Latest news with #DeeHaslam
New York Times
22-05-2025
- Business
- New York Times
Fight continues as Browns plan to move from downtown, build indoor stadium
The Cleveland Browns say they're moving forward with their plan to build an indoor stadium in suburban Brook Park. Unsurprisingly, the public bickering around the team's planned exit from Cleveland continues. This week, Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb told Cleveland's Fox 8 News that the city has 'more important priorities than the Cleveland Browns' and it has to 'move on. If they go to Brook Park, God bless them. Good luck.' Advertisement That led to Bibb's office releasing a formal statement clarifying that the city intends to fight to keep the Browns in downtown Cleveland despite the Haslam Sports Group's plan to build an indoor stadium in Brook Park, about 15 minutes southwest of the city and not far from the team's daily training facility in Berea. Mayor Bibb reinforces his commitment to protecting Cleveland taxpayers. — Office of Mayor Bibb (@CLEMayorsOffice) May 21, 2025 Team owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam have long explored options for a new stadium. For 18 months, they've been firm that they prefer to build an indoor facility over renovating the current Huntington Bank Field. The team's current stadium lease expires after the 2028 season. 'The Haslams are taking extreme measures to relocate the team away from downtown in an irreversible move that will negatively impact Cleveland and numerous small businesses that have stood by and supported their team,' Bibb said in the statement. Haslam Sports Group has pledged $1.2 billion in private investment, plus a promise to pay cost overruns for the Brook Park facility. With an estimated total price tag of $2.4 million, the Browns' plan is to ask for $600 million in bonds from both the state and Cuyahoga County, money that would eventually be repaid with tax revenues created by the Brook Park stadium project. Ohio Gov. Mike DeWine has a June 30 deadline to sign the state budget into law. The Ohio House passed its version of the budget last month, and it's now in the state Senate. DeWine had originally proposed doubling the state tax on sports betting to raise money for new stadiums instead of pledging $600 million in state bonds. In March, Jimmy Haslam said the Browns hoped to begin construction in early 2026 if the funding is approved next month. Last summer, the Browns formally rolled out drawings and plans for their new entertainment complex on the site of a former Ford plant. In a letter sent by Haslam Sports Group to Cuyahoga County executives earlier this month, the team essentially said it will move forward even without the county's support. Advertisement 'Renovating the (current) stadium and putting more than $1 billion into a short-term fix that would present the same dilemma 15 to 20 years from now is neither a strategic nor a fiscally responsible long-term approach,' the Browns' letter said. There have been a lot of letters and statements amid other paperwork in this Browns versus Cleveland battle. The city and team also have dueling lawsuits over the Modell Law, with Cleveland maintaining the Browns would be in violation of the 1996 law named after former team owner Art Modell if they moved to Brook Park, and the Browns filing a challenge to that in federal court. In January, the city sued the Browns in an attempt to enforce the Modell Law, which requires a team that takes taxpayer money and plays in a tax-supported facility to either obtain the city's permission or allow it and others to purchase the team before moving away from that facility. The Browns maintain that the Modell Law would apply only if the team were trying to move out of state, as Modell did, and that the team holds the right to move freely once the current lease expires. The fight is not only over funding, but also how to best use the lakefront land on which the current stadium sits. There has been little new development around the stadium over three decades, and the Haslam Sports Group wants not only to hold more events year-round in Brook Park, but also to own the parking lots surrounding the new facility. In January, Bibb called the Brook Park project 'the Haslam scheme' and said it was a 'ploy' that would 'raise your taxes, make it more expensive for you to attend games and steal events away from downtown.' After the Greater Cleveland Partnership endorsed the Browns' plan to move forward with their Brook Park project, the city of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County released a joint statement saying they would no longer participate with the Greater Cleveland Partnership in meetings involving civic vision and development. 'No amount of money can account for the irreversible damage caused by the construction of an unneeded entertainment district that competes with downtown and suburban entertainment districts,' the statement said.
