CLEVELAND — For the Cleveland Browns, the turf might be greener in neighboring Brook Park. But Cuyahoga County isn’t likely to help them get there.
The county’s top two officials stressed Monday that they’re not willing to invest in a proposal to build a new stadium in the suburbs. Instead, they want the Browns to recommit to Downtown, where a revamped stadium could be an anchor for lakefront development.
“This isn’t about Cleveland versus Brook Park,” Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne said during an early afternoon news conference. “This is about Downtown. This is about everybody’s Downtown. … Whether you live in Warrensville Heights, or whether you live in Westlake. Whether you live in Solon, or whether you live here in the city.”
Talks about the future of the stadium – stay or go, renovate or build new – have been taking place behind closed doors for months. Now some details are starting to spill out.
In early August, Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb released a letter outlining his proposal to help finance a makeover of the city-owned stadium near Lake Erie.
Last week, the Browns sent out renderings and a video of their Brook Park proposal, along with a letter making the case for new construction to season ticket holders.
Ronayne and Cuyahoga County Council President Pernel Jones Jr. weighed in with an open letter Sunday, telling Browns owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam that a $2.4 billion suburban stadium is a tough sell.
The public officials followed up with their news conference, where Ronayne said the concept is too risky – and the potential harm to a fragile Downtown too great.
“We believe, after analysis of the Cleveland Browns proposal for Brook Park, that this dog doesn’t hunt,” Ronayne said.
That doesn’t mean the Browns, who are still weighing their options, won’t move to Brook Park. But it does complicate their efforts to pay for a project where county-issued bonds were part of a potential $1.2 billion public-financing package.
“The process of renovating or building a new stadium is incredibly complex,” the Haslams wrote in a statement posted online Sunday.
“We have received the county’s response and are still in the process of gathering information and doing diligence on both paths,” they added. “It would be short-sighted for Northeast Ohio to rule out any options at this point for a long-term decision of this magnitude.”
The Browns and Haslam Sports Group haven’t said much publicly about the details of their financing plans. But they’re focused on using future tax dollars – revenues created by the new stadium and surrounding development in Brook Park – to help pay for construction.
That means asking the state and county, or other entities, to issue bonds. And then repaying that debt over several decades using tax revenues generated by the project.
Ronayne said the Browns were seeking $600 million from county-issued bonds. Half of that money would be repaid using new tax revenues from Brook Park, representing the city's share of the public financing. The other half would be repaid using new county tax revenues.
“We are not looking to tap into existing taxpayer-funded streams, which could divert resources from other pressing needs,” David Jenkins, chief operating officer for the Browns and Haslam Sports Group, wrote in his letter to fans earlier this month. “We are instead working on innovative funding mechanisms with local, county and state officials.”
But Ronayne doesn’t buy the team’s financial projections.
He believes a new stadium – and more than $1 billion worth of private development that the Haslams envision on a 176-acre site in Brook Park – will fall short of expectations, putting the county in peril.
“If they fail, we fail,” Ronayne said. “And we’re not looking forward to that. We can’t do that. We can’t put the treasury and the taxpayer at risk.”
He also balked at the possibility of dedicating a slice of the county bed tax – a tax that hotels, motels and short-term rentals collect from guests – to financing a stadium.
“I don’t think that’s an appropriate use of the bed tax,” Ronayne said.
He and Jones said they’re open to playing a role in funding a renovated Downtown stadium, which fans could reach using a proposed land bridge between Mall C and the lakefront. But the price tag for the suburban project “is a bridge too far,” Ronayne said.
And he expressed concern about the fallout for Downtown hotels, restaurants, bars and small businesses if the Browns leave the central business district.
In their letter to fans, the Browns acknowledged that a suburban move “may have a near-term impact on downtown.”
But, Jenkins wrote, “we believe that the year-round activity of a domed stadium can still positively impact the Downtown economy.” And the lakefront, he implied, might be better off without a stadium.
The Browns are still talking to the city of Cleveland, which is offering a financing deal worth an estimated $461 million.
That’s money from projected growth in admissions taxes; a potential extension of the so-called sin tax, on alcohol and cigarette sales across the county; parking revenues; and existing capital reserves for the stadium.
In exchange, the city is asking the Browns to sign a new 30-year lease. The project hinges on major infrastructure investments, including the proposed land bridge and the transformation of the Cleveland Memorial Shoreway into a narrower boulevard as it cuts across Downtown.
Bradford Davy, the mayor’s chief of staff, said Monday that Haslam Sports Group responded to the city's offer with a series of follow-up questions. The Bibb administration expects to answer those questions this week.
There’s no firm timeline for the Browns to make a decision. But the clock is ticking.
Their lease on the Downtown stadium ends after the 2028 season. And it could take three years, at least, to build a new stadium. Renovations also would take several years.
On Monday, Ronayne urged the Browns to release images of a reimagined Downtown stadium, so the public can see both possibilities.
“I’ve seen the plans,” he said. “I think they’re exciting. … The reality is, we need to connect these dots that we’ve worked so hard to build. That infrastructure that we’ve put billions of dollars of investment in should not be pulled away piecemeal.
“We want it to stay together. We all know post-COVID-19 how precarious Downtowns are. But this is a Downtown that has a future, and we hope with the Cleveland Browns.”
