(C) Ohio Capital Journal
This story was originally published by Ohio Capital Journal and is unaltered.
. . . . . . . . . .



How Ohio lawmakers are reacting to the Browns request for $600 million • Ohio Capital Journal [1]

['Morgan Trau', 'Megan Henry', 'Nick Evans', 'Susan Tebben', 'More From Author', '- March', '.Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus-Coauthors.Is-Layout-Flow', 'Class', 'Wp-Block-Co-Authors-Plus', 'Display Inline']

Date: 2025-03-13

The Cleveland Browns are trying not to fumble an opportunity to get hundreds of millions of dollars from the state, but some lawmakers are already trying to intercept the possible deal.

“This would be one of the largest economic development projects in Northeast Ohio History, and even in the state of Ohio,” Ted Tywang, Haslam Sports Group’s chief administrative officer and general counsel, said during testimony Tuesday.

During a committee hearing at the Statehouse, Tywang presented their plan to receive $600 million in bonds to help pay for a new stadium in Brook Park. The dome would be for more than just football.

“Final Fours and weekends of major concerts and college football playoffs,” he listed.

The total cost of the Brook Park development would be $3.4 billion.

However, the stadium itself would cost $2.4 billion. The team would pay for $1.2 billion themselves, and taxpayers would foot the rest of the bill — $600 million from local jurisdictions like Cuyahoga County and the remaining $600 million from the state.

It’s clear that Haslam Sports Group isn’t buying into Gov. Mike DeWine’s proposal to double the tax rate on sports-gaming companies to gradually fund major investments in professional athletic facilities.

Upfront, the Browns would pay $38 million in a refundable deposit to assure the state they are serious about the investment opportunity.

“$38 million — is that enough?” I asked Tywang following the hearing.

“We think with the cushion that is absolutely is,” he said.

Lawmakers react

House Finance Chair Brian Stewart (R-Ashville) is interested.

“It’s essentially escrowing money that would grow over time so that the Browns can kind of put their money where their mouth is,” Stewart told me.

There seems to be more of an appetite for this plan than the governor’s proposal, he added. Gov. Mike DeWine wants to double the sports betting tax, creating a fund for all professional sports teams to get money from in the future.

Senate Minority Leader Nickie Antonio (D-Lakewood) said the tax changes are the much better option.

“It would solve these kinds of issues so every couple of years we don’t have some sports franchise, entity coming to the legislature with their hand out saying ‘you have to give us some money so that we can stay in the community,'” she said.

Still, Antonio and the majority of the lawmakers from Cleveland and the surrounding suburbs are firmly opposed to this. During the question and answer portion of the committee, Terrence Upchurch (D-Cleveland) did say that Cleveland wouldn’t punish them for leaving, angering some constituents who were watching and reached out to me.

“We will remain Browns fans whether you guys stay on the lakefront or go to Brook Park, myself included,” Upchurch said. “I’ll still be a fan whether you stay on the lakefront or go to Brook Park.”

The vocal Cleveland lawmakers don’t sit on the Arts, Athletics and Tourism Committee, but several told me they are disappointed that Upchurch didn’t press harder.

That said, he did ask if the Browns considered the impact that moving to Brook Park would have on the fans’ pockets, as well as if moving out of the lakefront was the best idea.

“We’ve done years of work — it is the best for the Browns, it is the best for Northeast Ohio,” Tywang said.

Assistant Minority Leader Dontavius Jarrells (D-Columbus) and state Rep. Haraz Ghanbari (R-Perrysburg) seemed more skeptical about the proposal.

Jarrells asked how Ohioans are supposed to feel assured that the Browns won’t eventually come back to the Statehouse to ask for more money, and if they don’t give it — the team would threaten to move out of state.

“We’re not asking for a handout for $600 million from the state,” the Browns attorney responded. “So again, there’s going to be a return for the state on this investment.”

Ghanbari questioned the future of the Browns.

“So what is Plan B if Brook Park doesn’t work out?” Ghanbari asked.

[END]
---
[1] Url: https://ohiocapitaljournal.com/2025/03/13/how-ohio-lawmakers-are-reacting-to-the-browns-request-for-600-million/

Published and (C) by Ohio Capital Journal
Content appears here under this condition or license: Creative Commons license CC BY-NC-ND 4.0.

via Magical.Fish Gopher News Feeds:
gopher://magical.fish/1/feeds/news/ohiocapitaljournal/