Yahoo
20-05-2025
- Business
- Yahoo
‘A pivotal moment': Greater Cleveland Partnership backs Browns dome plan
[Watch previous FOX 8 I-Team coverage in the player above.] CLEVELAND (WJW) — Members of Greater Cleveland's regional chamber of commerce, which fosters development in the region, said they support the Cleveland Browns' move to Brook Park. In what it called 'a pivotal moment for Greater Cleveland,' the Greater Cleveland Partnership's executive committee said it 'endorses a domed stadium that anchors a mixed-use development in Brook Park as well as support for all our professional sports facilities,' reads a statement found Tuesday on the partnership's website. 10-year-old boy killed in crash on US Route 422 in Solon identified 'GCP also asks all parties to work together for accelerated development of a vibrant downtown lakefront and riverfronts,' reads the statement. 'The business community has and will continue to support the success of our public officials. We will continue to work with them on these transformational opportunities to provide long-term and lasting benefits to support the growth of downtown, Cleveland and the region.' Executive committee members with conflicts of interest recused themselves from the endorsement, according to the statement. That presumably refers to Browns co-owner Dee Haslam, one of the numerous local and Ohio-based executives who sits on the committee. Huntington National Bank, Sherwin-Williams and FirstEnergy are also represented. 'Professional sports are an economic engine,' reads the statement, and a domed stadium in Brook Park means a 'transformative' $3.4 billion investment in the region. Domed stadiums in regions similar to Cleveland can draw up to three times as many visitors per year, and the demand for large-scale, live entertainment is expected to continue growing, according to the partnership. A domed stadium in Brook Park could also synergize with new development at Cleveland Hopkins International Airport. 'While a downtown dome is ideal, financial and development constraints have been challenging; the Brook Park option is more practical to move forward,' reads the statement. Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne disagreed, calling the plan a 'boondoggle' when speaking to reporters on Monday. He and Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb want to keep the Browns playing downtown. 'The truth is simple: You're pushing a costly, risky and poorly conceived plan that uses public subsidy to diminish our region, our communities and our businesses,' he said. City leaders issued a statement to the FOX 8 I-Team on Tuesday that reads: 'The city of Cleveland is focused on delivering a world-class lakefront for Cleveland's residents, visitors and businesses. It's disappointing to see a small number of individuals from the regional chamber supporting the financial interests of the Haslams at the expense of Cleveland and taxpayers.' The Browns sought $600 million in state bonds, to be repaid with profits from the new stadium, and planned to put up more than $2 billion on their own for the stadium and surrounding development. When the county wouldn't get on board, Haslam Sports Group said they'd go on without them. Haslam Sports Group Chief Operating Officer Dave Jenkins, in a statement to the I-Team, said the Browns' open-air lakefront dome is 'a short-term solution' and that there's a bigger upside with the county's participation. 'We have had extremely positive and constructive collaboration within our community, with corporate leaders and with state officials who understand and support the transformative nature of this opportunity,' Jenkins wrote. ' … By not participating, [Ronayne] is not impeding this transformative solution, he is negatively impacting the growth of Northeast Ohio and the several hundreds of millions of excess dollars generated on the public side that could go towards lakefront redevelopment, the city of Cleveland and other Cuyahoga County needs.' 'Saw a little purple jacket': Teen rescued child from river after deadly Fremont train accident A vacancy at Huntington Bank Field could also lead to new mixed-use development that 'supports a more vibrant downtown and activated waterfront,' reads the statement. It could also mean the closure of Burke Lakefront Airport to make more room. 'Once the stadium decision is settled, GCP asks the team, Cleveland and Brook Park and county to collaborate on accelerating the lakefront development,' reads the statement. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
USA Today
29-04-2025
- Business
- USA Today
Analysis says Browns' projections for new stadium are 'too optimistic'
