Hall of Fame Village sued over 2024 enshrinement bill as water park lease unravels
Lawsuit adds pressure to a project already fighting for momentum
An unpaid bill from last summer’s enshrinement week has landed Hall of Fame Village in court. A vendor claims it was not paid for services tied to 2024’s Pro Football Hall of Fame festivities, and the company behind the sprawling sports-and-entertainment campus in Canton is now facing a lawsuit. The filing doesn’t spell out the amount owed or the exact services provided, but it stems from work done during one of the city’s busiest weeks of the year.
This is the latest money problem for the development that surrounds the Pro Football Hall of Fame. Separate from the lawsuit, the Chicago-based firm that owns the site slated for the indoor water park terminated its lease with the Village, saying it’s owed $2.6 million in rent, interest, and late fees. The water park—branded Gameday Bay—broke ground in 2022, only to have construction pause in spring 2024 when financing tightened. The opening, once pitched as near-term, is now penciled in for mid-2025.
For Canton, enshrinement week fills hotels and restaurants and draws national attention. It also relies on a complex ecosystem of vendors who handle security, staging, transportation, hospitality, and pop-up experiences. When a vendor says it wasn’t paid, it raises red flags not just about one invoice, but about the project’s cash flow and its ability to deliver on a packed calendar of events.
The publicly traded Hall of Fame Resort & Entertainment Co., which operates the Village, has been juggling multiple projects at once: event programming at the stadium and performance venues, retail and dining buildouts, and big-ticket attractions like the water park. That mix takes steady financing, and the company has previously signaled it needs additional capital to finish projects and keep schedules intact. The lawsuit adds a new legal and financial variable at a time when every dollar—and every headline—matters.
There’s also an important distinction here. The nonprofit Pro Football Hall of Fame runs the museum and oversees the enshrinement itself. The Village is the separate, for‑profit development built around it—stadiums, plazas, and planned attractions designed to keep visitors in Canton longer. When the Village ends up in court, it doesn’t mean the museum is party to the case. But in the public eye, those lines blur, and that can complicate sponsorships, vendor confidence, and event planning.
What kind of services might be at issue? Court papers don’t say. In large event footprints like this, unpaid claims most often involve temporary infrastructure (staging, lighting, tents), crowd management, cleaning, catering, or transportation. If the case moves forward, expect arguments over contract terms, change orders, and approval trails—who authorized what, and when.
If the vendor wins or the parties settle, the outcome typically includes a repayment plan, late fees, and possibly interest. If the dispute escalates, a judgment could open the door to liens or further collection steps. None of that guarantees immediate payment; it just sets the rules. On the flip side, if the company can document that services didn’t meet spec or were not properly approved, it could push back and reduce or defeat the claim. Right now, the amount and specifics remain under wraps.
Water park setback, vendor risk, and what to watch next
The water park mess reveals the bigger challenge: a signature attraction that stalled as construction costs rose and financing tightened. The property owner’s lease termination citing $2.6 million in unpaid obligations is not just a legal fight—it’s a clock. Every month without progress makes it harder to hit the revised mid‑2025 opening target, and pushes more cost risk onto future capital raises.
Even with the uncertainty, parts of the Village continue to operate and host events. The stadium and performance spaces are active, and the campus still aims to convert enshrinement traffic into year‑round footfall. The question is how much programming the operator can shoulder while navigating legal disputes and funding gaps. Vendors look closely at that. They price risk into contracts, demand tighter payment schedules, or walk away.
For fans and the city, the near‑term focus is this year’s enshrinement. The museum and the enshrinement ceremony have their own budgets and partners, and the show tends to go on. But the surrounding experience—food, concerts, pop‑ups, family attractions—often leans on the Village’s infrastructure and vendor network. If those partners lose confidence, the campus can still host events, but it gets harder and more expensive.
Investors will be watching the same markers lenders watch: liquidity, debt maturities, and progress on anchor projects. Announcements about new financing, fresh partnerships, or phased buildouts could stabilize timelines. Silence would do the opposite. In the background, the lawsuit will grind through motions, hearings, and, most likely, negotiations.
- 2022: Water park construction begins.
- Spring 2024: Work stops amid financing challenges.
- Summer 2024: Enshrinement week vendor provides services at issue in the new lawsuit.
- Lease dispute: Chicago-based property owner claims $2.6 million in unpaid rent, interest, and late fees and terminates the water park lease.
- Mid-2025: Targeted water park opening, contingent on resolving financing and site control.
The development still holds promise: a national brand, a built‑in event that draws attention every year, and a local market that knows how to host football fans. But promise needs funding, clean contracts, and steady execution. The latest lawsuit is a reminder that in real estate and live events, the calendar doesn’t wait—and neither do unpaid invoices.
- September 16 2025
- Thaddeus Culpepper
- Permalink
Written by Thaddeus Culpepper
View all posts by: Thaddeus Culpepper