CLEVELAND, Ohio — Some Cleveland leaders are ramping up pressure to prevent the Browns from finding a new home outside the city.
Cleveland City Council members unanimously passed an ordinance this week, calling on the city to enforce a state law created during what many Browns fans consider a dark chapter of the team’s history. The so-called “Art Modell Law” is named for the former owner who moved the team from Cleveland to Baltimore in the mid-90s.
“I didn’t name that law. I’m just asking that we follow it,” said Brian Kazy, the Ward 16 city councilman. “That law was put into place to protect the taxpayers of the city of Cleveland.”
The law requires Ohio team owners to seek permission to move. Without permission, they must give a six-month notice and allow both the local government and local investors an opportunity to purchase the team.
Kazy introduced the ordinance after the Haslam Sports Group confirmed it was exploring its options for an updated stadium when its lease with the team expires after the 2028 season.
In early April, Kazy told News 5 he was frustrated that Cleveland City Council was being left out of early discussions.
Rumors that the owners were seriously considering sites out of the city were confirmed when state lawmakers were shown renderings of a dome at a 175-acre property in Brook Park.
They described what those plans looked like to News 5.
“This is about keeping an economic engine in the city of Cleveland, but it’s also about the history and the tradition of the city that we lost back in 1995 and that we don’t want to lose again,” Kazy said of the ordinance.
The Art Modell Law has never been truly tested, though the Haslams benefitted from it in 2018 when they purchased the Columbus Crew as the team faced relocation.
“There are a whole lot of ways that this law could be potentially challenged,” said Eric Chaffee, a law professor at Case Western Reserve University’s School of Law. “There are major questions about its enforceability, especially in regard to whether it may be constitutional.”
Regardless of the law’s enforceability, Chaffee explained it could be used as leverage.
“It can be used in negotiation with the team in order to create incentive for the owners not to move the team. And if they are, to potentially offer it to someone else in the area,” he said.
He also said the law could be useful in generating public support.
“It helps to remind an owner that they don’t want to become associated with an unpopular move,” he said. “People in Cleveland still aren’t particularly happy with Art Modell for relocating the Browns.”
Many Browns fans in downtown Cleveland Tuesday told News 5 they would also prefer to keep the team in its current location.
“Browns fans are crazy loyal. The dawg pound is crazy. Why change anything? If it ain’t broke, don’t fix it,” said Dar Houston.
Nickii Dawson added, “For one, that would take a lot of revenue away from the city and downtown. It would take money out of our pockets as bartenders and servers.”
Others said they enjoy the atmosphere of Browns games in downtown Cleveland.
“It’s the heart of the city. It’s happening. It’s where everyone wants to go now,” Wendy Thomas said.
Briana Thomas added, “The Cavs are here, the Guardians are here, the Browns just need to stay here.”
Some have touted the empty Brook Park site as better potential for a fresh start. The presentation to state lawmakers featured a domed stadium and surrounding entertainment district for fans.
“With all due respect to Brook Park - and I love Brook Park - but they haven’t invested like the city of Cleveland has invested over the last 30 years,” Kazy said.
The Browns have not openly discussed any potential plans for a future stadium. Kazy said if it’s not feasible to renovate the team’s current stadium, other areas in the city could be suitable, including a 40-acre parcel off of Orange Avenue.
“We’re doing everything that we can do to make sure that team stays in the city of Cleveland. And all we’re asking is that the law director does the same thing,” he said.
Both the city administration and Haslam Sports Group declined to comment on the passed ordinance.
Haslam Sports Group previously issued the following statement:
"We've been clear on how complex future stadium planning can be. One certainty is our commitment to greatly improving our fan experience while also creating a transformative and lasting impact to benefit all of Northeast Ohio. We understand the magnitude of opportunity with a stadium project intent on driving more large-scale events to our region and are methodically looking at every possibility. We appreciate the collaborative process with the City of Cleveland and the leadership of Mayor Bibb in analyzing the landbridge and renovating the current stadium. At the same time, as part of our comprehensive planning efforts, we are also studying other potential stadium options in Northeast Ohio at various additional sites. There is still plenty of work to do and diligence to process before a long-term stadium solution is determined and will share further updates at the appropriate time."
Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb also previously issued the following statement:
“My administration is committed to creating a best-in-class lakefront for Cleveland and keeping the Browns downtown is a priority. Over the last two years, my administration has been active and engaged with the Haslam Sports Group (HSG) to understand the needs of the team and collectively work toward an agreement.
We meet regularly with their team to refine shared terms and come to a joint vision and acceptable deal for both parties that improves the experience for residents, sports fans and visitors. HSG has been a great partner and I look forward to continued collaboration and conversation to find the best solution.”
