Latest news with #Clevelanders'
Yahoo
20-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
I-Team: Browns make another legal move to clear path to Brook Park dome
*Attached video: Browns say city 'misguiding' Clevelanders on stadium: Court (WJW) — The FOX 8 I-Team has found the Cleveland Browns just filed a motion to throw out a lawsuit filed by the City aimed at stopping the team from moving to a dome in Brook Park. The City filed suit in Cuyahoga County Court to enforce the so-called Modell Law. That restricts pro sports teams from moving, and it would give the City a chance to find new owners for the Browns. Wayne Dawson shares lesson, update in cancer fight But, the Browns now want that lawsuit put on hold or thrown out. Months ago, the Browns filed their own lawsuit against the City in Federal Court. In that case, the Browns asked a Federal judge to declare the Modell Law unconstitutional. The legal team for the Browns argues that the Federal Court should decide the matter and the Browns want the City's lawsuit put on hold or thrown out to 'eliminate the risk of inconsistent judgments and avoid the inefficiencies that arise from competing, parallel proceedings.' The new legal filing by the Browns adds, 'Federal district courts are the 'primary and powerful reliances for vindicating every right given by the Constitution, the laws, and the treaties of the United States.' All of this comes in a week when the debate over the future home of the Browns has been marked by fiery words. Local K-9 tracks down electronic devices to solve child sex crimes The team wants to build a dome in Brook Park and open play there in 2029. The lease for the current stadium ends after the 2028 season. Wednesday evening, the Browns released a new statement, and the Cuyahoga County Executive spoke out. That followed a bold statement from the Mayor of Cleveland. Earlier this week the Browns accused the City of Cleveland of 'misguiding Clevelanders' about the team's plans for a dome and development around it. Then, Mayor Justin Bibb called out the Browns for 'misleading statements.' He called the dome project a 'scheme.' Late Wednesday, County Executive Chris Ronayne held a news conference speaking out against using public money to help the Browns build a dome. More than 46,000 Tesla Cybertrucks recalled for cant rail that can detach, increasing crash risk Ronayne said, 'The Brook Park stadium proposal is a risky bet with public dollars, a risk we shouldn't take.' But the Browns fired back in a new statement saying, 'While we respect the Mayor and County Executive, the facts are the facts. We have detailed the work completed in collaboration with our team of experts and have taken a conservative approach in our exploration and projections for both stadium options. The work shows definitively that an enclosed stadium in Brook Park is the most viable long-term solution, and the best choice to ensure a thriving future for the Cleveland Browns, our fans, Greater Cleveland and Northeast Ohio.' We went back to two season ticket holders watching this. Chris Becker said, 'Well, I don't know what to believe. The fans are sort of stuck in the middle, here. You know, we want to support the Browns. We want to go to the games.' Reverend Jimmy Gates told the I-Team, 'Can't we all get along to get past the personal part for what's best for the City? What's best for this region.' Casting call: Movie shooting soon in Northeast Ohio Some of the strongest words surround the court fight. The City of Cleveland is using the so-called Modell Law to try to block the Browns from leaving. The Mayor says the team is 'violating State law' restricting sports teams from moving. The Mayor called it an 'attack' on the City's plan to redevelop the lakefront. The Browns argue in their latest Federal Court filing, that the Modell Law shouldn't block the team from leaving. The team plans to move at the end of the lease for the current stadium, and the team plans to stay in the area. In the meantime, the Mayor said the Browns need to 'raise your taxes' for a dome with 'average ticket prices nearing $700' and 'parking rates north of $100.' So, what about those claims? The Browns tell us ticket prices for the dome haven't been set. Neither have parking prices. These 18 US cities among the happiest in the world: new report In the Browns' new statement, Chief Communications Officer Peter John-Baptiste said, 'We have not finalized any ticket prices and are committed to offering ticket options at a variety of price points. We can say definitively that the average ticket price claimed by the Mayor and County Executive is more than three times what we would expect the average ticket price at the new stadium to be. We remain committed to coming together with both state and local public officials to create a positive and meaningful long-term economic benefit for Cleveland and the surrounding region while giving Browns fans one of the best game day experiences in the world.' The City of Brook Park expects to count on parking taxes and admissions taxes, but those haven't been set either. The Browns have asked the State for $600 million dollars, but they say it would, basically, be a loan. A team official stressed to lawmakers, 'It is not a grant. It is not a handout.' However, the dome project could lead to a new county hotel tax and rental car fee. The Browns also hope for $600 million in local public funding, too. The team insists profits from the dome complex would cover the local funding, as well. The County Executive has repeatedly spoken out against the dome plan saying it would hurt downtown, and the Browns should stay there. The team, on the other hand, believes a dome would benefit downtown and all of NE Ohio bringing in money and jobs. Popular laundry detergent recalled over bacteria concern Through it all, those fans say they just want the matter settled. Chris Becker said, 'I think, quite honestly, an indoor stadium is more useful to the community.' Reverand Gates added, 'You would hope that, by now, they would be sitting down. A meeting of the minds and trying to devise a plan. Whatever it takes. Whatever they need to do to keep 'em in downtown Cleveland.' The Browns want a hearing in Federal Court on their lawsuit against the Modell law. In the County Court case, an attorney conference is set for next month. State lawmakers are expected to take the first big vote on State money for the Browns next month. The Browns also said, Wednesday, 'Despite our extensive efforts to explore and collaborate on a lakefront option, the City's plan is the risky bet. It is not economically viable. It includes no concrete path for making funds available to start construction. And, more importantly, it will burden its taxpayers for decades to come while kicking the can down the road. In stark contrast, the Brook Park proposal will not draw from existing taxpayer revenue streams, does not require any funding from the City, and will be funded primarily by revenue generated from the project. ' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
