Both sides of raging argument over public money for Browns dome: I-Team
CLEVELAND (WJW) – The FOX 8 I-Team did some digging into the firestorm around $600 million in public money going to the owners of the Cleveland Browns to help build a dome.
It has become almost a guarantee that state lawmakers will approve the money to help the Browns build a dome and development around it in Brook Park.
Some state and local leaders are piling on, trying to stop any money for the Browns. They're arguing the state needs more money for things like education.
'We say to the owners, 'look, you want to build it? Build it yourself,'' Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne told us in the last week.
I-Team: New video, police response from Lee-Harvard shooting that left 7 injured
'I have a big problem with rewarding a billionaire family with a $600 million performance grant,' state Senator Casey Weinstein said.
'What we talked about is giving billionaires money from Ohioans that they, quite frankly, don't need,' state Senator Nickie Antonio added.
But on Wednesday, Ohio Senate Finance Chairman Jerry Cirino fired back.
'Let's be careful about disparaging billionaires or highly successful people. They are an important part of our economy. They pay most of the taxes,' he said.
'Easy way for naysayers to say, 'Why should we give money to billionaires?'' Browns owner Jimmy Haslam told the I-Team in April.
Haslam reminded everyone that his company is investing more than $1 billion in the dome complex.
'That'll be the fourth or fifth largest project ever done in Ohio. Period. And the largest in Northeast Ohio,' he added.
I-Team: Video shows Gregory Moore, accused of killing Aliza Sherman, booked into jail
Lawmakers now have come down to the final weeks for deciding on one of three plans to help fund a dome for the Browns. The public money would be paid back.
Meanwhile, the state Senate president took on another common complaint about lawmakers simply giving in to political influence.
'What's your response to that?' we asked state Senate Rob McColley.
'We haven't been influenced by the Haslams. We do this for economic development projects of this size all the time,' he answered. 'This is a good investment for Ohio. It's one that's going to bring in more money to the general fund for other priorities in the state.'
The Browns keep moving closer to getting state money and the voices for and against keep growing louder.
State lawmakers will be taking a final vote on the budget by the end of the month.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
The most important Democratic primary endorsements: poll
Sens. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.) and Elizabeth Warren (D-Mass.), two progressive powerhouses, hold the most influential endorsements in Democratic primaries, according to new polling shared with Axios. Why it matters: Democratic figures have already started firing off endorsements for the 2026 midterms. But new data reveals only a fraction of those endorsements motivate primary voters. 60% of likely Democratic primary voters are more likely to support a politician endorsed by Sanders, according to recent polling by Data for Progress. That figure is 56% for Warren. The endorsements of top Democratic leaders like Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries aren't as powerful as the endorsements of other prominent Democrats, according to the poll. The big picture: There are several high-stakes primaries for Democrats next year. Progressives and moderates will try to put their thumbs on the scales of those contests. Senate Democrats are preparing for open primaries in Michigan, Illinois, Texas, Florida and North Carolina. Zoom in: These are how political figures polled among Democratic primary voters. Sen. Bernie Sanders — Net +48 (More likely: 60%, Less likely: 12%) Sen. Elizabeth Warren — Net +46 (More likely: 56%, Less likely: 10%) Former Transportation Secretary Pete Buttigieg — Net +44 (More likely: 53%, Less likely: 9%) Gov. Tim Walz — Net +44 (More likely: 54%, Less likely: 10%) Sen. Cory Booker — Net +38 (More likely: 51%, Less likely: 13%) House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries — Net +37 (More likely: 47%, Less likely: 10%) Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez — Net +31 (More likely: 44%, Less likely: 13%) Gov. Gretchen Whitmer — Net +31 (More likely: 39%, Less likely: 8%) Gov. Josh Shapiro — Net +29 (More likely: 40%, Less likely: 11%) Sen. Amy Klobuchar — Net +29 (More likely: 40%, Less likely: 11%) Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer — Net +27 (More likely: 43%, Less likely: 16%) Rep. Jasmine Crockett — Net +26 (More likely: 33%, Less likely: 7%) Gov. Gavin Newsom — Net +25 (More likely: 38%, Less likely: 13%) Gov. Andy Beshear — Net +23 (More likely: 32%, Less likely: 9%) Businessman Mark Cuban — Net +23 (More likely: 35%, Less likely: 12%) Gov. J.B. Pritzker — Net +21 (More likely: 29%, Less likely: 8%) Sen. Chris Murphy — Net +19 (More likely: 26%, Less likely: 7%) Gov. Wes Moore — Net +17 (More likely: 25%, Less likely: 8%) Sen. Tim Kaine — Net +17 (More likely: 28%, Less likely: 11%) Former Ambassador Rahm Emanuel — Net +14 (More likely: 25%, Less likely: 11%)
