Jump to content

Brook Park: New Cleveland Browns Stadium

acd
in Northeast Ohio Projects & Construction

Featured Replies

3 hours ago, Cleburger said:

Give her office a call:  614-466-0961.  

 

Just had a conversation with an aide there who claimed to not know anything about it. 

Maybe the aid didn’t get the same HSG thank envelope- or maybe they did?

    • Like 1
    • Replies 1.1k
    • Views 77.3k
    • Created
    • Last Reply

    Top Posters In This Topic

    Popular Days

    Most Popular Posts

    • Enginerd
      Enginerd

      Looking forward to the new stadium village 

    • TBideon
      TBideon

      THEN PAY FOR THE STADIUM NO ONE WANTS YOUR GODDAMN SELF!!

    • Ethan
      Ethan

      So it looks like they have no interest in developing near a potential infill Red Line station, nor making any kind of pedestrian connection to the airport. Seems like a major missed opportunity to me.

    Posted Images

    2 hours ago, Htsguy said:

    I guess the question is why isn't that happening?

    Yep that was also Ronayne’s question hahahah

    He was County Planning Commission and City of Cleveland Planning Director.  This gives him enormous credibility in term of what he laid out during is presser.    

    • Like 3
    19 hours ago, KJP said:

    Statement from a Haslam Sports Group Spokesperson:

    While we respect the Mayor and County Executive, the facts are the facts. We have detailed the work completed in collaboration with our team of experts and have taken a conservative approach in our exploration and projections for both stadium options. The work shows definitively that an enclosed stadium in Brook Park is the most viable long-term solution, and the best choice to ensure a thriving future for the Cleveland Browns, our fans, Greater Cleveland and Northeast Ohio. Despite our extensive efforts to explore and collaborate on a lakefront option, the City’s plan is the risky bet. It is not economically viable. It includes no concrete path for making funds available to start construction. And, more importantly, it will burden its taxpayers for decades to come while kicking the can down the road. In stark contrast, the Brook Park proposal will not draw from existing taxpayer revenue streams, does not require any funding from the City, and will be funded primarily by revenue generated from the project. Further, we have not finalized any ticket prices and are committed to offering ticket options at a variety of price points. We can say definitively that the average ticket price claimed by the Mayor and County Executive is more than three times what we would expect the average ticket price at the new stadium to be. We remain committed to coming together with both state and local public officials to create a positive and meaningful long-term economic benefit for Cleveland and the surrounding region while giving Browns fans one of the best game day experiences in the world.

     

    Peter John-Baptiste
    Chief Communications Officer

     

    I would urge the City to drop the Modell-Law lawsuit and let the Browns build in Brook Park.  Let them prove that the Brook Park proposal will actually exceed Ronayne's expectations.  Then they can say "told you so!" 

    • Dislike 1

    Ronayne laid out three options from HSG in his talk, Brook Park with county money, BP without county money, and downtown. At this point it sounds like the county is about as firm a no on giving money to the BP site as possible. Assuming that's correct, it sounds like we're down to two options, downtown, or BP with no county support. So now the question is which of those two options we will get? Are the Haslams Willing to risk more of their own money for their preferred isolated site? Or will they buckle and concede to staying downtown? Maybe they'll find a way to get the money elsewhere, idk. At any rate, I'm glad that at least my local tax dollars aren't going to support what doesn't seem to be a very well thought out plan. 

    • Like 10
    • Dislike 1

    Can anybody think of a stadium proposal nationwide that has been built when it has been opposed by both the city and the county.  Even if you do have the money to do it yourself, think of all the absolutely necessary ancillary infrastructure which has to be completely to support the stadium.  A thing like this cannot be built if you make yourself the enemy of the two largest public corporations in your region.  What is this guy thinking?  Complete arrogance. 

    Edited by Htsguy

    • Like 4

    Lots of similarities with the Bears fiasco though the moron mayor is on board.

    9 minutes ago, TBideon said:

    Lots of similarities with the Bears fiasco though the moron mayor is on board.

