GREEN BAY, WI (WTAQ-WLUK) — The board which acts as the landlord for Lambeau Field says it is prepared for its role in lease talks with the Green Bay Packers and city of Green Bay, but no specifics were released after a closed-door meeting Thursday.
The current lease for Lambeau Field runs until 2032 and is between the city, team and the Green Bay/Brown County Profession Football Stadium District. The Packers have options to extend the lease another 10 years, but have said they don’t want to do that.
After direct talks between the city and team broke down, the team suggested the Stadium District Board get involved. Although there has been progress toward a deal since then, the Stadium District Board met Thursday in closed session for more than an hour to discuss its role moving forward.
Afterward, district executive director Brian Dworak said the district has not seen any formal proposals from either side.
“The Stadium District had a productive meeting today. We continue to be willing to participate in lease negotiations with the city and the Packers, and look forward to next steps in that process.
District Chair Leah Weycker suggested the district shouldn’t be considered a mediator.
“We’re not in between those two other entities. We are a third party to the lease,” she said.
“The discussion today is really about ‘what does the district want’ and ‘what does the district need’ as part of an extended lease agreement to continue as a three-party agreement with Lambeau Field,” Dworak said.
Dworak is hoping for a meeting with all three parties, but nothing has been scheduled.
“We just hope that this can happen amongst the three parties and we can get together soon and work to resolve those issues,” Dworak said.
Neither team president Mark Murphy or Mayor Eric Genrich attended the meeting, for either the open or closed portions
The Packers have said it’s important to extend the lease now so they can execute that $1.5 billion plan to keep Lambeau Field among the best stadiums in the league. They say the longer this drags on, the more costly it could be and increases the chances of asking taxpayers for money.
Comments