Dan Onorato, who takes office Jan. 2 as Allegheny County's chief executive, has one promise for the sporting public: The Penguins will not get a penny of local tax money to build a new arena.

Instead of relying on taxpayers, the team must find a private company or benefactor to help it construct the $270 million rink it wants, he said.

"They need to make the deal work without local tax money," Onorato, a Democrat, said.

He maintains that the Penguins can still get a new rink if team executives are creative. Onorato pointed to a privately built arena in Columbus, Ohio, as proof that a top-notch rink can be constructed without burdening taxpayers.

Nationwide, an insurance and financial services company headquartered in Columbus, provided 90 percent of the $150 million spent on an arena for the National Hockey League's expansion Blue Jackets. Nationwide stepped forward in 1997 after voters rejected a bond issue to pay for an arena with tax money. The Dispatch Co., publisher of Columbus' daily newspaper, provided the other 10 percent of arena construction costs.

Today, Nationwide Arena serves as the centerpiece of a Downtown Columbus office and entertainment district. Formerly the site of a penitentiary, the 75-acre neighborhood includes a movie theater, restaurants, offices and a concert venue. Apartments and perhaps condominiums are on the way.

Onorato's insistence on a Pittsburgh arena being a largely private project is a radical departure from what the Penguins expected.

In a financing proposal drafted by the city-county Sports & Exhibition Authority, a minimum of $63 million in local tax money and another $90 million from state taxpayers were to be obtained for the rink.

The Penguins accepted the Sports & Exhibition Authority's plan, but Onorato said he cannot and will not.

Perhaps the scope and cost of the proposed arena need to be reduced, or a private company needs to become a partner of the team to offset any reliance on local tax money, he said.

But economists who specialize in the business of professional sports say private businesses generally see no benefit in building and owning sports stadiums. Hundreds of millions of dollars in up-front construction costs and ongoing tax bills are the primary reasons.

Already, the owners of Nationwide Arena are trying to convince Ohio taxing authorities that the building is worth less than a quarter of what it cost to construct. Nationwide's objective is to reduce the real estate taxes it pays.

Instead, the Franklin County Board of Revision last week increased the taxable value of Nationwide Arena by $26.4 million, meaning the owners will face bigger bills.

Michelle Chippas, director of marketing for Nationwide Realty Investors, development arm of the company, said the tax ruling will be appealed.

Nationwide collects $3 million a year in lease payments from the Blue Jackets, who are owned by a different company. Over the course of a 25-year lease, Nationwide will recoup from the team only about half of what it spent to build the rink.

"The arena, for us, does not make money," Chippas said.

Nationwide's hope for financial success is that the ancillary office, housing and entertainment developments eventually will succeed.

"I think this was a once-in-a-lifetime situation," Chippas said of the company venturing into the arena business. "We're looking long term, 15 or 20 years down the road" for profitability.

Even with Nationwide building the Columbus arena, the project was not cost-free to taxpayers. About $33 million had to be spent on downtown street improvements, much of it in the new entertainment district anchored by the hockey rink.

Still, opponents of public funding for a Columbus arena said the project worked out to their liking.

"What the NHL wanted was corporate welfare. We were the first city that didn't let that happen," said Richard Sheir, a privately employed systems analyst, who led the fight against public money being spent on an arena.

Because Nationwide pays arena property taxes that are funneled to the Columbus school system, Sheir said, the general public benefits from the rink, not simply those fans who follow hockey.

Mellon Arena, built in 1961, is a public building that cannot be taxed. The new stadiums constructed for the Steelers and Pirates also are off the tax rolls -- a circumstance far more typical than what happened in Columbus.

Even if the Penguins can find a business partner to build a new arena, as Nationwide did in Columbus, the project might not rejuvenate the team or improve its bottom line, experts say.

"A stadium is a draw unto itself for a short period, and that honeymoon is getting shorter with each new building," said Michael Haupert chairman of the economics department at the University of Wisconsin-La Crosse. "Then, it's back to square one and what draws fans. Usually, it is a winning team. So, unless the new arena generates the cash necessary to improve the quality of the team, it will not have a lasting impact."

Rodney Fort, a sports economist at Washington State University, said new baseball parks, blessed with more inherent charm than indoor arenas, do not necessarily create greater fan support.

"Witness the Detroit Tigers," Fort said of the team that last season sold 1.37 million tickets in 4-year-old Comerica Park. The team drew more fans each of its last two seasons at Tiger Stadium.

Of course, Detroit fielded a better team in the old ballpark than the club that finished last season 43-119, worst in the major leagues. But a new park was supposed to make the Tigers competitive, something team owners said was impossible in an old stadium.

Pittsburgh and Milwaukee also have new baseball parks, but both franchises lack the financial wherewithal to keep their better players.

"The Brewers started slashing payroll for next year by dealing Richie Sexson, their highly paid slugger," Haupert said. "This is a mere three seasons into their taxpayer-financed, $450 million stadium."

Hockey, more of a niche sport in American cities than football or baseball, faces perhaps greater economic problems.

Onorato said the county government has no money to help the Penguins construct a new arena. As for Pittsburgh's city government, it cannot pay its bills and is looking for financial assistance from the state.

To Onorato, local economics dictate that the Penguins find a fresh way to build the arena they covet.

"I think it's simple. The NHL has to get its own fiscal house in order, and the Penguins have to find private money," he said.