    Correct.  And right now it is going nowhere, especially since they are asking for a ton of money from one of the most cash strapped states in the country.  Similarly, the owners of the Rays have basically made enemies of both city and county officials, and now the status of their new stadium is in limbo.

    Edited by Htsguy

    43 minutes ago, Ethan said:

    Ronayne laid out three options from HSG in his talk, Brook Park with county money, BP without county money, and downtown. At this point it sounds like the county is about as firm a no on giving money to the BP site as possible. Assuming that's correct, it sounds like we're down to two options, downtown, or BP with no county support. So now the question is which of those two options we will get? Are the Haslams Willing to risk more of their own money for their preferred isolated site? Or will they buckle and concede to staying downtown? Maybe they'll find a way to get the money elsewhere, idk. At any rate, I'm glad that at least my local tax dollars aren't going to support what doesn't seem to be a very well thought out plan. 

     

    I'm curious what doing BP without county money looks like. Asking BP to put that on their credit card seems like a red line for the mayor there who says he must protect the city. Elon is raising all kinds of billions for his flunky app, so it seems like they could find $600M from the private market but I'd guess it'd be more expensive than the county doing it. Not an expert and would love to hear more about this! 

    If Option #3 is proceed without the County, why is this up for a discussion? What incentive is there for County to help BP? Dangle your incentives carrot for DT tell him get lost for BP. Seems pretty open and shut?

    • Like 3
    15 minutes ago, Htsguy said:

    Correct.  And right now it is going nowhere, especially since they are asking for a ton of money from one of the most cash strapped states in the country.  Similarly, the owners of the Rays have basically made enemies of both city and county officials, and now the status of their new stadium is in limbo.

    That Rays situation is interesting. Tampa, really Florida as whole, doesn't seem to care much for MLB, and rumors are the Sternbergs are shopping.

     

    The fact there was so little Tampa outcry over the failed Montreal split seasons is pretty indicative of the region's attachment. 

     

    Plus St. Petersburg is, what, 40 miles from Tampa? That would be like the Guardians playing in Barberton. The team has had a foot halfway out the door for a while, temporary acommodations in Steinbrenner Field notwithstanding.

     

     

    Edited by TBideon

    It's interesting, and should be very telling to anyone who is actually paying attention with any sort of scepticism, is that the Haslam response amounts to "nuh uh!" 

     

    Ronayne went point-by-point through HSG's economic analysis and explained clearly why he had concerns. The way to respond to that isn't to say, "no, that's wrong", it's to respond point-by-point and explain how they did their analysis, came to their conclusions, and why those conclusions are reasonable. 

     

    Whether it's my perception or reality, it's becoming more apparent that Jimmy is little more than a toddler throwing a tantrum because he's used to getting his way and always told he's right because he's the smartest boy in the room. 

    Edited by Luke_S

    • Like 8
    9 minutes ago, Luke_S said:

    Whether it's my perception or reality, it's becoming more apparent that Jimmy is little more than a toddler throwing a tantrum because he's used to getting his way and always told he's right because he's the smartest boy in the room. 


    This will not be a popular sentiment but I’m coming to the perspective that we would be better off without this toxic team. This ownership is putting their personal profits ahead of the future of our entire region. We are in a place where every public dollar is precious for supporting our critical needs. If we blow a bunch of money on something foolish and decadent, we know no one in DC or Columbus is coming to help us when we need help paying for health, roads or schools later. 

    • Like 8
    6 minutes ago, coneflower said:


    This will not be a popular sentiment but I’m coming to the perspective that we would be better off without this toxic team. This ownership is putting their personal profits ahead of the future of our entire region. We are in a place where every public dollar is precious for supporting our critical needs. If we blow a bunch of money on something foolish and decadent, we know no one in DC or Columbus is coming to help us when we need help paying for health, roads or schools later. 

    As a moderator I'm stepping in to flag this as hate speech.

    • Thanks 1
    • Haha 6

    I knew the browns would drill down on the ticket price estimate from bibb and the county.

