Bills new stadium lease is not ironclad

Investing $850 million of public funds in a new stadium for the Buffalo Bills is a heavy lift for taxpayers. The elected officials who negotiated those terms have offered us the solace that it keeps the team here for at least another 30 years.

It’s an ironclad lease, they’ve assured us.

But it’s not.

And the state of the team’s ownership – Terry Pegula, in his 70s, and his wife Kim, dealing with serious health issues that keep her away from the team – only heighten concerns about the team’s long-term prospects in Western New York.

The memorandum of understanding between the state, county and team allows for the relocation of the team if the Bills owners pay back the $850 million in public funds spent to construct the stadium, plus any capital improvements, and the cost to demolish it, if the state’s stadium authority so desires. After 15 years, the penalties to relocate start to steadily decrease.

The only recourse the state and county would have is litigation in an effort to stop the team from moving. I can’t recall a court ever blocking a major league sports franchise from moving, however.

Now, $850 million, give or take, might sound like a huge disincentive. At least until you consider the escalating value of NFL franchises. The Pegulas bought the team for $1.4 billion. Today it’s worth an estimated $3.4 billion. What are the Bills going to be worth five, ten, fifteen years down the road? A whole lot more.

Subscribe to our free weekly newsletter


Suppose the Pegulas decided to sell. Or Terry dies or ages out and Kim is in no position to carry on. 

Is there anyone in Western New York rich enough to buy the team and keep it here? 

I doubt it. 

Could the team be handed down to the Pegula children, assuming they even wanted it? Only if the kids could pony up the federal estate tax, equivalent to 40 percent of the value of the team. That would come to, what, three, four, five billion dollars? 

Again, I doubt it.

That could leave the Bills  – and the community – at the mercy of an out-of-town buyer.  No doubt a gazillionaire. If he or she dropped upwards of $10 billion to buy the team and bring it home with him, do you think spending up to $1 billion to break the lease would dissuade him or her? 

Again, I doubt it.

Yeah, but wouldn’t league owners put a stop to it? 

You mean the same team owners who in recent years have approved teams leaving Oakland, San Diego and St. Louis? 

The same crew that previously allowed the Colts to abandon Baltimore and the Browns, Cleveland? (Iconic franchises, I might add.)

The same owners who have imposed relocation fees on teams and then split the proceeds among themselves? Each NFL team pocketed $55.2 million in relocation fees charged collectively to the Rams, Raiders and Chargers when they left town. Talk about easy money, and an incentive to continue to allow for the movement of franchises.


Donate to support our nonprofit newsroom


All this behooves the state and county to ask an uncomfortable question: What’s up with the Pegulas?

I mean, they own the team and Kim was a very hands-on president. She’s no longer on the scene since suffering an apparently serious illness seven months ago.

The Pegula family has been tight lipped about Kim’s condition and prognosis and has asked for the press and public to respect their privacy. That’s understandable, to a point. 

But it’s not unreasonable for the taxpaying public and the government officials negotiating the stadium deal on their behalf to know the state of the team’s ownership before making a final commitment to fork over $850 million to help build the $1.4 billion stadium.

Wouldn’t an investment group want to know about the ownership of a business before it invests in it?

The Pegulas bought the Sabres in 2011 and the Bills three years later. Kim, in time, ascended to president of both teams and by all accounts has been very hands-on. 

She was hospitalized in early June for what was described as an “unexpected illness.” No details were provided. 

Later that month, Pegula Sports and Entertainment issued a statement that said: “Kim is progressing well and is resting and rehabilitating from a health issue.” Three days later, her tennis star daughter Jessica told reporters at Wimbledon that her mother is “doing a lot better now.” 

Another daughter, Kelly, posted comments in September on her Instagram account that featured a photo of her with her mother in happier times that started out: “This is a tough birthday for me. Been a rough few months.”

Meanwhile, it appears Kim Pegula has been completely absent from the operations of the Bills and Sabres. That’s quite a departure, as one source told me that before her illness, “everything ran through her.”

It’s clear something serious is going on with her.


Follow us on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram & YouTube


Terry, meanwhile, has continued his low-key ownership, attending many Bills games but rarely speaking in public. Comments described as “incoherent” that he made in December to fellow NFL owners were noted in a story by CBS Sports. The topic was criticism of the league’s scouting combine.