Axios
an hour ago
- Axios
The intra-GOP fight over Israel's strikes on Iran
Some Hill Republicans view the past 24 hours as a battle lost for MAGA's isolationist camp. Why it matters: GOP Hill leaders united in support of Israel's targeted attack on Iran — in spite of MAGA media's monthslong warnings against such strikes. Major MAGA figures from Tucker Carlson to Charlie Kirk to Jack Posobiec tried for months to rally the Trump base against the U.S. backing direct attacks on Iran. Non-interventionism is a core pillar of the "America First" movement — arguably as important to the MAGA base as immigration and trade. But elected Republicans' public support of Israel's action indicates the more traditional national security hawks still have some ground to stand on, for now. What they're saying: "Two months ago I gave Iran a 60 day ultimatum to "make a deal." They should have done it," Trump posted on Truth Social on Friday. Israeli officials told Axios that despite the administration's official distancing from the strikes, the U.S. had given Israel the green light. "The United States Senate stands ready to work with President Trump and with our allies in Israel to restore peace in the region and, first and foremost, to defend the American people from Iranian aggression," Senate Majority Leader John Thune (R-S.D.) said in a statement. "Israel decided it needed to take action to defend itself. They were clearly within their right to do so," Speaker Mike Johnson (R-La.) said. What we're hearing: Top GOP congressional staffers told Axios the limits of the MAGA isolationists' influence — particularly with lawmakers — is clear. One chief of staff described the online personalities as "in a bubble," arguing they have almost no real influence on Capitol Hill. Another said they felt that when it comes to Israel, most Republicans are not all that in line with voices like Carlson. One aide argued that Trump is not all that different than in his first term, when he took out Qasem Soleiman i or ordered strikes on Syria in response to a chemical weapons attack — despite new voices in his inner circle. Standing with allies is foreign policy 101, said another, calling it "remarkable" how some in the administration's isolationist wing pretends otherwise. What to watch: Some Republicans are taking it a step further than approval of Israeli actions, encouraging more direct U.S. involvement while not yet advocating for troops on the ground. "Again, I applaud President Trump for urging Iran back to the negotiating table," Sen Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) posted on X on Friday. "However, if Iran refuses this offer, I strongly believe it is in America's national security interest to go all-in to help Israel finish the job." "President Donald J. Trump does not bluff. If the Iranians attack Americans— there will be hell to pay," Sen. Markwayne Mullin (R-Okla.), a close Trump ally, posted. Between the lines: The MAGAverse's influence could have been diluted by its own division over the issue of Israel and Iran. Some in MAGA, led by older voters and evangelicals, want to continue Washington's historic Israel bearhug even while avoiding other foreign entanglements. Others don't have such an Israel-sized carveout in their non-interventionist instincts. A slice of MAGA promoting antisemitism is openly hostile to the country. The bottom line: Those divisions were on full display Friday. "How is it not AMERICA FIRST to congratulate those who just made sure Islamists who chant "DEATH TO AMERICA" and who openly plotted to assassinate President @realDonaldTrump never have an opportunity to have a nuke?" right-wing provocateur Laura Loomer posted on X. "They should be Israel first. But we have to be America first," Steve Bannon said on his "War Room" podcast Friday. "The bottom line is, we cannot be inexorably dragged into a war on the Eurasian land mass or in the Middle East or in Eastern Europe."
