The Portland City Council approved $120 million in funding to renovate the Moda Center and attempt to keep the Trail Blazers in the city.

The council voted 8-4 Wednesday to pass a non-binding term sheet, though it also included an amendment that would require the Blazers to pay about $3.1 million in rent annually.

The city’s approval was the final step in a monthslong process to line up financing for the arena, but it does not guarantee that the Blazers will stay. The vote instead launches a 4 1/2-month negotiation with the team on a new lease agreement.

The Blazers and the city of Portland have found little common ground so far in their negotiations, but a deadline now looms for both parties. Government officials at the state, county and local levels have voted to approve more than $573 million to refurbish and modernize the Moda Center, but there must be an agreement on a term sheet by Dec. 31 for the team to access the $365 million appropriated by the Oregon state legislature. The city council will likely vote on the lease on Dec. 17, its final scheduled meeting of the year.

The team’s Moda Center lease expires on Oct. 11, 2030, and the two sides are trying to agree on a new 20-year deal. The franchise and local government have publicly disagreed about how much the Blazers should contribute financially, along with other terms of the current bridge lease. New Blazers owner Tom Dundon has said he believes the team should not have to contribute to the renovation funds. Last month, Blazers president Dewayne Hankins said the city was is not a palatable business environment for the team.

The Blazers have also asked the city to remove a clause that requires the team to maintain the Moda Center “in a first-class manner.” Team executives say that leaves the Blazers open to lawsuits.

City officials have disputed that interpretation and have so for declined to take out a clause that was already negotiated in a signed lease. Deputy city administrator Donnie Oliveira also said the bridge agreement, signed in 2024, prevents the city from suing the Blazers during the course of the current lease.

“We again reiterate our position in this proposal that the information (Rip City Management) provides regarding any future renovation will not be used against (the Blazers) and the city has no intention of using the current Bridge Agreement in that manner,” Oliveira wrote in a July 28 email to Hankins. Oliveira’s message quoted, in bold and underlined text, the following language from the lease: “Landlord agrees not to raise, assert, pursue, or otherwise enforce in any manner the ‘first-class’ obligations of Tenant hereunder.”

For weeks, there was uncertainty about whether city and county officials would approve the funds to renovate the arena. Not only had the relationship between the city and team grown testy, but local politicians also began to voice skepticism about devoting taxpayer money to the renovation plan.

The Moda Center is the oldest NBA arena that hasn’t been renovated. Since the city bought the arena for $1 from the Paul Allen estate in 2024, the team and the city have been splitting the maintenance bills, which range from $8 million to $10 million a year.

Last week, the Multnomah County Board of Commissioners approved a term sheet that would offer up to $101.6 million to upgrade the arena. The city council voted Wednesday to finance its contribution.

Now the negotiations begin.

Any members of the LIV Golf league hoping to balance out a pared-down 2027 schedule with more DP World Tour events were in for a surprise.

The DP World Tour has begun notifying current LIV golfers that, beyond the 2026 season, it will resume imposing heavy-handed fines and tournament suspensions as part of its conflicting events rule, according to a source briefed on the matter. The source spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to speak publicly.

In February, eight LIV golfers were given conditional releases to participate in DP World Tour (formerly European Tour) events without incurring fines or suspensions. Typically, participating in LIV tournaments would have been considered a violation of the conflicting events policy, but the players struck a deal in which they agreed to pay all previously incurred fines and participate in extra DP World Tour tournaments in exchange for the ability to play 2026 LIV events freely. Those players included Tyrrell Hatton, Laurie Canter, Thomas Detry, Tom McKibbin, Adrian Meronk, Victor Perez, David Puig and Elvis Smylie. Jon Rahm was not included on the initial list of players but struck his own deal with the DPWT in May.

Now, the DP World Tour is communicating to many of those same players that it is highly unlikely conditional releases will be granted beyond 2026 and advising them not to base future scheduling decisions on that possibility.

At the time of its February announcement, the DPWT noted the LIV players would provide “additional value” to the circuit’s events, but it also noted “the releases apply for the 2026 season only and they are not precedent-setting.” That inclusion is now relevant as the tour appears to have changed its tune amid recent events.

LIV CEO Scott O’Neil is touting a 2.0 model that will lower purses and the number of tournaments each year, but is offering players the opportunity to be equity holders in the reimagined league. That’s a problem for the DP World Tour, the source explained, because it would incentivize players to focus on LIV first and not be full participants in the DP World Tour. Outside of Smylie, the affected players are European-born and will have Ryder Cup ambitions in 2027. The DP World Tour controls the European Ryder Cup team and runs the tournament when it is in Europe, in next year’s case, Ireland’s Adare Manor.

The DP World Tour declined to comment for this story.

Sergio Garcia, Ian Poulter and Lee Westwood have also, within the last 18 months, paid their outstanding fines.

LIV players have been told this information at a pivotal moment, as they will soon be asked to confirm their loyalty to LIV for the 2027 season, according to a separate source briefed on the matter, who spoke anonymously because they were not authorized to speak publicly.