    • Like 1
    20 minutes ago, YABO713 said:

    As a moderator I'm stepping in to flag this as hate speech.

     

    Thank you.  I can't recall a time since that the region came together as strongly as we did to keep the Browns identity here.   Even the expatriate community got involved.

     

    Many who don't remember it don't get it, but some do.

    I see the Commanders new stadium is likely to be a dome. That "furthest east" dome argument literally dead already, as if it wasn't some fake news propaganda to begin. 

     

    We are going to be stuck in no man's land if this happens. Indy, Detroit and Minneapolis will get the big stuff through the winter and in the summer Pittsburgh and Cincinnati will get them with outdoor Downtown stadiums. Although I'm half waiting for the Bengals to spitefully ask for their suburban dome now too just because.

     

    I'd have more respect for these politicians railroading this through if they just openly said they have been bribed to support this. There is no logical argument whatsoever for this project with the use of public funds.

     

     

    • Like 2

    Yesterday I posed the question whether there is/was any stadium, nationwide, ever built or proposed, even one totally privately financed, which was opposed by both the city and county.  Part two of that question, and even a more ridiculous scenario, any stadium built with "state money" where the city and county opposed it.

    2 hours ago, E Rocc said:

     

    Thank you.  I can't recall a time since that the region came together as strongly as we did to keep the Browns identity here.   Even the expatriate community got involved.

     

    Many who don't remember it don't get it, but some do.

     

    I remember it and got involved in the fight to keep the Browns name, colors and history here. I had a fax machine at home and used it to send letters to NFL team owners from me and my extended family. 

     

    But I discovered in those three years without Cleveland football that there can be life without a local team to cheer on Sundays. And there have been many times, especially during the Randy Lerner and Haslam eras, when it felt like there wasn't a team here in Cleveland. There's been so many times that I've lost that loving feeling for this team. I've stopped caring about it and I don't care if they stay or go. But I know many others do care about it based on the number of views my Browns articles get. So I know they probably aren't leaving the metro area. But sometimes I wish they would so we could have a little less drama around here on Sunday evenings and Monday mornings. The average costs of going to a game has contributed to the fact that I haven't been to a Browns game in at least 10 years. And based on the estimated cost of going to a new enclosed stadium, I doubt I will again anytime soon.

    "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

    •
    • Like 9
    4 minutes ago, KJP said:

    But I discovered in those three years without Cleveland football that there can be life without a local team to cheer on Sundays. And there have been many times, especially during the Randy Lerner and Haslam eras, when it felt like there wasn't a team here in Cleveland. There's been so many times that I've lost that loving feeling for this team. I've stopped caring about it and I don't care if they stay or go. But I know many others do care about it based on the number of views my Browns articles get. So I know they probably aren't leaving the metro area. But sometimes I wish they would so we could have a little less drama around here on Sunday evenings and Monday mornings. The average costs of going to a game has contributed to the fact that I haven't been to a Browns game in at least 10 years. And based on the estimated cost of going to a new enclosed stadium, I doubt I will again anytime soon.

    This is something that I've mentioned in the past. I'm too young to had been able to experience that era (I was 3 years old when the Browns left) but being a nerd and looking back it seems that Cleveland began focusing on its downtown neighborhoods and attractions more to draw people Downtown due to the inability to rely on the Cleveland Browns games. Downtown seemed to have a year round buzz and I feel because the city felt a need to fill an economic void they buckled down more. It is like when someone who is in a financial bind will do whatever it takes to make money to pay the bills and keep the lights on. 

    2 hours ago, snakebite said:

    I see the Commanders new stadium is likely to be a dome. That "furthest east" dome argument literally dead already, as if it wasn't some fake news propaganda to begin. 

     

    We are going to be stuck in no man's land if this happens. Indy, Detroit and Minneapolis will get the big stuff through the winter and in the summer Pittsburgh and Cincinnati will get them with outdoor Downtown stadiums. Although I'm half waiting for the Bengals to spitefully ask for their suburban dome now too just because.

