Either someone's lying about costs or whoever is doing the purchasing for the park needs to rethink their decisions
I guess that for tax purposes, it could be beneficial to claim you've invested ten times the amount you actually have, but that would also be highly illegal. But yeah, I think they're inflating the numbers massively for press releases, to make the new attraction seem more impressive than it actually is.
Or they could be taking the Disney approach, tricking with leases of intellectual property to move profits around the corporation without paying taxes on it. When Disney spends a billion dollars on a new area, I'd guess around 90 % of it is a "license fee" that the Parks division pays the IP division for the rights to use the IP in the new area. That way, a substantial amount of money is listed as an expense and not as a transfer of capital, which would be taxable. Although I don't see how Flamingoland could be big enough to use such a trick, and most alternative variants of it tend to be illegal (for instance, Flamingoland Administration paying £20m to Flamingoland Construction for a new coaster. Flamingoland Construction spends £3m building the coaster, and pockets the difference. Flamingoland Administration could then write off £20m in investment, while Flamingoland Construction somehow moves the £17m out of the company over the next few months and ends up without making profits that year, hence not making money and not having to pay tax either. The tax authorities would have the bunch of them in jail by Christmas).
So yeah, probably just inflating the numbers for PR.