New York Times
20-03-2025
- Entertainment
- New York Times
For Cleveland Orchestra, It's Beethoven (and Freedom) to the Rescue
The Cleveland Orchestra showed up at Carnegie Hall this week without a star. When the music director Franz Welser-Möst planned the ensemble's two-night visit to New York, the opening concert, on Tuesday, was to be headlined by the soprano Asmik Grigorian. A volcanic presence on European stages who rarely makes it to the United States, Grigorian would have been a major box-office draw. Then came news that she was pulling out for unspecified personal reasons. Time to break out the emergency rations of Beethoven. The remaining rump of the Clevelanders' program for Tuesday, the Suite from Janacek's 'From the House of the Dead,' based on Dostoyevsky's account of life in a Russian prison colony, was joined by Beethoven's Fifth Symphony and, for good measure, his 'Leonore' Overture No. 3. A crowd-pleasing solution to a marketing headache? A repertory staple musicians can shine in without too much rehearsal? Not at all. The new program was 'a chance to say something important about our world today,' Welser-Möst wrote in a program statement that referred, smartly but vaguely, to people's 'fight for freedom everywhere.' Without naming specifics, Welser-Möst explained that the Janacek was a testament to 'human dignity' in 'desolate circumstances.' Beethoven's Symphony No. 5 traced a progression 'from darkness to light,' he added, while the overture, written for Beethoven's political prison break opera 'Fidelio,' represented the 'greatest music about freedom ever written.' Far from being a stop gap, the new program created what Welser-Möst called 'a profound statement' that was sure to 'resonate deeply' with New Yorkers. (No similar claims were made for Wednesday's program, which consisted of Stravinsky's 'Pétrouchka' and Tchaikovsky's Symphony No. 5.) The resulting concert on Tuesday was invigorating and full of ravishing playing, as was the performance the next night. But if there was any profound truth to be gleaned from the double helping of Beethoven served alongside Janacek's dazzling suite, it was only that the Fifth and the 'Leonore' overture provide ready-made templates for struggle narratives ending in triumph. Just whose struggle and what is being overcome — I'm guessing that Gaza, Ukraine and the state of American democracy are among them — remain open to interpretation. In fairness, the Cleveland Orchestra has never relied on provocative or politically minded programming to earn its devoted fan base and superlative-studded reviews. In his 23 years at the helm, Welser-Möst has fine-tuned this storied ensemble into an elegant, cohesive and keenly responsive engine. Other American orchestras have struggled to define their role in society as they fret over accusations that their branch of the arts is reactionary and socially irrelevant. The Cleveland Orchestra's image may be conservative — a guardian of a particular European tradition — but it's a well-defined luxury brand that delivers outstanding value. Watching the musicians perform on the same stage that had just hosted the Vienna Philharmonic, I was struck by the similarities between the two institutions. Some of it had to do with the Cleveland Orchestra's mellow and thoughtfully blended brass section, which stands apart from the more metallic and muscular playing in most American orchestras. The Cleveland string section physically moves much like its Austrian counterpart, with entire blocks of players bobbing and weaving as in a chamber setting where the whole torso helps signal expressive intent to the group. Especially in the last movement of the Tchaikovsky, it was a pleasure watching the violinists sway and dance as a bloc. And though the ensemble is studded with stars, a spirit of collaborative forbearance infuses solos. The guest concertmaster Jan Mracek was almost self-effacingly light-footed in the virtuosic cadenzas Janacek writes for the solo violin. John Clouser's bassoon simmered with refinement, especially in the Tchaikovsky. And my ear kept being drawn to the uncommonly dark-hued sound of Joshua Smith's flute, which lent unexpected gravitas to an instrument that typically provides light birdlike relief whenever it rises above the orchestral texture. From the podium, Welser-Möst projected discreet authority, conducting with an economy of gesture that highlighted the easy symbiosis between him and the orchestra. In the Beethoven symphony, he was especially attentive to transitional moments, including the exponential crescendo that flares up at the end of the third movement and leads into the explosive final Allegro. Beethoven demands utmost restraint from the orchestra in the bars leading up to that surge, as the music rises in pitch without yet gaining volume. At Carnegie Hall, that passage came across as almost claustrophobically repressive, the eventual uncorking of sound and energy seeming to burst out like pent-up frustration. It was one of those musical thrills that might have made Beethoven's Fifth such a safe bet with audiences of all kinds. But to a politically inclined listener, it could also sound like a tipping point in a mass movement leading to revolution.
