Browns make a case for Brook Park dome stadium

Image: HKS and Cleveland Browns

The National Football League (NFL) team Cleveland Browns ownership recently presented its most detailed vision yet for funding a $2.4 billion dome stadium in Brook Park in Ohio (US) relying in part on taxing the stadium users while insisting it won’t draw from the existing City, County, or State tax revenues.

The Browns are making a strong pitch for a venue in Brook Park and dismiss concerns that moving the stadium to Brook Park would hurt downtown Cleveland. They argue that downtown businesses would still benefit from the large events as the planned development at the Brook Park site is relatively small – 450 hotel rooms compared to 5,000 downtown, 233,000 square feet of retail (about a quarter of a regional mall) and 1,100 housing units.

‘cleveland.com’ stated that the above would be part of an overall development topping $3 billion when adding in adjacent hotels, housing, restaurant, and other entertainment venues on the former Ford Motor Company plant property next to the airport.

The Cleveland Browns are a professional American football team based in Cleveland. The Browns compete in the National Football League (NFL) as a member of the American Football Conference North Division. The team is named after the original Coach and Co-Founder Paul Brown.

The 67,431-capacity Huntington Bank Field is a stadium in Cleveland, Ohio, United States primarily for American football. It is the home field of the Cleveland Browns of the National Football League (NFL) and serves as a venue for other events such as college and high school football, soccer, hockey, and concerts.

‘cleveland.com’ further stated that the goal is to have shovels in the ground within a year and the stadium ready for the start of the 2029 football season, said David Jenkins, Chief Operating Officer (COO) of both the Browns and the Haslam Sports Group (engage and unite communities through premier sports and entertainment experiences) led by Browns Principal Owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam. The adjacent development would take longer to complete.

A large portion of the plan essentially is a variation of what Cities like Cleveland often do in helping to bankroll big developments – diverting future tax dollars expected as a result of the development back to help cover the cost.

In the Browns case it would take a variety of local and State taxes – from increased fees for renting cars or hotel rooms to admission and parking taxes generated on the site – with a buy-in from the Government leaders at all levels.

The key challenges include persuading the Governor of Ohio Mike DeWine who favors using sports gambling tax revenue to gradually fund the stadium costs and proving that neither the State nor the County would be liable if revenue projections fall short. The Browns want the County and the State to issue Government bonds to cover half of the upfront costs as this provides cheaper financing than what a private developer could secure.

Stated Jimmy Haslam, “I don’t know, if we don’t do Brook Park and we pass on it this time, anybody is ever going to put $2 billion of private money into the Cuyahoga County (Ohio). We found 175 acres that is flat, has power, which is a big deal, is clean environmentally and is serviced by a major State highway and two interStates – all right across from the airport. … I just don’t think you’re going to find that again.”

The Haslams are seeking $600 million from the State and $600 million from the local Governments to match their commitment of $1.2 billion on the 65,000-seat stadium and they have laid out a plan from where most of the money would come from to recover the cost for the Governments.

Haslam said the Browns would be responsible for any cost overruns and private dollars would be used for the related retail, housing and hotel developments.

However, the Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne said some of the numbers appeared to be inflated and he reiterated that the focus should be on downtown – “Our assessment of Brook Park is that the numbers they have put forth don’t square.”
 

What the Browns want from Brook Park and Cuyahoga County

As for the local share, the Browns are proposing the County issue $600 million bonds with the County sources covering payments for $178 million of the borrowing and the Brook Park sources covering the remaining $422 million.
 

Here’s how:

• An increase in the bed tax from 6.5 percent to 7.5 percent with the new money earmarked for the stadium. The County’s bed tax on hotel rooms was last increased from 5.5 percent to 6.5 percent in 2019 to free up money, in part, for the 34,830-capacity Progressive Field and the Rock and Roll Hall of Fame induction ceremonies;
• A County-authorized fee of $6 per rental car. Like the bed tax, the Browns say this spreads out the cost to the visitors to the region instead of it falling mostly on the Cuyahoga County residents;
• Increasing the Brook Park admission tax from 3.5 percent and 6.5 percent. This would be the largest contribution from the Brook Park, and, the Browns point out, a user tax; and
• Money from a Brook Park parking tax. Some 12,000 to 13,000 parking spaces are planned for the stadium.

 

Where things stand Politically

The Browns have been meeting with the local and State officials.

Ronayne long has publicly opposed the project saying the Browns should remain downtown. He has said a Brook Park stadium could pull resources from downtown and lead to unnecessary county spending on new infrastructure in Brook Park.

Governor DeWine supports investing in stadiums but in a different way.

Haslam, noting he still needs to learn more about DeWine’s recent proposal tied to increasing the tax on the sports gambling companies said he was encouraged by the idea and called the ultimate plan an evolving process – “(DeWine) made a comment the other day that things ought to be paid for in cash. That would make it a bit more challenging. If they would bond that revenue stream it definitely would meet the Browns needs under their proposal – meaning they could use the gambling tax money to pay off the bonds over time rather than wait for the money to come in year by year.”

The Browns proposal would rely upon new State income taxes, sales taxes and commercial activities taxes generated by the development to pay off the bonds.
 

The Projections

The Browns believe there would be enough cushion that even after paying for construction of the stadium money would be left over that could be used for the other projects regionally such as the lakefront development or improvements to the Cleveland Hopkins International Airport.

Haslam said that since the bonds would be issued by the County and the State he conceded that those Governments would be on the hook if something unexpected fell through on the anticipated revenue.

Built correctly, the Browns believe the dome stadium could last more than 50 years.

But County Executive Ronayne sees it differently pointing out that the other pro sports teams have recently moved back downtown in their Cities. Cleveland, he argues, shouldn’t be moving in the opposite direction.

Concluded Ronayne, “We have had productive meetings (with the Browns) of late, most principally on the lakefront plan. So, we were surprised at their Press briefing as it relates to their plans at Brook Park.”

Continue to follow Coliseum for latest updates on venues business news. Coliseum is dedicated towards building the best global community of sports and entertainment venue executives and professionals creating better and more profitable venues.

Become a member of the only Global Sports Venue Alliance and connect with stadiums, arenas and experts from around the world. Apply for membership at www.coliseum-online.com/alliance and make use of the 365Coliseum Business.

• Tags »
• Cleveland
• funding

« Previous News: Time running out for Brisbane ‘32 venues
» Next News: Pokémon battle royale in MLB ballparks