flows, and fractured terrain that scientists will use to better understand the Moon’s geologic history.
Among the most remarkable visuals is a rare solar eclipse seen from space, where the Moon passes in front of the Sun, revealing the Sun’s outer corona. The images also captured an “earthset” and “earthrise”—moments where Earth appears to set and rise over the Moon’s horizon.
In one striking image, the Moon is backlit by the Sun, with Earth glowing at its edge, while distant planets like Saturn and Mars appear as bright points in the background.
📸 Thousands of Images, New Discoveries
The Artemis II crew—Reid Wiseman, Victor Glover, Christina Koch, and Canadian astronaut Jeremy Hansen—used a range of cameras to capture thousands of high-resolution images during the flyby.
In addition to photography, the astronauts reported observing six meteoroid impact flashes on the Moon’s surface, offering scientists a rare opportunity to study active lunar events in real time.
Researchers are now analyzing the images, audio, and telemetry data to refine their understanding of the Moon’s surface and compare findings with observations from Earth-based astronomers.
🔬 Science That Shapes the Future
According to NASA officials, the data collected during Artemis II will play a critical role in shaping future missions, including plans to establish a long-term human presence on the Moon.
“These images are not only visually stunning, but they are brimming with scientific value that will inspire generations to come,” said Dr. Nicky Fox, associate administrator for NASA’s Science Mission Directorate.
The mission also provides astronauts with a unique advantage—human observation. With four trained sets of eyes, the crew is able to analyze subtle differences in color, brightness, and texture across the lunar surface in ways robotic systems cannot.
🚀 More Than Halfway Home
Now more than halfway through its 10-day journey, Artemis II is heading back toward Earth. NASA is targeting a splashdown at 8:07 p.m. EDT on April 10 off the coast of San Diego.
Live coverage of the return will begin at 6:30 p.m. EDT on NASA+, with recovery teams ready to retrieve the crew and spacecraft following reentry.
🌍 A New Era of Exploration
The Artemis II mission marks a major step forward in NASA’s long-term vision of returning humans to the Moon and eventually sending astronauts to Mars.
With each image and data point sent back to Earth, the mission is not only rewriting the record books—but also expanding humanity’s understanding of our closest celestial neighbor.
Official Artemis II images are available through NASA’s digital platforms, including the Artemis Image Gallery and NASA Image and Video Library.
🔗 Related External Links
Explore official NASA resources and view the latest Artemis II Moon flyby images:
- NASA: Artemis II Mission Overview
- NASA Artemis Program (Return to the Moon)
- NASA Image and Video Library (Artemis II Photos)
- Artemis Image Gallery
- Orion Spacecraft Details
- Apollo 13 Mission History (Previous Distance Record)
Source: NASA Official Release – Artemis II Moon Flyby Images
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/
The Knowledge
Artemis II’s long countdown – a space historian explains why it has taken over 50 years to return to the Moon
Why has it taken 50+ years to return to the Moon? A space historian explains the technical, political, and financial complexities behind Artemis II’s long journey.
Emily A. Margolis, Smithsonian Institution
While I was leading a tour of the National Air and Space Museum in January 2026, a visitor posed this insightful question: “Why has it taken so long to return to the Moon?”
After all, NASA had the know-how and technology to send humans to the lunar surface more than 50 years ago as part of the Apollo program. And, as another tour guest reminded us, computers today can do so much more than they could back then, as evidenced by the smartphones most of us carry in our pockets. Shouldn’t it be easier to get to the Moon than ever before?
The truth is that sending humans into space safely continues to be difficult, especially as missions increase in complexity.
New technologies require years of study, development and testing before they can be certified for flight. And even then, systems and materials can behave in ways that surprise and worry engineers and mission planners; look no further than Boeing’s Starliner CFT mission or the performance of the Orion heat shield on Artemis I.
Issues with Starliner’s thrusters led NASA to return the spacecraft from the International Space Station without its crew. Unanticipated chipping of the Orion heat shield resulted in years of research, culminating in NASA altering the atmospheric reentry plans for the Artemis II mission.
NASA’s programs also require sustained political will and financial support across multiple presidential administrations, Congresses and fiscal years. As a historian of human spaceflight, I have studied the space agency’s efforts to engage the broader public to convince American taxpayers that their programs hold value for the nation.
NASA is now on the eve of the first crewed flight to the Moon since the Apollo era: Artemis II. A crew of four will conduct a lunar flyby, laying the groundwork, the agency hopes, for a landing on the Artemis IV mission.
The story of NASA’s effort to return humans to the Moon is long and winding, demonstrating the complexities of turning grand ambitions into real missions.