Yahoo
20-03-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
I-Team: New arguments for and against Cleveland Browns dome
CLEVELAND (WJW) – The FOX 8 I-Team found more strong words, even wild claims swirling around the fight over the Cleveland Browns' plan to move to a dome in Brook Park. Wednesday evening, the Browns released a new statement and the Cuyahoga County executive spoke out. That followed a bold statement from the mayor of Cleveland. Tough talk in the battle over the home of the Browns. This week, the Browns accused the city of Cleveland of 'misguiding Clevelanders' about the team's plans for a dome and development around it. When will Cedar-Lee development be demolished? Then, Mayor Justin Bibb called out the Browns for 'misleading statements.' He called the dome project a 'scheme.' Late Wednesday, County Executive Chris Ronayne held a news conference speaking out against using public money to help the Browns build a dome. 'The Brook Park stadium proposal is a risky bet with public dollars, a risk we shouldn't take,' Ronayne said. The Browns fired back in a new statement: 'While we respect the Mayor and County Executive, the facts are the facts. We have detailed the work completed in collaboration with our team of experts and have taken a conservative approach in our exploration and projections for both stadium options. The work shows definitively that an enclosed stadium in Brook Park is the most viable long-term solution, and the best choice to ensure a thriving future for the Cleveland Browns, our fans, Greater Cleveland and Northeast Ohio.' We went back to two season ticket holders watching this. 'Well, I don't know what to believe. The fans are sort of stuck in the middle here. You know, we want to support the Browns. We want to go to the games,' Chris Becker said. 'Can't we all get along to get past the personal part for what's best for the city, what's best for this region?' Reverend Jimmy Gates said. How do astronauts reacclimate to Earth? Research for that process happens in Cleveland Some of the strongest words surround the court fight. The city of Cleveland is using the so-called 'Modell Law' to try to block the Browns from leaving. The mayor said the team is 'violating state law' restricting sports teams from moving. The mayor called it an 'attack' on the city's plan to redevelop the lakefront. But, the Browns argued in their latest federal court filing that the Modell Law shouldn't block the team from leaving. The team plans to move at the end of the lease for the current stadium and the team plans to stay in the area. Meanwhile, the mayor said the Browns need to 'raise your taxes' for a dome with 'average ticket prices nearing $700' and 'parking rates north of $100.' So, what about those claims? The Browns told us ticket prices for the dome haven't been set. Neither have parking prices. In the Browns' new statement, chief communications officer Peter John-Baptiste said: 'We have not finalized any ticket prices and are committed to offering ticket options at a variety of price points. We can say definitively that the average ticket price claimed by the Mayor and County Executive is more than three times what we would expect the average ticket price at the new stadium to be. We remain committed to coming together with both state and local public officials to create a positive and meaningful long-term economic benefit for Cleveland and the surrounding region while giving Browns fans one of the best game day experiences in the world.' The city of Brook Park expects to count on parking taxes and admissions taxes, but those haven't been set either. The Browns have asked the state for $600 million, but they say it would basically be a loan. A team official stressed to lawmakers, 'it is not a grant. It is not a handout.' However, the dome project could lead to a new county hotel tax and rental car fee. The Browns also hope for $600 million in local public funding. The team insists profits from the dome complex would cover the local funding as well. The county executive has repeatedly spoken out against the dome plan, saying it would hurt downtown and the Browns should stay there. The team, on the other hand, believes a dome would benefit downtown and all of Northeast Ohio, bringing in money and jobs. Through it all, those fans said they just want the matter settled. 'I think, quite honestly, an indoor stadium is more useful to the community,' Becker said. 'You would hope that, by now, they would be sitting down. A meeting of the minds and trying to devise a plan. Whatever it takes. Whatever they need to do to keep them in downtown Cleveland,' Gates said. Here's when 3 new Meijer supercenters are opening in NE Ohio The Browns want a hearing in federal court on their lawsuit against the Modell law. State lawmakers are expected to take the first big vote on state money for the Browns next month. The Browns also said in the Wednesday statement: 'Despite our extensive efforts to explore and collaborate on a lakefront option, the City's plan is the risky bet. It is not economically viable. It includes no concrete path for making funds available to start construction. And, more importantly, it will burden its taxpayers for decades to come while kicking the can down the road. In stark contrast, the Brook Park proposal will not draw from existing taxpayer revenue streams, does not require any funding from the City and will be funded primarily by revenue generated from the project. ' Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
