The Cleveland city council voted yesterday to approve giving the Browns $2 million a year for the next 15 years to help pay off $120 million in planned stadium renovations. (The measure needed a 12-vote supermajority to win, and snuck by with 13 votes on the 19-member council.) Since the Cleveland Plain Dealer reported over the weekend that the city is currently losing $6 million and change per year on the Browns stadium lease, this will push Cleveland’s losses over the $8 million per year mark.

The anti-funding side may have lost, but at least it prompted a four-hour debate that I’m now sorry I didn’t try to find a webcast of:

At one point, Councilman Tony Brancatelli pulled a red flag from his pocket and threw it on the table, calling out Banner on his comments about how favorable the deal is for the city, compared to what other cities have paid into their athletics facilities. The truth is, Brancatelli said, all of those cities have been held hostage by their contracts with NFL teams.

“We’ve afforded the Browns a lot of luxuries that many businesses who come to this table don’t have,” Brancatelli said.

Much of the debate appears to be about whether the Browns’ renovation requests were for “repairs” (which the city is obligated to pay for) or “capital improvements” (which the city already provides a fund for, but the Browns will now be getting $2 million a year on top of). Which led to exchanges like this one:

“There’s a common sense part of this that if you’re four years past something’s useful life it’s time to replace the scoreboard,” [mayoral chief of staff Ken] Silliman said.

[Councilmember Jeffrey] Johnson snapped back: “Well, I’ve got a common sense approach, too, and it says that we’re about to spend $2 million of my community’s money, and I need you to prove to me me that the scoreboard needs to be fixed today. … Respect me enough to bring me something that proves it. Don’t play me for a dummy.”

From the sound of it, the Cleveland council just punted and said fine, let them have their damn money. Next up, in all likelihood: the Indians!

The Cleveland Plain Dealer ran a great piece on Saturday (where almost nobody would see it, but let’s not be picky) running down the details of the Cleveland Browns lease, which some local officials see as a giveaway, but which Browns officials say is actually pretty generous to the public. Here’s what Cleveland rakes in each year, it turns out:

• $250,000 in rent
• $570,000 in revenues from three city-owned parking lots
• $3.5-4 million in ticket taxes on Browns tickets

The Browns keep everything else: ticket sales, ad revenue, concession sales, and the $6 million a year from naming rights to the city-owned building. The city, meanwhile, needs to pay for police overtime to patrol Browns games (cost not given), plus $850,000 a year in capital improvements to the stadium, a figure that will rise to $5 million a year in 2023. Plus, if the latest Browns renovation plan goes through, an additional $2 million a year for more stadium improvements.

The city, meanwhile, is paying for the entire $296.3 million construction cost of the stadium that opened in 1999. And I need to correct myself: I’d written that the stadium will have been paid off by 2015, when the city’s “sin tax” on cigarettes and alcohol that was passed to cover stadium costs expires — but no, it turns out the city has only paid off $68 million of that debt, and is going to have around $200 million left to go when the sin tax expires. So either Cleveland will need to dip into its general fund to the tune of about $10 million a year, or it will need to extend the sin tax — and which point the Browns, Indians, and Cavaliers have promised to seek even more money for stadium improvements. It really is the gift that keeps on giving.

Okay, it’s definitely Announce Stadium Plans But Refuse To Say How They’ll Be Paid For Week: First the Atlanta Braves, then the Virginia Beach mystery arena, and now the Cleveland Browns have announced $120 million in renovations to their stadium, with money coming from we’re-not-gonna-tell-you:

 The Cleveland Browns announced Wednesday a two-year plan to deliver $120 million in upgrades to the “fan experience” at the city-owned FirstEnergy Stadium –- including a new scoreboard, audio equipment and physical changes that would allow fans to move about more freely…

Browns CEO Joe Banner declined to discuss financing during a news conference Wednesday afternoon, revealing only that the organization has acquired what amounts to a loan from the NFL that could cover about half of the expense.

In a written statement, Mayor Frank Jackson said that he supports the improvements and that the plan “meets structural requirements and will enhance the fan experience here in Cleveland.” Details for financing the project, however, are still in discussion, Jackson wrote.

Talk of extending the “sin tax” on alcohol and cigarettes (seriously, that’s all the sins that Cleveland could come up with to tax?), which paid for new stadiums for the Browns and Indians and is set to expire in 2015, to fund upgrades for both teams has been kicking around for a while now, but there’s been no formal proposal as of yet. And from the sound of it, there may be considerable resistance on the Cleveland city council:

“The sin tax went toward establishing the infrastructure and keeping it safe and secure,” [city councilmember Jeffrey] Johnson said. “This is different. This is about who can have the biggest scoreboard and bragging rights. And the ownership is just trying to create a stadium that they can show off and enhance their reputation without really enhancing the benefit to the average citizen.”

Councilman Michael Polensek agreed and said he would vote against the city chipping in to pay for the renovation. He pointed out that $120 million could hire more than 1,000 police officers or ameliorate the city’s entire abandoned housing problem.

“I’m weighing the glitz and glamor and the hype associated with sports teams against the reality of life,” Polensek said. “The majority of my citizens can’t even afford to go to a game. And you want me to go back and ask them to dig into their pockets and ante up for the Cleveland Browns? I’m looking to Jimmy Haslam and his folks to have a civic soul. Corporate leadership must try to understand our plight, and so often they fail to do that.”

“I’m looking to the local sports team owner to have a soul.” I guess people have hoped for crazier things.

They started changing the signs on the Cleveland Browns stadium this weekend, from Cleveland Browns Stadium to FirstEnergy Stadium, which as you’ll know if you’ve been reading FoS is because new owner Jimmy Haslam sold the building’s naming rights for $6 million a year, none of which he’ll have to share with the taxpayers who actually own the stadium

Meanwhile, NBC Sports blogger/NFL mouthpiece Mike Florio decides that this is a perfect time for a quip:

Earlier this year, new owner Jimmy Haslam sold the naming rights to FirstEnergy.

Hopefully no discounts or rebates were involved in the transaction.

Get it, see, because FirstEnergy is an electricity company, and they like to offer discounts and rebates to their customers! [UPDATE: Or maybe because Haslam has his own problems with rebates — thanks to commenters for pointing this out.] And also, the idea of discounts and rebates being involved in a sports stadium deal is so unheard-of, it’s hilarious!

Oh, by the way, the Cleveland Browns sold the naming rights to their stadium this week to FirstEnergy Corp. for $6 million a year over 17 years. And by “their stadium,” I mean of course, “the stadium that taxpayers paid to build and own but won’t be getting any money from selling the name of.” Because that’s the way that modern stadiums roll.

FirstEnergy, a deregulated electricity company, showed declining profits last year, giving them a good head start on joining this list. Though they’ll have to work harder to become the next this.