Post-Apollo
In early 1970, with two successful Moon landings on the books, President Richard Nixon sought to reduce NASA’s budget to better align with his administration’s priorities. This decision put the space agency in a difficult position, which ultimately led to the cancellation of three planned Apollo missions to conserve funding for its plans for long-term human activity in low Earth orbit.
NASA repurposed the third stage of a Saturn V rocket to create the first U.S. space station, Skylab, which operated from 1973 to 1974. The space agency used leftover Saturn IB rockets and Apollo command and service modules to send crews to the station.
Over the next three decades, NASA developed and operated the space shuttle. The fleet of space shuttle orbiters supported satellite deployment and microgravity research on orbital missions of up to 17 days. This work was meant to enable future long-duration human missions and provide benefits to people on Earth. For example, data from protein crystal growth experiments have informed the development of medicines.
The space shuttle program facilitated the construction, maintenance and staffing of a continuously inhabited research platform in orbit, the International Space Station. The first modules launched in late 1998.
Where to next?
As the new millennium approached, the Clinton administration tasked NASA to think beyond the space station. What could robots and humans do next in space? And where could they do it? Notably, the White House expressed an interest in locations beyond low Earth orbit.
NASA, it turned out, was well positioned to meet the administration’s request. NASA Administrator Daniel Goldin was already thinking about preparing proposals for the next presidential administration and had recently sponsored a human lunar return study. In 1999, he established a team to investigate new technologies, missions and destinations for the 21st century.
This work took on new significance following the tragic loss of the space shuttle Columbia crew in February 2003. Many people, including those in the new George W. Bush White House, wondered whether the human spaceflight program should continue – and, if so, how.
Administration discussions culminated in Bush’s Vision for Space Exploration in 2004, which directed NASA to retire the space shuttle after the completion of the space station. It called for returning humans to the Moon on a crew exploration vehicle designed for destinations beyond low Earth orbit.
It also called for continuing robotic exploration of Mars and engaging companies and international partners in space. Fifteen years earlier, President George H. W. Bush had also announced a Moon and Mars exploration program, but congressional concerns about cost kept space travelers close to home.
The Constellation program’s legacy
In December 2004, NASA began the process of finding a manufacturer for the crew exploration vehicle. By August 2006, the space agency awarded Lockheed Martin the contract to build the capsule, which it had named Orion – the same Orion planned to carry Artemis astronauts to the Moon.
Years of research, development and testing followed for Orion as well as the Ares I crew and Ares V cargo launch vehicles. Together, these technologies made up the Constellation program.
Constellation had two primary objectives: in the near term, to help transport crew to and from the space station after the space shuttle program ended; in the long term, to enable human lunar exploration.
Building systems that could work in both Earth orbit and around the Moon was supposed to save the time and cost of developing two vehicles. Similarly, adapting space shuttle program hardware could supposedly cut costs.
During the first months of Barack Obama’s presidency in 2009, the administration initiated an independent review of NASA’s human spaceflight plans. The Augustine Committee, chaired by retired aerospace executive Norman Augustine, found that the agency’s ambitions outstripped its limited budget, leading to significant delays. The first Orion spacecraft was likely to arrive after the space station ceased operations.
The committee proposed several paths forward at the current funding level, which prioritized space shuttle and space station programs. An additional annual investment of US$3 billion would allow for human exploration beyond low Earth orbit.
Ultimately, the Obama administration canceled Constellation, but two of its technologies lived on, thanks to U.S. senators from states that would have been affected by cuts.
The NASA Authorization Act of 2010 funded Orion’s continued development, shifting responsibility for space station crew transportation to commercial vehicles. It also directed NASA to develop the space launch system, a redesigned Ares V heavy booster, to send Orion to the Moon. The technical strategy had political benefits, too, preserving jobs in numerous congressional districts by providing continuity for aerospace contractors.
In December 2014, a Delta IV heavy rocket launched the first Orion capsule on a test flight, providing engineers with data on spacecraft systems and the heat shield. By October 2015, the space launch system had completed a critical design review, the last step before manufacturing could begin.
Introducing Artemis
In December 2017, the new Trump administration issued a policy directive shifting the focus of NASA’s human spaceflight program back to the Moon. The space agency would use Orion and the space launch system in a race to meet an ambitious 2024 landing date. NASA officially named the program Artemis in May 2019.
The 25-day Artemis I mission, launched in November 2022, was a major milestone for the program. This uncrewed flight was the first flight of the space launch system and the first to integrate SLS and Orion. It laid the groundwork for Artemis II, which will be the first crewed flight of the SLS.
Over more than 50 years, each new presidential administration has reassessed the place of spaceflight among its priorities, either encouraging or curtailing NASA’s efforts to return humans to the lunar surface.
