GREEN BAY – Readers questions about the Green Bay Packers business operations and fan issues this month focused heavily on Lambeau Field and the team’s lease negotiations with the city of Green Bay.

Robert: The Packers, I believe, were set up as a nonprofit. Do they pay taxes?

Richard Ryman: Good question, Robert. They are not a nonprofit, as in a charity. In their case, non-profit means they don’t pay dividends to shareholders. As to taxes, they pay a lot of them. They don’t pay property taxes for Lambeau Field because it is on city-owned land, but they do pay property taxes on land they own directly, about 92 acres worth in Green Bay and Ashwaubenon. Also, they pay corporate income taxes, sales taxes, payroll taxes, and any others that businesses pay.

Questions regarding lease negotiations, Packers land purchases and Lambeau Field investment.

Nic: The 2003 stadium renovation cost $295 million, which included taxpayers funding a portion. How much has the Packers organization spent on Lambeau renovations since 2003, without going to the taxpayer? How does that number compare to other teams spending of their own money?

Richard Ryman: Nic, the Packers spent more than $600 million since the 2003 renovation, which was funded by a 0.5% sales tax. That tax was retired in 2015, although the county re-enacted a similar tax for other uses.

I don’t know how much other franchises spent on their stadiums, but they often get taxpayer support. For context, NFL teams with recent public financing deals include $623 million for the Jacksonville Jaguars, $600 million for the Baltimore Ravens, $650 million for the Carolina Panthers, $850 million for the Buffalo Bills and $1.2 billion for the Tennessee Titans. In some cases, such as with the new stadium in Buffalo, the Bills will pay $850 million as well, but that’s still a lot of taxpayer money.

Charlie: What’s the story behind the headbutting between the Packers and the city of Green Bay? For the longest time I thought they had a congenial relationship, but it appears something had been brewing for quite some time.

I remember observers saying in the early days of the current lease that the Packers got a really good deal. I think the city thinks so, too, and is trying to rebalance the scales. City representatives stressed that the disagreements, though acrimonious sounding, are not personal, they’re business.

I can say, through personal observation, that the Packers have rubbed Green Bay’s mayors the wrong way from time to time, but they all realized the importance of the Packers to the community and it would be foolish to jeopardize that relationship long term.

Both sides continue to work together on NFL draft preparations.

Brian: How close is a lease extension with the city? Will there be long-term repercussions on both sides as a result of this adversarial negotiations?

Richard Ryman: Both sides have gone silent on the lease issue. That could mean they are secretly talking or just sitting on their hands. Both have seemingly dug in their heels and are waiting for the other to blink. They’ve each said the other is being offered the best stadium deal in the NFL, and in this case, I think they are both right.

The Green Bay/Brown County Professional Football Stadium District held a special meeting Thursday to talk about the lease. The meeting was in closed session, so we don’t know what was discussed, and they came out of the session with the generic “staff is directed to carry out what we discussed.”

The district was miffed about being left out of previous discussions, so it’s hard to tell if this is a move forward or not.

The Packers, the city and the stadium district are all parties to the current lease and must all agree on new terms.

What is the stadium district and what purpose does it serve?

Randall: I read your article concerning the disputes between the Packers and the city of Green Bay. You mentioned the “Stadium District” several times as a third entity. What is the Stadium District? Who controls it? Why was it created?

The Green Bay/Brown County Professional Football Stadium District was established by the state Legislature to manage money connected with the 2003 renovation of Lambeau Field, including investments, paying off bonds, sales tax receipts, ticket tax money, seat licensing money and income from brick sales, license plate sales and the like. The district also oversees operations and maintenance of the stadium, provides excess funds for local economic development and serves as a political buffer between the Packers and the city. The district and the city are co-landlords and both are parties to the Packers’ lease.

The district has an executive director and a seven-member board with three appointees from the city of Green Bay, three from Brown County and one from the village of Ashwaubenon.

The city, ultimately, would like to see the stadium board go away. The Packers would not.

