By Frank Parlato
The City of Niagara Falls retained Sports Facilities Advisory (SFA), based in Clearwater, Florida, to evaluate the feasibility of a new indoor sports and concert arena.
Commissioned by Mayor Robert Restaino and released in June 2025, the report outlines a proposal for a 6,000-seat arena, a 500-seat ice rink, and an 800-space parking ramp.
The projected cost ranges from $178.7 million to $217.7 million, to be paid by taxpayers.
Economic Impact: A Misleading Metric
The report claims an $11.5 million economic impact in a year. The phrase misleads. Economic impact is not city income. It is consumer spending.
Of that $11.5 million, only a small portion—sales taxes, hotel occupancy taxes—would be captured by Niagara Falls. The rest would go to private businesses.
The arena proposal is that city taxpayers pay $200 million for a trickle of tax revenue and receipts from tourists who might buy a hot dog.
The study does not calculate actual municipal return, nor how many years it would take to recover even 10% of the public investment. The $11.5 million is not a return. It is a projection of private consumption—divorced from public gain.
Assuming everything goes perfectly. Assuming an anchor tenant.
The Imaginary Team
Central to the report’s financial projections is the presence of an “anchor tenant”—a full-time sports team that would justify year-round arena use. No such team exists. No league commitments.
The omission undermines the financial model entirely. Still, they ran the numbers like it was real. Attendance, revenue, hotels, taxes—$11.5 million—all spun from a bullshit, finely tailored.
There was supposed to be a team. A team would come and fill the seats and make the arena matter. But the team never came. It never even waved. A whole city is asked to believe in a story about players that hadn’t been born.
And they called it a plan.
Oh, you like numbers? Here’s one: ZERO. That’s how many anchor tenants they’ve got. Zero teams. Zero commitments. Zero reason to believe this arena won’t sit there empty while the city bleeds out in debt.
And if you think that’s a good investment, I’ve got more bullshit for you—fresh out the consultant’s mouth.
A Dream Arena for an Imaginary League
The arena needs an anchor tenant to justify its existence. There isn’t one. But the study proceeds as if there is.
Everything hinges on an anchor tenant that doesn’t exist. The projections, attendance, tax estimates—all depend on a fictional team. No team has been announced. No league has signed on. The study is built on an assumption the authors knew to be false.
The foundation of the report is a lie of omission. It speaks of an anchor tenant yet provides none. The projections are built upon this invented presence, and in doing so, manufacture consent for an economic illusion.
To question this tenant is to unravel the entire narrative. That is why it is never questioned.
You’re basing a $200 million arena on a team that doesn’t exist? No contract, no league, not even a logo? That’s your plan. But hey—if you like bullshit, buckle up.
We’ve got season tickets.