Each crewed flight requires the alignment of technical expertise, political will and financial support over years if not decades. For the space fans who plan to watch the Artemis II launch, the wait for countdown may feel long. But it’s just a blink in NASA’s long journey back to the Moon.
Emily A. Margolis, Curator of Contemporary Spaceflight, National Air and Space Museum, Smithsonian Institution
This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.
Dive into “The Knowledge,” where curiosity meets clarity. This playlist, in collaboration with STMDailyNews.com, is designed for viewers who value historical accuracy and insightful learning. Our short videos, ranging from 30 seconds to a minute and a half, make complex subjects easy to grasp in no time. Covering everything from historical events to contemporary processes and entertainment, “The Knowledge” bridges the past with the present. In a world where information is abundant yet often misused, our series aims to guide you through the noise, preserving vital knowledge and truths that shape our lives today. Perfect for curious minds eager to discover the ‘why’ and ‘how’ of everything around us. Subscribe and join in as we explore the facts that matter. https://stmdailynews.com/the-knowledge/
Food and Beverage
Dirty Birds Expands to Downtown Long Beach, Signaling Continued Urban Revival
San Diego’s Dirty Birds sports bar is opening a new location in Downtown Long Beach, highlighting the city’s ongoing revitalization and growth ahead of the 2028 Olympics.
Downtown Long Beach is getting a flavorful new addition as The Bascom Group announces a lease agreement bringing San Diego’s popular sports bar chain Dirty Birds to a prime retail space at 200 Pine Avenue.
The deal marks another milestone in the ongoing revitalization of Long Beach, particularly within its bustling downtown entertainment corridor.
A Prime Location in the Heart of Downtown
The newly leased space spans 3,039 square feet on the ground floor of 200 Pine Avenue, a six-story office tower that has undergone significant renovations in recent years. The building, a recognizable fixture in the downtown skyline, includes:
- Class “A” upgraded common areas
- A 123-stall parking structure
- Strong tenant retention history
- Existing retail neighbors like Agaves Kitchen & Tequila and Agaves Ultra Lounge
An additional 4,923-square-foot lower-level space remains available and is already attracting interest for a potential speakeasy-style nightclub concept.
Dirty Birds Brings Its Signature Energy North
Founded in San Diego, Dirty Birds has built a loyal following as a high-energy sports bar known for:
- Award-winning chicken wings with unique flavors like Dirty Blue and Apple Bourbon Chipotle
- A lively, fan-focused atmosphere filled with sports memorabilia
- A diverse menu including burgers, sandwiches, salads, and craft beer
With multiple locations across San Diego neighborhoods like Pacific Beach, Ocean Beach, and near San Diego State University, the brand has established itself as a go-to destination for sports fans.
Its expansion into Long Beach represents a strategic move into a rapidly growing urban market.
Downtown Long Beach’s Ongoing Transformation
The arrival of Dirty Birds reflects broader momentum in downtown Long Beach, fueled by public and private investment. According to Bascom leadership, the area is experiencing a surge in activity driven by:
- Community events like the DTLB Live! series
- Streetscape and public space improvements
- Increased residential and mixed-use development
Nearby landmarks include:
- Billie Jean King Main Library
- Long Beach City Hall
- Long Beach Convention & Entertainment Center
The location also benefits from excellent transit access, including proximity to the Metro A Line.
Olympic Spotlight and Future Growth
Looking ahead, Long Beach is poised for global attention as a key venue city for the 2028 Summer Olympics. The city is expected to host 11 sporting events, making it one of the most active Olympic hubs outside Los Angeles itself.
This global spotlight is accelerating over $1.7 billion in development projects, including:
- Waterfront transformations
- Expanded residential housing
- Infrastructure upgrades through the Elevate 28 program
What This Means for Long Beach
The addition of Dirty Birds is more than just a new restaurant—it’s another indicator of a city on the rise. As downtown Long Beach continues to evolve into a vibrant live-work-play destination, high-profile tenants like Dirty Birds help:
- Strengthen the local economy
- Enhance nightlife and dining options
- Attract both residents and visitors
With an anticipated opening later this year, Dirty Birds is set to become a new hotspot for sports fans and food lovers alike.
Related Links
- 200 Pine Avenue Property Details
- LoopNet Listing for 200 Pine Avenue
- The Bascom Group Official Website
- Downtown Long Beach Plan
At our core, we at STM Daily News, strive to keep you informed and inspired with the freshest content on all things food and beverage. From mouthwatering recipes to intriguing articles, we’re here to satisfy your appetite for culinary knowledge.
Visit our Food & Drink section to get the latest on Foodie News and recipes, offering a delightful blend of culinary inspiration and gastronomic trends to elevate your dining experience. https://stmdailynews.com/food-and-drink/
