Supporters of a new Aloha Stadium have presented reasons for building it that should be closely examined.

>> “Build it, and they will come.” Supporters of a new stadium argue that it will draw enough big events to make it feasible — big crowds for concerts, University of Hawaii football games, soccer and professional rugby. Hold on! Soccer? Professional rugby?

Hawaii doesn’t even have a professional soccer team or a professional rugby team. Furthermore, professional rugby is still trying to establish itself in the U.S., and it averages only slightly more than 2,000 spectators per game. It’s not feasible to build a big stadium for events with low attendance.

>> “UH needs a venue for football.” When the Stadium Authority fumbled by not maintaining the old Aloha Stadium adequately, UH recovered the fumble and ran with it, building its own stadium in record time on the Manoa campus. UH plans to expand its stadium, and that may be sufficient because UH football attendance has been falling for decades.

>> “Look at the success of Snapdragon Stadium.” Aloha Stadium supporters cite Snapdragon Stadium in San Diego as a model because it was recently completed and it is also part of a mixed-use development, as a new Aloha Stadium in Halawa would be. However, the events calendar on the Snapdragon Stadium website is sparse.

As of May 1, it contains a total of six concerts, San Diego State football games — six of them in the 2023 season — and soccer, rugby and lacrosse. That’s it. Supporters of a new Aloha Stadium need a reality check if they are depending on soccer, rugby and lacrosse for revenue. If the Snapdragon Stadium calendar indicates success, one wonders what failure looks like.

>> “Our new, improved model will cover all costs.” Gov. Josh Green has replaced Gov. David Ige’s model for building the stadium with a model where the state would partner with a private organization that would “design, build, operate and maintain” the facility.

The model may have changed, but costs won’t vary much. An analysis of the old model by PFM Financial Advisors estimated that the 30-year cost to the state for a new stadium, including financing and maintenance expenses, would have been $1.49 billion.

High costs, along with delays, have forced the state to think smaller, just as the rail project was forced to do. For example, the latest idea is to reduce the 35,000 seats in the original stadium idea to bleacher seating for 25,000 spectators — and the stadium roof is gone. It’s another version of back to the future, because it looks more like the old Honolulu Stadium on King Street, which, coincidentally, had a capacity of 25,000.

The state has appropriated $400 million for the project. Events will generate income, but to generate $1 billion over 30 years (see PFM Financial Advisors’ total estimated cost of $1.49 billion over 30 years), the stadium would have to average the equivalent of 33 events per year (nearly three events per month), each generating $1 million. The old Aloha Stadium didn’t even come close.

The state will negotiate the terms of a “design, build, operate, and maintain” contract with the private partner, who will do everything to minimize the risk of losing money. The state will have to put up a lot to get any private partner to agree to a contract. The problem is that nobody — including the state — knows what the private developer will require from the state.

The new Aloha Stadium is fraught with questions: questionable reasons for building it, questionable revenues and a big unknown about the state’s share that is to be negotiated. This a public project, and the public deserves much better.