In a refreshing rebuke of the money-grubbing cartel that is the National Football League, the mayor of Cleveland just said “NO!”
The Browns want a new stadium. And the city was willing to yet again put up millions of taxpayer dollars to help them rehab the lakefront stadium taxpayers built for what became an expansion franchise in 1999.
Per one media account:
“Last month, the city proposed funding $461 million — pretty much splitting the $1.1 billion cost with the Browns — to upgrade the current stadium and redevelop its surrounding property along Lake Erie.”
But that wasn’t enough for Browns owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam. They wanted more – a brand-new domed stadium, designed to maximize their profits, at taxpayer expense, of course.
So, the Haslams say they intend to move the Browns about 12 or so miles to the south in Brook Park. They hope to move in after their current stadium lease expires in 2028.
The price tag? About $2.4 billion. Financed, apparently, through public bonds. However, there are serious questions if that scenario will ever play to fruition.
As Sportico.com reports, the Browns claim no “existing taxpayer funding streams that would take away from other public needs” would be used.
“Instead, the over $2 billion private investment, together with the public investment, will create a major economic development project that will drive the activity necessary to pay the public bond debt service through future project-generated and Browns-generated revenue,” the team said.
But if this project will be such the cash generator, why should taxpayers have any skin in the game at all? They should not.
Back to Cleveland’s mayor, Justin Bibb. He drew a line in the sand, effectively telling the Browns to drop dead and not let the dressing room locker doors hit them on the way out:
“As mayor, I will always prioritize the needs of residents and businesses,” Bibb said in a written statement. “The Haslam Sports Group may want a roof over their heads, but my responsibility is to ensure that Cleveland residents have a roof over theirs.”
The mayor said balancing such priorities “requires care and precision.” And Cleveland must be “practical about our many needs and finite resources.”
Good for you, Mr. Mayor. We hope you stick to your guns.
And we hope you can impart this kind of wisdom on the leaders of Pittsburgh and Allegheny County when it comes time to renegotiate leases and/or upgrades and/or replacements – perhaps – with the Steelers for Acrisure Stadium and the Pirates for PNC Park.
We’re sure one or both franchises will argue for major taxpayer-financed upgrades, claiming their “investments” will reap grand economic benefits for Greater Pittsburgh.
For the Steelers and Pirates perhaps, but not for the overall economy. That’s pretty evident looking at the population and jobs numbers for Pittsburgh and Allegheny County since taxpayers last spent hundreds of millions of dollars to placate barons of sport with new playgrounds on the road to faux “prosperity.”
We’ll be keeping an eye on the Cleveland situation. That’s while Greater Pittsburgh taxpayers should be keeping an eye on their wallets.
Colin McNickle is communications and marketing director at the Allegheny Institute for Public Policy (cmcnickle@alleghenyinstitute.org).
