CLEVELAND, Ohio (92.3 The Fan) – A thorough review of the City of Cleveland’s lawsuit against the Cleveland Browns made a few things clear.
The relationship between the two sides is beyond repair.
The Browns will move to Brook Park.
The question is how much the Browns will have to pay the city of Cleveland for the right to do it.
That is what the 264-page lawsuit, including supporting exhibits, the city filed in Cuyahoga County Common Pleas Court on Tuesday is about – money.
The city sued on three counts: Violation of the ‘Modell Law,’ Breach of Contract, and Declaratory Judgement and Injunctive Relief. Cleveland has requested a jury trial in which they seek financial and injunctive relief from the court.
Within the lawsuit, obtained by 92.3 The Fan, the city detailed the grounds for which they are suing.
First the ‘Modell Law,’ enacted in the summer of 1996 after former and late owner Art Modell moved the franchise to Baltimore. The law says a team cannot stop playing games in an existing taxpayer supported stadium unless they enter into an agreement with the current municipality to change venues or gives the municipality six months’ notice of intent to cease playing games in the facility and simultaneously allows the municipality or individuals or groups an opportunity to buy the team.
According to the lawsuit, the taxpayer funded financial commitments to the construction and maintenance of the stadium are as follows:
Original construction cost: $290 million.
Stadium repair costs from 2003-2024: $78 million.
The Browns have sought $8 million in additional repairs over the final four years of the lease and the team notified the city “they are proceeding with nearly $3.2 million dollars in emergency repairs for which the Browns demand reimbursement from the City,” the lawsuit said.
The suit stipulates that “over $4 million annually in county sin taxes” are generated and go towards the stadium in addition to the city paying $1.3 million in annual property taxes on the stadium.
The city claims it stands to lose “at least $30 million in economic output every year” plus “$11 million in annual tax revenue” should the Browns move to Brook Park.
Prior to announcing their intent to pursue a $2.4 billion dome plus $1 billion-plus mixed-use development in Brook Park, the Browns estimated the cost of modernizing the current stadium to be between $1-1.2 billion and they offered to cover 50% of the cost. The team is also offering to cover $1.2 billion of the cost of the dome plus privately finance the adjoining development leaving taxpayers on the hook for $1.2 billion to be covered through various existing tax programs and economic activity generated by the new complex.
The “Breach of Contract” by the Browns of the lease that was signed with the NFL in April 1996, which includes an agreement to abide by all laws and ordinances, alleged by the city in the lawsuit is noncompliance by the Browns with the ‘Modell Law.’
The “Declaratory Judgement and Injunctive Relief” the city seeks is multifaceted. The city wants the ‘Modell Law’ enforced. The city wants an opportunity to find new ownership for the franchise absent an agreement to allow the team to relocate to Brook Park. The city also wants any funding the Browns might secure for the new dome to be blocked by the court, again absent compliance with the ‘Modell Law.’
The city has asked the court for “Money damages in an amount exceeding $25,000 and to be determined at trial” as well as reimbursement for attorneys’ fees and other costs.
In addition to recent correspondence between the two sides, details of capital repairs that the Browns are undertaking and seek reimbursement for, the original 1996 lease and related addendums to it, the city also submitted a study from Econsult Solutions Inc. to the court detailing the projected economic harm to downtown, which Cleveland deems to be significant, a new mixed-use development and dome in Brook Park would have.
So what’s the solution to clean up this mess?
The Haslams are not selling the Browns and they have made clear they are not going to continue playing in the existing stadium beyond the current lease which expires in 2028.
The only way the ‘Modell Law’ can be satisfied is through an agreement with Cleveland to allow the team to move to Brook Park. The only way such an agreement will be reached is if the Browns write a massive check to the city of Cleveland.
Deep down, this is exactly what Cleveland Mayor Justin Bibb is aiming for.
Bibb really doesn’t care where the Browns play football. He wants money to re-develop the lakefront and believes the Browns should help pay for it, including tearing down the current stadium.
Bibb is counting on this lawsuit to prompt the Haslams to grab their checkbooks to make the city go away and let them start building on the 176 acres of land they secured off Snow and Engle Roads.
The Browns have a timeline to complete construction by August 2029 and to do it within the $2.4 billion budget. Bibb knows any delays could add significant costs for the Browns and potentially sabotage the project.
That is what this is about. The creation of leverage.
The sooner the Browns write a check to Cleveland with a lot of zeros in front of the decimal point, the sooner they will be able to move forward in Brook Park with no legal entanglements. At least that is what Bibb is banking on.