DawgTalkers.net Forums DawgTalk Pure Football Forum Haslam Brook Park Stadium Proposal

Haslam Sports Group spokesman currently pitching Brook Park stadium deal to the Ohio House live right now for those interested...

**Refs please move to different thread if appropriate.

I watched it... it's boring lol

Most entertaining part:

Ranking member: "If we do not give you this money what then? What happens to the project? What is the future for Haslam and the Browns"

Ted Tywang (Browns spokesman): "You're really putting me on the spot." <light laughter>

Ranking member: "Does this whole project hinge on us giving you the $600M? What happens if this falls through?"

Ted Tywang: "I guess I better dust off my resume."

LOL

LOL! that was probaly the best part.

my take... the only thing the politicians cared about was having reason/information to tell their "constituents"

https://www.cleveland.com/open/2025...s-600m-bonds-for-brook-park-stadium.html

By

Rick Rouan, cleveland.comJeremy Pelzer, cleveland.com

COLUMBUS, Ohio—The Cleveland Browns are offering state lawmakers new financial assurances in their quest for $600 million in state aid for a new covered stadium in Brook Park.

To help quell skepticism about the team’s request for lawmakers to provide the money via state-issued bonds, the Browns are now proposing to provide $38,250,000 in “up-front” cash that would be tapped if revenue from the stadium project and surrounding development doesn’t cover the bond costs. That amount is expected to grow through interest to nearly $150 million by 2054.

Ted Tywang, Haslam Sports Group chief administrative officer and general counsel, laid out the plan Tuesday afternoon to the Ohio House of Representatives Arts, Athletics, and Tourism Committee.

Under the Browns’ plan, the Brook Park stadium’s anticipated $2.4 billion price tag would be paid for with $1.2 billion from team owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam, $600 million from the state, and $600 million from local governments.

Tywang’s presentation indicates that the Browns are doubling down on their hopes to secure the $600 million from the state via bonds, even as Gov. Mike DeWine is pushing an alternative plan to provide the money by doubling the state’s sports-gambling tax.

Under the Browns' plan, the state-issued bonds would be repaid with state income, sales, and commercial activities tax revenue from the proposed stadium and the proposed $1 billion mixed-use development surrounding it.

Over the 30-year life of those bonds, the Browns estimate that the project will generate $2.9 billion in state tax revenue -- enough to cover the cost of the bonds and put the excess in state coffers.

But some experts have questioned whether the team’s projections are overly optimistic and if the stadium and surrounding development can generate revenue fast enough to pay off the bonds.
DeWine has also balked at the idea, saying that thanks to ballooning bond interest rates, issuing $600 million in bonds could ultimately cost the state about a billion dollars.

Tywang, in testimony Tuesday, said revenue from the project would have to be off by more than 40% than expected for the state to start contributing money to cover bond payments. Even so, he said, the team is offering the upfront money as a “cushion” as an extra way to protect taxpayers, adding that he didn’t know of any other stadium project where a team has offered such collateral.

“This unique up-front payment structure would further hedge State risk and would be the most conservative state funding construct of any major sports-related development in the country,” Tywang stated in written testimony submitted before the hearing.

The Browns would also pay for any cost overruns, he said.

Tywang pointed out another issue that state lawmakers would need to address: Under current law, state funds can only be used to cover up to 15% of the initial estimated construction cost of an Ohio sports facility. Tywang’s testimony says lawmakers would need to approve an “enabling statute” to change that limit before bonds could be issued to cover 25% of the estimated cost of a new Browns stadium.

The Browns’ push for stadium bonds comes as DeWine’s budget proposal calls for raising the state’s tax on sports gambling companies’ gross Ohio revenues from 20% to 40%. That would raise an estimated $288 million more over the next two fiscal years for stadium projects (including the Browns, but also for other teams) and youth sports.

However, state lawmakers’ initial response to DeWine’s stadium-funding plan has been skepticism, if not outright opposition.

It still remains to be seen which stadium funding proposal, if any, lawmakers will keep as they hammer out a final budget plan in the next few months. However, state Rep. Melanie Miller, an Ashland Republican and a Brook Park native, said after Tuesday’s hearing that the committee will consider submitting the bond proposal as a budget amendment to the Ohio House Finance Committee, which is expected to make its first round of revisions to the budget bill next week.

For the $600 million from local governments, the Browns are asking Cuyahoga County to issue its own bonds, which would be backed largely by county tourism taxes and the city of Brook Park. However, Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne has pledged not to provide any county money for plans that move the Browns out of Cleveland.

Tywang said after Tuesday’s hearing that the situation regarding local funding is “fluid.”

During the hearing, Tywang showed committee members a slideshow showing renderings of the proposed new stadium and surrounding development. Tywang touted the project as one of the largest economic-development projects in state history, saying it would create 6,000 construction jobs and 5,000 full-time jobs when work is completed.

I find it a bit ridiculous that other areas bend over backwards on stadium issues, yet not Ohio.

I am not saying that the state should finance the whole darn stadium ..... but in this case, they are not. Not even close. It is a jobs magnet. It is funded to a great degree by the team owners, and they are covering overruns. They are even guaranteeing part of the bond issue themselves. Further, tell me what state wouldn't throw stupid money at a major project, creating thousands of jobs during construction, and after.

Just get this done already. The Browns, even when not very good, bring a lot of people and activity (and money) to the region.

Kinda feel bad for the businesses downtown that will get hurt by this move

I see the Haslams have made some tweaks from their original design concept released back in August in which they had vehicles traveling on the wrong side of the road, European style!

if a business gets hurt by 8 days a year.... they were already going out of business. Besides, most people tailgate when they go to Browns games. They aren't going to restaurants etc.