Bills owner Terry Pegula took to the microphone to make a point that confused many in the room. According to sources, Pegula didn’t condone the combine weigh-ins (which aren’t televised) but seemed to play a devil’s advocate role that it’s ultimately what people want to see.

He then tried to bridge football with women’s tennis, the sport of his daughter, Jessica, who is ranked No. 3 in the world. The Bills owner appeared to bemoan the sometimes-revealing outfits that he said women tennis players are encouraged to wear. Some sources construed his comments to mean that sports all have some level of exploitation. Another source simply called them “incoherent.” The conversation came to an end shortly after Pegula’s confusing comments.

Much like how many Bills fans worried about the team’s fate as Ralph Wilson got on in years, it’s not unreasonable to have similar concerns about the team’s not-a-spring-chicken owner (71) if his much younger wife (53) is not in a position to carry on.

It seems to me that Gov. Kathy Hochul and Erie County Executive Mark Poloncarz – whose offices refused my interview requests – need to do their homework and answer the following questions:

  • Are there examples of real ironclad leases from around the league that should be considered for our stadium here?
  • How is the Bills ownership structured? Do Terry and Kim own the team 50-50? Are the kids involved?
  • Do the Pegulas have a succession plan in place and, if so, what is it?
  • What kind of shape are Terry – and especially, Kim – really in and what is their prognosis for the long term? 

These are not academic questions. Answering them is required due diligence if the interests of taxpayers and fans are to be respected. The time to do so is now, before it’s too late. And time, according to the governor, is running out, as a final deal is pending.

I hope Kim recovers and that she and Terry live long lives and the Bills (and Sabres) stay in Buffalo forever. But there’s too much at stake to simply hope for the best.

The post Bills new stadium lease is not ironclad appeared first on Investigative Post.

Related articles

LIVE: URGENT REPORT ON VENEZUELA INVASION | The Weekend Show

Army combat veteran and Democratic candidate for Missouri’s...

Nick Shirley’s investigation into alleged Minnesota day care ‘fraud scandal’: What we know

Shirley claimed owners of empty day cares were stealing millions of dollars from Minnesotan taxpayers.

This Trumpist threat proved itself a danger — now it’s forming again



By Alexander Lowie, Postdoctoral associate in Classical and Civic Education, University of Florida

Stewart Rhodes, the founder of the Oath Keepers, a far-right militia, announced in November 2025 that he will relaunch the group after it disbanded following his prison sentence in 2023.

Rhodes was sentenced to 18 years in prison for seditious conspiracy and other crimes committed during the U.S. Capitol riot on Jan. 6, 2021.

In January 2025, President Donald Trump granted clemency to the over 1,500 defendants convicted of crimes connected to the storming of the Capitol.

Trump did not pardon Rhodes — or some others found guilty of the most serious crimes on Jan. 6. He instead commuted Rhodes’ sentence to time served. Commutation only reduces the punishment for a crime, whereas a full pardon erases a conviction.

As a political anthropologist I study the Patriot movement, a collection of anti-government right-wing groups that include the Proud Boys, Oath Keepers and Moms for Liberty. I specialize in alt-right beliefs, and I have interviewed people active in groups that participated in the Capitol riot.

Rhodes’ plans to relaunch the Oath Keepers, largely composed of current and former military veterans and law enforcement officers, is important because it will serve as an outlet for those who have felt lost since his imprisonment. The group claimed it had more than 40,000 dues-paying members at the height of its membership during Barack Obama’s presidency. I believe that many of these people will return to the group, empowered by the lack of any substantial punishment resulting from the pardons for crimes committed on Jan. 6.

In my interviews, I’ve found that military veterans are treated as privileged members of the Patriot movement. They are honored for their service and military training. And that’s why I believe many former Oath Keepers will rejoin the group – they are considered integral members.

Their oaths to serving the Constitution and the people of the United States are treated as sacred, binding members to an ideology that leads to action. This action includes supporting people in conflicts against federal agencies, organizing citizen-led disaster relief efforts, and protesting election results like on Jan. 6. The members’ strength results from their shared oath and the reverence they feel toward keeping it.

Who are the Oath Keepers?

