Apparently all the stadium news decided to happen in the last 24 hours, that’s okay, I didn’t have any better plans for things to do with my Tuesday. Anyway, in Cleveland yesterday, Browns owner Jimmy Haslam revealed his “Plan B” if the state, county, and city don’t approve $1.2 billion in public money for a new stadium in Brook Park:
Haslam said it will come down to whether Ohio lawmakers approve $600 million in funding for the stadium proposal in the budget at the end of June. If so, the plan is to have shovels in the ground to begin construction in Brook Park in the first quarter of next year.
If not, Haslam told reporters that the Browns would move to “Plan B,” which would be renovating the existing Huntington Bank Field in downtown Cleveland.
So, wait, hang on. That $600 million in state tax money, the revenues that supposedly would cease to exist without the Browns playing in Ohio, is needed because without it … the Browns would keep on playing at another location in Ohio? Even if you think that Cleveland would be better off reclaiming its lakefront property that is currently occupied by the Browns stadium, there is no math by which it’s worth spending $1.2 billion in government money just to move the Browns and their fans a few miles southwest.
There is certainly a theme emerging to this firehose of a news day, and it is this: From Oregon to Arizona to Ohio, sports team owners and their pals in state and local government are tallying up every scrap of tax revenue they possibly can as “attributable” to the local sports team, and then demanding a check in that amount — and never mind if it’s tax revenue that the government would be getting anyway because if the team left people would just spend their money elsewhere, or because the team owner has no intention of leaving regardless. There haven’t been many big changes in the stadium subsidy playbook over the 27 years I’ve been writing this blog, but I’m tempted to say that the increasing reliance on the Casino Night Fallacy is a growing trend. Next up: To find out whether state legislators can see through it as well as Oscar Madison, or if they’re happy enough to use it as an excuse to hand over public cash to the local sports billionaires, whether it makes any damn sense or not.
How many cocktails had owner Haslam consumed before he disclosed Plan B?
On the one hand the stadium does waste what SHOULD be prime development land. Cleveland’s neglect of Lakefront development is borderline criminal. So the Browns building a stadium literally anywhere else in the Cleveland area would be great. Also the stadium they currently have is an embarassing dump. On the other hand I can’t imagine Cleveland would be able to get their head out of their a$$ and develop the area properly
“On the one hand the stadium does waste what SHOULD be prime development land.” — Prime for what? The commercial real estate market is in bad shape, so class A office buildings are not likely there. What do you want to put there? Condominiums?
Condos, entertainment, shopping, etc. You would literally be better off if you tore down the stadium (and the stupid airport next to it) and just put a big lawn and turned it into a park.
In Haslam’s slew of remarks (including, finally, that they “swung hard and missed on the Deshaun Watson trade”), one other admission got lost in the shuffle. He admitted that—if the State came through with its $600 million of bonds— the dome might move forward WITHOUT the owner’s long-sought additional $600 million in County-backed bonds. That’s a critical admission that, if played right, should permanently extinguish that owner ask.
Hey Ken. Every time you post here I ask you why in the 16 years you were part of Frank Jackson’s administration did nothing get done on the Lakefront while Burke Lakefront Airport stayed open using up 450 acres of downtown real estate and restricting development around it while it was mostly used by flight schools.