The businesses that benefit from browns games are in the flats and e4th. Those places get a ton of business already.

The estimate of job losses from the move was 360.

If the city does it right with the location of the stadium... it will generate a ton of jobs income and residential tax as it would be the ideal spot to live in downtown Cleveland.

I mean it looks like a euro-dystopian barn on the approach. I’m sure it will be great for those who can afford to go.

8 days is just football. There's a lot more uses for the stadium throughout the year.

what? like...


3 high school football games, 1 college hockey game and 2 concerts?

especially because it will keep the people who can't afford it out.

In all seriousness, people in Detroit can afford it. We can afford it too.

And Nashville. Their new dome is under construction now.

I wish I could argue this point, but it is totally accurate.

True, but not so much that stadium.

One would think that a city, especially ours would take note when an NFL owner starts to talk about a new stadium. Only recently has the city talked about closing Burke. Well, they should have been doing that 3 years ago.

Once again the city fumbled the ball.

Also with a roof/dome you’ll have more opportunities for events throughout the year… concerts, Disney on ice, monster jam, etc. More events brings more revenue to the area.

I agree,, Sometime back, when we lost the Browns to Baltimore, I wanted them to consider relocating Burke to a more inland location near down town. Maybe get rid of some of the blight in the process..

I also wanted a Dome, Hotel and Convention center at the Burke site. I was laughed at.. 30 years later and here we go again.

I agree,, Sometime back, when we lost the Browns to Baltimore, I wanted them to consider relocating Burke to a more inland location near down town. Maybe get rid of some of the blight in the process..

I also wanted a Dome, Hotel and Convention center at the Burke site. I was laughed at.. 30 years later and here we go again.

I wasn't laughing.

I do get why we got the stadium did...it fit the timeline. This go around there was no excuse. By now you'd think the city would know that haslam doesn't just talking about getting things done, he gets them done.

It wasn't long after Haslam got here he said the stadium needed upgrades, and boom, cranes were in place reworking the upper pound, new scoreboards were installed, club sections were reworked, etc. When the Haslams started talking about the need for a new stadium 3 years ago, the city should have been all ears and there with open arms asking what they needed to do to make it happen. Instead they dilly dallied like a bunch of dummies until it was too late. Haslam is way past the planning and talking phase. He is ready to break ground.

All true,,, This time it's clear that we don't have a lot of options. The facility he's proposed in Brookpark is rather amazing to be honest. The space is available and ready to go.

But, to be honest, Burke is still there and still can be used the way I thought back in the day. I suspect it's not has grand as the Brookpark thing,, But still pretty damn nice.

All in all, I'd rather they be Downtown, but in the end, if they win, they play on the moon if need be.

I'd rather be downtown as well.

The problem with Burke at this point is you don't just shutter up a main airport overnight. To the FAA Burke is a main airport even if you, I, or most others don't see it as such. Any airport that can land large aircraft is much different than some airstrip out is the country somewhere. It might take 2-3 years to shut it down by the time you got all the permits and cleared the land.

You could start all the new planning for the site while all of that was happening, but that comes at a considerable expense. I know there was some question about if the site could even support such a development since it is a landfill site. I am not sure if they could even test for that until the land was cleared. If not, that would be another delay and costly fix to raise the site another 5 feet or whatever to make it ready for construction.

Bottom line is if Burke was deemed as the site for a new stadium, all of that should have started 2-3 years ago. The process has started. Land has been optioned. Architecture work has been completed. Permits are in place. The state has passed laws to raise money from state gambling. The snowball is rolling and betting bigger and bigger. The city and it's weak Modell law and going to get rolled over.

The best thing the city can do is face the facts, open their arms to everybody involved and try to find a way to salvage something for the people of Cleveland, people the city to this point has failed.

Any time you have to go through a process like this with a government you need to make sure the wheel has enough grease.

Just the way it works. Nothing new here.

What a Bunch of Crap Peen !... Ever going to stop making excuses for your GOOD-OLD0BOY buddy . Sorry for the rant , but Haslam and Company make me sick.

Water, you're entitled to your opinion as we all are but honestly this is the price of doing business. Things like this go on all the time and everywhere. Right, wrong or indifferent that's the way it is.

Peen is right. I was going to post "Shocking", because it is truly anything but.

I would be shocked if there wasn't any greasing of the wheels in today's world.

I agree that it shouldn't be the way things work but Peen is certainly correct in saying that is in fact the way things works.

What exactly is a bunch of crap? Excuses? What excuses?

The Haslams looked for property in the city. There isn't enough to build what they want to build. The stadium lease is up in a few years, so there is a timeframe problem.

Ok, you don't like Haslam. Cool. No need to get mad at me simply because I express my views, views I see as reasonable and probably pretty spot on the mark.

Not just todays world. The way the world has been for a long time.

You’re right, ballpeen but I get water’s point to some extent: politicians who can be bought are corrupt and beneath me, to be honest.

But yeah, it’s the way this stuff works. This stadium is going to happen. It’ll still be the Cleveland Browns, they’ll still be in northeast Ohio, just down the road a few miles. Get on board with it.

I don't even see it as being bought. It's more about access. Money can buy you that but it doesn't necessarily buy their up vote. Most wealthy people contribute money to candidates of both parties so they get invited to the right party, no matter which one is elected.

That's very true. However, it does seem to be getting worse, with politicians with no other careers, and making $200K per year, having tens of millions of dollars in a decade or 2.

No disagreement here.

peen says:
Let's call it what it is..a BRIBE...

Sorry man, bribes are given under the table. Something that neither party wants to be seen. This was openly given to a politicians campaign in one form or another. All above board and nothing illegal about it.

The UAW makes and receives contributions all the time. Nothing illegal or sleezy about it.

So it's a legal bribe, then?