Dave: The city council stated that there are 3 features to a lease agreement. 1) community development 2) economic development 3) lease payments. So, 1) Given the Packers’ long history in Green Bay, wouldn’t their relationship with the community predate any of these supposed agreements; 2) do these agreements even apply given the little amount of public funding the Packers have enjoyed relative to other teams; 3) does anybody really question the Packers contribution on either of the first two? Specifically, was the city of Green Bay at all involved with getting next year’s NFL draft? Given that the Packers have put back the annual (rent) escalation and that the first two are moot, aren’t we done?Lastly, what percentage of Green Bay residents are Packer shareholders and maybe thinking the counsel needs to relax?

The city doesn’t dispute the Packers’ investment in the wider community. The Packers Foundation supports a lot of activities and organizations locally and statewide, understanding as they do, their unique franchise-community relationship, the likes of which exists nowhere else in the NFL

The city, as I understand it, has two issues. First of all, they’d like to see more of the team’s investment happen in Green Bay proper. Pretty much all of the non-Lambeau Field investment is in Ashwaubenon. Secondly, they’d like to see the community benefits and economic development portions of the Packers’ contributions guaranteed in writing. The Packers say they would consider that if they had a better idea where the money would go. They resist committing to spend $500,000 on “whatever” over the next 30 years.

The city was integral in attracting the NFL draft. Normally, it’s the cities that are the hosts and do all the work. Because of Green Bay’s size, the Packers took the lead in seeking the event, but it was critical to the NFL that the team and city were in agreement and would work closely together. Both have pledged to do so, lease and other issues notwithstanding.

I don’t know how many Green Bay residents are shareholders. The Packers don’t share information to that degree, but I’m willing to bet more are shareholders than season ticket holders. If you live in the community but are not a Packers shareholder, you are still a stakeholder, and what happens matters to you as much as to anyone else.

Will the Packers build a new stadium on their own?

Eric: Are the Packers trying to buy enough land to build a new stadium solely owned by the Packers?

John: With the Packers stuck in a contentious lease negotiations, could they just say forget it and build a new stadium on all the land they have acquired and control their own destiny without having to deal with the city of Green Bay?

Andrew: With the arms race for new stadiums in the NFL, do you ever see a scenario where the Packers would put a roof on Lambeau or get a new stadium in the event players start wanting to play in the newer stadiums even more as time goes on?

Richard Ryman: Could they build a new stadium? Probably not on their own, given the enormous costs of stadiums these days (see the earlier answer), and I don’t think either Green Bay or Ashwaubenon is big enough to make up the difference, even if they wanted to. The state would have to step in, as it did for the Milwaukee Bucks and Brewers recently.

If a new stadium were a possibility, by the time the Packers could do it, we’re probably talking $2 billion to $3 billion; staggering amounts.

Would they? Never say never, but I don’t think they want to. They fully understand the value of Lambeau Field’s history, but also, they sunk more than $600 million into the stadium in the past 21 years. Walking away from that would not be easy.

If they did build a new stadium, it would be right next to Lambeau Field, which the city would still own. That would be awkward, visually and functionally, and the Packers would have to buy a lot more land to make it work in any case.

They have not said what they’ll do with the land they’ve acquired so far. Several of the businesses have longer leases, which means they’ll stay put for a while. For a team that wants to control its own destiny, as much as it can in a relationship with 31 other partners who aren’t always as socialism-minded as the Packers need them to be, it does give them a measure of risk control and non-football income.

I feel safe in saying there will never be a roof on Lambeau Field. Fans would not stand for it, and it seems like retrofitting a roof on that outdoor stadium would end up being a Solider Field-type abomination. If they were to build a new stadium, maybe. But they’d still never host a Super Bowl.

More: 10 reasons Green Bay will never host a Super Bowl

Mike: Rich, hypothetically, if the stadium lease isn’t signed, what is your best guess as to what happens with Titletown district and all the land around the stadium the Packers own?