Analysis says Browns' projections for new stadium are 'too optimistic' Show Caption Hide Caption Browns fans react to news of new stadium, move to Brook Park Fans gave their reactions after team owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam announced the Cleveland Browns are moving to Brook Park to build a new dome stadium. The analysis questions the projected number of jobs and new visitors, citing similar research showing limited economic impact from sports stadiums. The legality of using state bonds for a sports stadium is also uncertain, with a definitive answer requiring a court decision. Concerns exist that economic activity might simply shift from other areas within Ohio rather than generate new growth. The Cleveland Browns and many Republican lawmakers are pitching the team's new, domed stadium as an economic boon for the state, worthy of a $600 million bond investment. But a new, independent legislative analysis found the Browns' projections are likely too rosy on everything from the number of construction workers employed to how many people would attend events at the proposed Brook Park stadium. "The academic literature on publicly funded sports stadiums is vast, covering many decades, sports, states and municipalities," according to the Ohio Legislative Service Commission analysis, prepared in response to questions from the Ohio Senate's top Democrat. "The overwhelming conclusion from this body of research is that there are little to no tangible impacts of sports teams and facilities on local economic activity." Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio, D-Lakewood, who requested the analysis, said the proposed funding plan raised "serious legal and financial concerns." Among the concerns: It's not clear whether the Ohio Constitution allows the state to issue bonds for a sports stadium. A 1993 court decision allowed Ohio to issue bonds for the Cincinnati Performing Arts Center. Using that logic, a new Browns stadium might be allowed, and Ohio Treasurer Robert Sprague recently said the Browns proposal was constitutional. However, the analysis wrote: "Ultimately, only a court can determine whether or not it is permissible." The Browns' owners' economic impact analysis found the Brook Park project would lead to 6,000 temporary construction jobs, 5,370 permanent positions at the stadium and 2,540 jobs in Cuyahoga County. But research suggests that there are "very limited economic impacts of professional sports teams and stadiums." Some of those jobs might not be new, but rather moved from Cleveland to Brook Park, according to the LSC analysis. The owners projected that a new domed stadium would bring 1.5 million new visitors to the area. But the LSC analysis said this "may be overly optimistic." To hit those numbers, the stadium would have to host 21 sold-out events (in addition to Browns games), LSC estimated. But none of the three closest domes had more than 12 major events in 2023. Hosting a big event in the Cleveland area could pull economic activity from other parts of the state. For example, the Haslam family, which owns the Browns and Columbus Crew, held a game between the Crew and Inter Miami in Cleveland to capitalize on the increased demand for Miami star Lionel Messi. Ohio couldn't issue general obligation bonds, backed by the full faith and credit, revenue and taxing power of the state, for the Browns stadium, according to the analysis. That means Ohio lawmakers couldn't levy a tax to pay for the debt service. Those who crafted the legislative analysis, first reported by Ohio Public Media Statehouse News Bureau, didn't have access to the full economic report commissioned by the Browns' owners, so they couldn't dig into the math behind the projections. Antonio said the new analysis should give lawmakers pause. "We should not move forward until we know the courts, the numbers, and the public are on board.' Republicans in the Ohio House of Representatives approved the $600 million bond project for the Cleveland Browns. When the proposal passed, Rep. Mike Dovilla, R-Berea, described the Browns' proposal as "Cleveland's ship finally coming in" and called it a transformative, world-class entertainment district. But, Rep. Ron Ferguson, R-Wintersville, said any economic benefit to Brook Park is coming at Cleveland's expense. "If you look at the state holistically, there isn't going to be any new economic spend, which is what this study says over and over again." Ferguson, who opposes the Browns project, said state lawmakers shouldn't be putting their thumbs on the scale and choosing one part of Ohio over another. "All you're doing is moving the money around within the borders of Ohio." Now, the Ohio Senate is reviewing the Browns' proposal, and more teams, including the Cincinnati Bengals, are asking for money. Gov. Mike DeWine initially pitched paying for new stadiums by doubling taxes on sports betting. He has the power to veto any plan that he decides isn't in Ohio's best interest. 'Sports are very important in Ohio," DeWine told the statehouse bureau. "It's a good thing for our state in many, many ways, but we can't fund it anymore out of general fund money. We can't do it.' State government reporter Jessie Balmert can be reached at jbalmert@ or @jbalmert on X.
