Arlington Weighs $273M Deal to Keep Cowboys at AT&T Stadium Through 2055

City leaders say the extension is vital to the region's economy, but critics argue taxpayers deserve a vote.

Apr. 16, 2026 at 11:38pm

Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›

A photorealistic studio still-life image featuring a polished, geometric metal sculpture in the shape of the Dallas Cowboys' iconic star logo, resting on a clean, monochromatic background and dramatically lit to conceptually represent the abstract corporate strategy and financial implications of the proposed stadium deal.A symbolic sculpture representing the high-stakes financial partnership between the city of Arlington and the Dallas Cowboys organization.Arlington Today

The city of Arlington is considering a proposal that would extend its financial partnership with the Dallas Cowboys and keep the team at AT&T Stadium until 2055. The deal would commit more than $273 million in public funds, but it is drawing criticism from some who say voters should get a say.

Why it matters

The Cowboys are a cornerstone of Arlington's identity and economy, and keeping the team is a priority for city leaders. However, some residents argue that a deal of this scale should be put to a public vote, especially given the city's recent fiscal pressures.

The details

Under the proposed deal, taxpayers would contribute $273 million while the Cowboys organization would invest $750 million toward maintenance, operations, and improvements to the complex. Arlington Mayor Jim Ross says the public funds would be directed toward priorities like security upgrades and pedestrian safety improvements around the stadium. The funding source is a half-cent sales tax that Arlington voters approved in 2004 to help build the stadium, but some critics argue the new deal requires a public vote.

  • The Arlington City Council is expected to vote on the proposal on Tuesday, April 16, 2026.

The players

Bowie Hogg

Arlington City Council Member representing District 7, who says the Cowboys are a cornerstone of the city's identity and economy.

Jim Ross

Mayor of Arlington, who argues the new deal does not require a public vote because voters already approved the funding source in 2004.

Warren Norred

An Arlington attorney who supports the Cowboys but opposes using public funds to support the team, and says he is prepared to challenge the deal in court if it proceeds without a public referendum.

Steve Cavender

A candidate for Arlington mayor, who says the proposal raises serious questions about democratic accountability and calls for the decision to be put to a public vote.

Dallas Cowboys

The professional football team that would benefit from the proposed extension, which they say reflects their continued trust and collaboration with the city.

Got photos? Submit your photos here. ›

What they’re saying

“We've built and done some amazing things. It's great for our economy.”

— Bowie Hogg, Arlington City Council Member

“We have the best stadium in the world, and we want to make sure we remain the best stadium in the world.”

— Jim Ross, Mayor of Arlington

“I'm in favor of the Cowboys. I want them to win, I want them to go play, I want them to make a lot of money in Arlington. That doesn't mean I want to give them my money.”

— Warren Norred, Arlington Attorney

“Any proposal involving taxpayer dollars should be transparent, fully vetted, and ultimately decided by the voters.”

— Steve Cavender, Candidate for Arlington Mayor

“The long, impactful partnership we've had with the City of Arlington represents the fulfillment of a mutual vision we had years ago. It has exceeded the high expectations we all shared right from the beginning.”

— Dallas Cowboys

What’s next

The Arlington City Council is expected to vote on the proposed deal on Tuesday, April 16, 2026. If the deal is approved without a public referendum, attorney Warren Norred says he is prepared to challenge it in court.

The takeaway

This debate highlights the ongoing tension between the economic benefits of keeping a major sports franchise in a city and the democratic principle of allowing taxpayers to have a direct say in how their money is spent. The outcome of this decision could set a precedent for how such public-private partnerships are handled in the future.