If it is a direct allocation, no. 

But if it is allowing the use of projected increase in property taxes due to the improvements to help fund it, that is acceptable due to the high economic input. 

Additionally, allowing the use of an increased sales tax to fund the same on goods sold at the stadium is also acceptable. 

Thus, the main principle is that the tax break or subsidy must be tied to the increase of value or commerce generated by the stadium being there.