     

    I'd have more respect for these politicians railroading this through if they just openly said they have been bribed to support this. There is no logical argument whatsoever for this project with the use of public funds.

     

     

    Cinci and Pitt will likely add a dome to their current sites or build new to keep up at some point.

    https://thespun.com/nfl/cincinnati-bengals/report-putting-dome-on-nfl-stadium-would-cost-up-to-1-billion

     

    1 hour ago, Willo said:

    Cinci and Pitt will likely add a dome to their current sites or build new to keep up at some point.

    https://thespun.com/nfl/cincinnati-bengals/report-putting-dome-on-nfl-stadium-would-cost-up-to-1-billion

     

     

    Cincinnati is not putting a dome on the stadium.

     

    The Bengals and Hamilton County are looking at renovations, and it would likely be well north of $1 billion in addition to the over $1 billion renovation costs already in negotiations. We've spent a lot of time in the Paycor Stadium topic about this.

     

    We also won't build another stadium unless a neighboring county wants to donate billions of tax revenue to move them from Hamilton County. 

    • Like 1

    I don't want the team to leave and l don't want a dome in BP. What l want is the Browns playing downtown. But since l rarely get what l want l'm sure to get one of those first two.

    All this money the State talks of giving the Haslams is unacceptable.  This development brings nothing to the region that we don't already have.

    1. a perfectly acceptable stadium to renovate.  2. hotels already exist downtown  3. land downtown for additional residential dwelling. 4. vacant office space.  4. venues that can hos conventions and concerts. 5. infrastructure.

     

    The Haslam's haven't mentioned any concrete evidence businesses flocking to relocate to Brook Park from outside Ohio.  Let's stop the madness and wake up to the fact there is no reason for this development

    • Like 6

    A new wrinkle...

     

     

     

    "In the souls of the people the grapes of wrath are filling and growing heavy, growing heavy for the vintage." -- John Steinbeck

    •
    • Like 5
    • Love 1
    • Haha 1
    1 hour ago, KJP said:

    A new wrinkle...

     

     

     

    “We can’t afford to put money into stadiums out of the general fund”.

     

    Well well… a surprise but I’m still not buying. 

    • Like 2
    2 hours ago, KJP said:

    A new wrinkle...

     

     

     

    If he vetos it can't the state still vote to override it?

    19 hours ago, ryanlammi said:

     

    Cincinnati is not putting a dome on the stadium.

     

    The Bengals and Hamilton County are looking at renovations, and it would likely be well north of $1 billion in addition to the over $1 billion renovation costs already in negotiations. We've spent a lot of time in the Paycor Stadium topic about this.

     

    We also won't build another stadium unless a neighboring county wants to donate billions of tax revenue to move them from Hamilton County. 

    May be true short term but I meant the pressure will likely build among the competitive owners cabal when all the other domes come on line.  I believe DeWine's sin-tax type tax plan to support public stadiums may have helped push the effort in the Cinci dome direction but it seems the alternative risky bond scheme the grifting Haslams are lobbying thru the Statehouse (risky to tax payers not HSG) may be a one and done with HSG BP only leaving Cinci to lobby separately for any equal $. 

    So you're saying there's a chance...

    • Haha 1
    17 hours ago, MyPhoneDead said:

    If he vetos it can't the state still vote to override it?

    The state legislature overriding a veto about the use of general funds for a billionare's playground would be honestly quite something...something I would not be surprise by these corrupt Repubs in the state house who couldn't give 2 s**ts about the average Ohian

    • Like 5
    17 hours ago, AsDustinFoxWouldSay said:

    The state legislature overriding a veto about the use of general funds for a billionare's playground would be honestly quite something...something I would not be surprise by these corrupt Repubs in the state house who couldn't give 2 s**ts about the average Ohian

    If these rest-of-State Rs - who are inexplicably pushing the HSG scam vs at least getting behind their Governor's plan - and they do override an alleged DeWine threatened veto - they are not reading the room as they say in DC (unless this is all gamed out Kabuki Theater by DeWine, Rs and GSG).