Rhodes joined the Army after high school and served for three years before being honorably discharged after a parachuting accident in 1986. He then attended the University of Nevada and later graduated from Yale Law School in 2004. He founded the Oath Keepers in 2009.

Oath Keepers takes its name from the U.S military Oath of Enlistment, which states:

“I do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; and that I will obey the orders of the President of the United States …”

Informed by his law background, Rhodes places a particular emphasis on the part of the oath that states they will defend the Constitution against all enemies, foreign and domestic.

He developed a legal theory that justifies ignoring what he refers to as “unlawful orders” after witnessing the aftermath of Hurricane Katrina. Following the natural disaster, local law enforcement was assigned the task of confiscating guns, many of which officers say were stolen or found in abandoned homes.

Rhodes was alarmed, believing that the Second Amendment rights of citizens were being violated. Because of this, he argued that people who had military or law enforcement backgrounds had a legal duty to refuse what the group considers unlawful orders, including any that violated constitutionally protected rights, such as the right to bear arms.

In the Oath Keepers’ philosophy, anyone who violates these rights are domestic enemies to the Constitution. And if you follow the orders, you’ve violated your oath.

Explaining the origin of the group on the right-wing website The Gateway Pundit in November 2025, Rhodes said: “We were attacked out of the gate, labeled anti-government, which is absurd because we’re defending the Constitution that established the federal government. We were labeled anti-government extremists, all kinds of nonsense because the elites want blind obedience in the police and military.”

Rebuilding and restructuring

In 2022, the nonprofit whistleblower site Distributed Denial of Secrets leaked more than 38,000 names on the Oath Keepers’ membership list.

The Anti-Defamation League estimated that nearly 400 were active law enforcement officers, and that more than 100 were serving in the military. Some of these members were investigated by their workplaces but never disciplined for their involvement with the group.

Some members who were not military or law enforcement did lose their jobs over their affiliation. But they held government-related positions, such as a Wisconsin alderman who resigned after he was identified as a member.

This breach of privacy, paired with the dissolution of the organization after Rhodes’ sentencing, will help shape the group going forward.

In his interview with The Gateway Pundit, where he announced the group’s relaunch, Rhodes said: “I want to make it clear, like I said, my goal would be to make it more cancel-proof than before. We’ll have resilient, redundant IT that makes it really difficult to take down … And I want to make sure I get – put people in charge and leadership everywhere in the country so that, you know, down the road, if I’m taken out again, that it can still live on under good leadership without me being there.”

There was a similar shift in organizational structure with the Proud Boys in 2018. That’s when their founder, Gavin McInnes, stepped away from the organization. His departure came after a group of Proud Boys members were involved in a fight with anti-fascists in New York.

Prosecutors wanted to try the group as a gang. McInnes, therefore, distanced himself to support their defense that they weren’t in a gang or criminal organization. Ultimately, two of the members were sentenced to four years in prison for attempted gang assault charges.

Some Proud Boys members have told me they have since focused on creating local chapters, with in-person recruitment, that communicate on private messaging apps. They aim to protect themselves from legal classification as a gang. It also makes it harder for investigators or activist journalists to monitor them.

This is referred to as a cell style of organization, which is popular with insurgency groups. These groups are organized to rebel against authority and overthrow government structures. The cell organizational style does not have a robust hierarchy but instead produces smaller groups. They all adhere to the same ideology but may not be directly associated.

They may have a leader, but it’s often acknowledged that they are merely a figurehead, not someone giving direct orders. For the Proud Boys, this would be former leader Enrique Tarrio. Proud Boys members I’ve spoken to have referred to him as a “mascot” and not their leader.

Looking ahead

So what does the Rhodes interview indicate about the future of Oath Keepers?

Members will continue supporting Trump while also recruiting more retired military and law enforcement officers. They will create an organizational structure designed to outlive Rhodes. And based on my interactions with the far-right, I believe it’s likely they will create an organizational structure similar to that of the cell style for organizing.

Beyond that, they are going to try to own their IT, which includes hosting their websites and also using trusted online revenue generators.

This will likely provide added security, protecting their membership rolls while making it more difficult for law enforcement agencies to investigate them in the future.

Exploring the Legality Questions About Venezuela Military Strike

Several Democrats have claimed that the Trump administration’s Jan....