Yahoo
an hour ago
- Yahoo
Exposed: How Texans' Tax Dollars Fund Political Agendas
When state Sen. Mayes Middleton sponsored a bill to ban taxpayer-funded lobbying, he hoped it would end the use of peoples' money against their own interests. 'For too long, taxpayers' and parents' own tax dollars have been used to lobby against them in Austin,' Middleton said in a statement to The Dallas Express. Middleton, a Republican, introduced SB 19 in the state Senate in February, aiming to ban public bodies from hiring lobbyists. 'These taxpayer-funded lobbyists have squandered millions of dollars of your hard-earned dollars to lobby against border security, election integrity, parental choice in education, teacher pay raises, and even fought against property tax relief and reform,' Middleton said in the statement. Tarrant County Judge Tim O'Hare endorsed Middleton's proposed ban on taxpayer-funded lobbying in February. 'It's time for Texas to put a stop to using our tax dollars for special interest lobbying,' he posted at the time. Close to $100 million in public funds is spent each year on taxpayer-funded lobbying, according to Middleton. Public bodies across Texas spent up to $98.6 million in 2023 – up from $75 million in 2021 – to hire 'contract lobbyists,' according to a report by the Texas Public Policy Foundation. James Quintero, policy director of the group's Taxpayer Protection Project, wrote that these numbers fail to 'capture the full weight of taxpayer-funded lobbying.' He added that local governments also use tax dollars to hire 'in-house lobbyists' and pay membership dues to 'politically active groups that represent political subdivisions to the legislature.' Quintero wrote that it is 'more difficult to quantify' these kinds of lobbying due to the large volume of information. 'The practice of T[axpayer] F[unded] L[obbying] is being utilized by local governments to lobby state government for more government – and in a decidedly leftwing direction,' Quintero wrote. 'It is tantamount to the weaponization of public money against the public interest, for the benefit of a select few.' Groups like the Texas Association of School Boards used 'school tax dollars' to protect men going into girls' restrooms and locker rooms, and invited 'transgender advocates' to train school board members on pronouns, Middleton said. In the past, the TASB reportedly helped block school choice. The TASB uses 'taxpayer-funded' lobbying, and it spent up to $1.89 million as of the '2024 election season,' according to Transparency USA. Since 2015, the group has spent up to $6.8 million. Its 'advocacy agenda' is off-limits to the public. The TASB denounced efforts to ban lobbying with public money: 'Prohibiting Local Governments from Lobbying is Community Censorship.' Dallas directed more than $1 million to its 'internal lobbyists,' which support legislation it says 'protect[s] the rights of all vulnerable communities, including LGBTQIA+ individuals, youth, seniors, and refugees.' Fort Worth supports legislation that would 'prohibit discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation, gender identity, or gender expression.' Other large cities across Texas also fund lobbyists with public money. Austin uses its 'public-private team of lobbyists' to 'actively support legislation' backed by the city council, like 'pay-equity, education-equity, housing-equity, and health-equity.' Houston supports measures 'strengthening local governments' regulatory authority over energy industry participants.' San Antonio's Government Affairs Department pushes legislation supporting 'health equity and social justice.' Middleton's ban on taxpayer-funded lobbying – backed by Lt. Gov. Dan Patrick – passed the state Senate in March but ultimately died in the state House. Before it passed the first chamber, Republican state Sen. Robert Nichols introduced an amendment that gutted the bill. This removed the ban on public dollars for nonprofits that hire lobbyists and created carve-outs for nonprofits. TASB is a nonprofit, so this would have exempted the group from the public lobbying ban. 'Time and time again, we have seen taxpayer-funded lobbyists advocate against Texans and against common sense,' Middleton said in a statement. 'We don't need an Austin lobbyist middleman between state and local elected officials. We are elected to represent our constituents directly.'