    • Like 1

    I don't agree with the framing of this column but it does raise an interesting question. At what point does Bibb take whatever consolation deal Haslam is offering? 

     

    https://www.cleveland.com/opinion/2025/03/justin-bibb-battled-the-haslams-now-cleveland-needs-a-browns-exit-deal-leila-atassi.html

     

    The thing the column ignores is the county is more important than CLE right now because that's where the rest of the money is potentially coming from. Whatever Bibb were to accept would have to be done in concert with Ronayne and the county council. Based on the survey above, it doesn't seem like the county government has much pressure to give the team any money. It will be fascinating to see what happens if the state votes to give them money. I don't know if that situation has ever happened where state gives money local government doesn't want! Only in Ohio!

     

     

    Edited by coneflower

    43 minutes ago, coneflower said:

    I don't agree with the framing of this column but it does raise an interesting question. At what point does Bibb take whatever consolation deal Haslam is offering? 

     

    https://www.cleveland.com/opinion/2025/03/justin-bibb-battled-the-haslams-now-cleveland-needs-a-browns-exit-deal-leila-atassi.html

     

    The thing the column ignores is the county is more important than CLE right now because that's where the rest of the money is potentially coming from. Whatever Bibb were to accept would have to be done in concert with Ronayne and the county council. Based on the survey above, it doesn't seem like the county government has much pressure to give the team any money. It will be fascinating to see what happens if the state votes to give them money. I don't know if that situation has ever happened where state gives money local government doesn't want! Only in Ohio!

     

     

    The column buried lede conclusion seems repeated almost verbatim from the HSG interns propaganda releases. There is no need for Bibb and Ronayne to stop the pressure now only to claim a dime store participation trophy as the PD/HSG puff piece clumsily tries to sell at the very end.  Also, let the downstate Statehouse Rs push the shaky bond scheme backed in part by State income taxes (and then see what happens when a potential Gov Ramaswamy eliminates the State income tax and local communities have to to skyrocket their local taxes (no free lunch Brook Park).

     

    So, let the Tennessee grifters find the other public $600 million elsewhere such as from their own personal $12 Billion checkbook or from Brook Park and Berea as both are in his camp already and have to play ball.  Let Brook Park, Berea and maybe Middleburg Heights merge and join forces and tax their residents to death as they and their hotels and restaurants will see the most of the vastly overstated regional benefits (not Downtown per the propaganda). 

     

    Plus, we don't need sudden HSG virtue signal gestures to put some(?) money in the Lakefront development collection plate. Any HSG dollars - if the move to BP ever happens - would be tainted with the HSG jinx.  Why don't they write the check amount now and make public and hand over HSG's lakefront plans since already paid for. 

     

    Lastly, if the scoundrels somehow wins in this case, we should be able to find an innovative way to cover the stadium, rehab it, and connect it via land bridges/skywalks direct into to the Convention Center and compete with the speculative HSG stadium for events 365 (would also allow us to finally bulldoze the IX center and offer the 160 acres of prime land to any of the international companies now proposing US ventures and JOBS to avoid tariffs).  

     

     

    • Like 6

    It truly is a sad state when our elected officials are more concerned of giving $600 million to a billionaire rather than focusing on giving that money to education.   Thank you Michelle Jarboe for her reporting and asking the questions that deserve to be asked.

     

    I would like to ask HSG if they continue state their projections are correct why they put $38.5 million in a fund if there is shortfall in paying back the bonds in the future. Sure seems they aren't sure their numbers are correct in getting the State to issue the bonds.

     

    I also ask why HSG has designed a stadium that Northeast Ohio simply cannot afford

    Edited by dave2017

    • Like 2
    3 hours ago, dave2017 said:

    I would like to ask HSG if they continue state their projections are correct why they put $38.5 million in a fund if there is shortfall in paying back the bonds in the future. Sure seems they aren't sure their numbers are correct in getting the State to issue the bonds.

    Here at "Cost-plussing" Field "our customers are too unsophisticated to understand."