Richard Ryman: Mike, The lease has eight more years to run even before it gets to the options phase, which could add 10 more years. The Packers are always thinking 10 steps ahead, so I don’t think they’d continue to purchase land around Lambeau Field if they didn’t expect to be there for a long time. The Packers started lease negotiations this early because they want to get ahead of new collective bargaining agreement negotiations with players, which will begin soon, but ultimately, they can wait out the current administration. On the other side, the city believes it can wait out the Packers as well, and in the meantime will continue to get escalating lease payments of $1 million-plus annually.

Opposing fans in Lambeau Field is an irritation

Tom: Why can’t the Packers protect their season tickets like the New England Patriots do? To see more than 7,000 to 10,0000 Lions fans in Lambeau with the Packers waiting list is beyond ridiculous. I am a season ticket holder of both Green (took 30-plus year wait) and Gold packages. I will NEVER sell my ticket to a non-Packers fan. It’s a HOME game people. Return your ticket to the Packers if you can’t go!

Richard Ryman: Tom, as I understand it, the Patriots tried to operate their own secondary market for ticket sales, but I believe they’ve since abandoned the experiment.

It is understandable that Packers fans are irritated by having too many (how many is too many?) opposing fans in Lambeau Field, but for perspective, secondary marketplace Vivid Seats said 28% of fans at Packers home games were opposing-team fans in 2023, compared with 32% of fans at road games being Packers fans. At least two games this season, at Jacksonville and Los Angeles, saw Packers fans dominating the those stadiums.

Technology does not currently exist to allow teams to have greater control of digital tickets, but with the emergence of A.I., who knows what might be possible? It’s probably not in the NFL’s best interest to restrict any fans from attending games, but individual teams might have a different perspective.

Brian S.: What can the Packers and more broadly, the NFL, do to enhance the appeal of attending an NFL game? Currently, I can watch the game at home, not paying for tickets, parking, waiting in line for a restroom. With the cost of attending an NFL game continuing to rise, what do you see the Packers/NFL doing to continue to drive demand to attend versus watching at home?

Richard Ryman: This is an issue the Packers have been addressing for a while now. The new video scoreboards, new programming on those screens, revamped grab-and-go concessions stands, upgraded WiFi and cellular connections, digital ticketing and the efficiency of cashless purchases all were done with the idea of improving the fan experience. All told, the improvements cost hundreds of millions of dollars.

There are ever more options for watching the games at home, as the NFL leaves no revenue-generating possibility untapped, but the Packers have never had a problem filling Lambeau Field.

In general, a winning team is the best enhancement to the fan experience, and being in the midst of 78,000 screaming fans is something you can’t experience at home, even with the volume turned all the way up.

Jeff: Whatever happened to Milwaukee hipster taco favorite BelAir Cantina coming to the Titletown district? That was supposed to happen in mid-2024?

Richard Ryman: I spoke to someone from the restaurant at their booth at a recent Packers game. They said they were now aiming for an early January opening. The Packers said they’ve been told the buildout will be complete by late December.

And I have time for one more question.

Paul: Is there a reason that there isn’t a clock inside the stadium? I mean, I know Pabst isn’t paying for the light up “T ” any more, but is it just a lack of a sponsor?

Looking through photos over the years, the Pabst-sponsored scoreboard with a clock above it was there for a couple of decades, but was not included when a new scoreboard, with new sponsors, was installed. Now, scoreboards are really giant entertainment centers and a clock of that sort would be out of place. The scoreboard does, however, include a digital clock. There is a traditional clock on the exterior Bellin Health Gate façade. But be warned, it’s on Lombardi time. Wherever you’re headed, you’ll get there 15 minutes early.

Contact Richard Ryman at [email protected]. Follow him on Twitter at @RichRymanPG, on Instagram at @rrymanPG or on Facebook at www.facebook.com/RichardRymanPG/.

This article originally appeared on Green Bay Press-Gazette: Readers ask what would happen in Packers don’t get lease extension