(The Center Square) – The Browns and city of Cleveland have continued their back and forth on a new stadium for the team with Cleveland sending a letter informing the Browns it intends to invoke the Modell Law and attempt to recruit a group to keep the team in Cleveland while the Browns say they are moving the team to Brook Park.
The team said it is moving forward on buying a 176-acre site in Brook Park that will be the site of a new stadium and development.
“While work remains with our public partners on the project, this is a key step in our efforts to create a responsible long-term stadium solution that delivers a world-class experience for our fans, attracts more large-scale events for our region and positively impacts our local economy,” Haslam Sports Group-Chief Operating Officer Dave Jenkins said in a statement.
While the Browns claim the development will benefit the public, the “public partners” referenced is the team asking for $1.2 billion in public funds to build a $2.4 billion stadium on the site.
Cleveland has spent $350 million on the construction, repair and maintenance of the Browns’ current home, Huntington Bank Field, and the city plans to use a 1996 law referred to as the Modell Law that requires the Browns be made available for sale for a six-month period before the franchise can be moved again, according to Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb.
Bibb gave the Browns a Thursday deadline to respond to his letter to team management, posted on neo-trans blog, before the city begins legal proceedings against the team.
The team says it will ultimately build 300,000 square feet of retail, two hotels, 1,100 apartments and 500,000 square feet of office on the site. It says that 450 hotel rooms; 575 apartments and 96,000 square feet of traditional retail will be ready to open along with a stadium in 2029.
Despite the claims of the Browns and other professional sports teams, economists have consistently shown that funding stadiums is a loss for taxpayers and not a worthwhile public investment.
Those economists have shown how teams pay for economic impact reports from consulting groups that show positive public gains, which never come to fruition, while attempting to convince politicians and the public to spend public funds on stadiums, arenas and developments.