     

     

     

    • Like 1
    18 hours ago, coneflower said:

    I don't agree with the framing of this column but it does raise an interesting question. At what point does Bibb take whatever consolation deal Haslam is offering?

    I didn't understand the the nature of the editorial either.  The article applauded Bibb for not caving to the the threats of a billionaire based on principle, but then also suggested that at some point Bibb should play nice, lest he miss out on some of the billionaire's money?  Not sure what to make of that.

     

    I applaud the Bibb and Ronayne.  Given how much investment went into the lakefront, it would be kind of a shame for the Browns to leave, but not the end of the world.  Publicly supported stadiums have never been shown to be worth the public subsidy and are often drains on the City.  If the City ends up paying to demo the existing stadium (projected at $20M) so be it.  It's far less than the $400M they originally offered and City would end up with about 25 acres of shovel ready lakefront land ready to develop.  The bridge connector is already funded (at least partially), and the City would be free of long term maintenance and operating costs.  I think the City/County has very little to lose here.  In fact, I think Bibb and Ronayne are in a perfect position to avoid putting up a huge subsidy without it looking like they "let the Browns leave".  

    • Like 1

    I know I shouldnt be, but I'm still surprised that billionaires in their 70s are more focused on parking revenue that they might get to see a few years of, instead of cementing a legacy in Cleveland History as the developers of THE lakefront that multiple generations of people would be utilizing. 

    • Like 6
    2 hours ago, Dino said:

    I didn't understand the the nature of the editorial either.  The article applauded Bibb for not caving to the the threats of a billionaire based on principle, but then also suggested that at some point Bibb should play nice, lest he miss out on some of the billionaire's money?  Not sure what to make of that.

    I think the author's point is not that Bibb should eventually cave, but that Bibb stands to gain more by taking the high road and moving on than by continuing to throw shade at every opportunity.

     

    If Bibb has made his best case for the Browns to stay and Haslam makes the decision to leave anyway, Bibb should look for other ways that he can work with Haslam to Cleveland's benefit. To the extent Bibb wants something from Haslam, whether that's a collaboration with RTA to add a station in BP or getting Haslam to invest in the lakefront plan, then at some point he needs to move past any disappointment in Haslam's decision to conduct his business elsewhere and find where they still have common ground and can work together to Cleveland's benefit. 

    • Like 1
    18 minutes ago, Foraker said:

    If Bibb has made his best case for the Browns to stay and Haslam makes the decision to leave anyway, Bibb should look for other ways that he can work with Haslam to Cleveland's benefit. To the extent Bibb wants something from Haslam, whether that's a collaboration with RTA to add a station in BP or getting Haslam to invest in the lakefront plan, then at some point he needs to move past any disappointment in Haslam's decision to conduct his business elsewhere and find where they still have common ground and can work together to Cleveland's benefit. 

     

    I don't think this is personal or emotional at all. This is all business. If both sides have a mutual financial benefit in the future I assume they would be rational and pursue it. 

     

    Yes I am giving Jimmy Haslam the benefit of the doubt that he would be rational.

     

    *I may edit or just delete this comment later.  

     

    • Like 1
    • Haha 3
    38 minutes ago, Foraker said:

    I think the author's point is not that Bibb should eventually cave, but that Bibb stands to gain more by taking the high road and moving on than by continuing to throw shade at every opportunity.

     

    If Bibb has made his best case for the Browns to stay and Haslam makes the decision to leave anyway, Bibb should look for other ways that he can work with Haslam to Cleveland's benefit. To the extent Bibb wants something from Haslam, whether that's a collaboration with RTA to add a station in BP or getting Haslam to invest in the lakefront plan, then at some point he needs to move past any disappointment in Haslam's decision to conduct his business elsewhere and find where they still have common ground and can work together to Cleveland's benefit. 

    I agree. But I did think the lines about how we aren’t actually going to pay for anything and the county should just give in, were weird.

    • Like 1
    Guest
    This topic is now closed to further replies.
    Go to topic listing

    Recently Browsing 0

    • No registered users viewing this page.