The Cleveland Browns’ proposal to relocate from their historic downtown stadium to a new $2.4 billion domed facility in Brook Park has ignited a multifaceted debate involving financial, legal, and civic considerations. While the Haslam Sports Group, led by team owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam, advocates for the move, local officials, including Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb, express strong opposition, citing potential risks to the city’s economy and legal challenges.

The Proposal: A Vision for Brook Park

The Browns envision a state-of-the-art, enclosed stadium situated on 176 acres near Cleveland Hopkins International Airport in Brook Park. This location is approximately 12 miles south of downtown Cleveland and offers advantages such as improved traffic flow, ample parking, and proximity to major transportation hubs. The proposed development includes not only the stadium but also a mixed-use entertainment district featuring retail spaces, hotels, and residential areas, aiming to generate year-round economic activity.

Funding and Financial Structure

The Haslam Sports Group has outlined a funding plan that combines private investment with public support:

• Private Investment: $1.2 billion from the Haslam Sports Group.
• Public Funding:
  • State of Ohio: $600 million, to be repaid through tax revenues generated by the project.
  • Cuyahoga County: $178 million, sourced from county-issued bonds, with repayment through site-generated revenues.
  • Brook Park: $422 million, financed via bonds.

Additionally, the proposal includes raising the hotel bed tax from 6.5% to 7.5% and implementing a $6 surcharge on rental car transactions, both of which would primarily impact non-residents.

Legal and Civic Opposition

The proposal has faced significant resistance from local officials and civic leaders:

• Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb: Criticizes the plan as a “scheme” and argues that the proposed relocation violates the Modell Law, which requires teams receiving public funding to offer the team for sale to local buyers if they relocate .
• Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne: Expresses concern over the financial implications for county taxpayers and advocates for renovating the existing stadium instead .
• Cleveland City Council: Opposes the move, emphasizing the importance of maintaining the Browns in downtown Cleveland to support local businesses and the city’s economy.

The NFL, under Commissioner Roger Goodell, supports the relocation, suggesting it could benefit the broader Cleveland area economically and potentially position the city to host a Super Bowl.

Next Steps and Timeline

The Browns’ lease at the current Huntington Bank Field expires after the 2028 NFL season, with plans to commence construction of the new stadium in early 2026. However, the proposal’s success hinges on securing approval for the public funding components, with a critical deadline set for June 30, 2025, for the Ohio state budget.

As discussions continue, the future of the Browns’ stadium remains uncertain, balancing the team’s aspirations with the city’s legal, financial, and civic concerns.

READ NEXT: Cleveland Browns Father’s Day Gift Guide