The Haslams will soon build a $2.4 billion dome in Brook Park. And while the funding for that project is pretty much locked up—with the generous help of $600 million from the state of Ohio—one looming, lingering question is how exactly repairs will be paid for in the future.
It’s a question of timely importance. One need only look to the current situations at Rocket Arena and Progressive Field to pull the distant future into the present.
The Gateway Economic Development Corporation of Greater Cleveland, the nonprofit that owns and operates both facilities, recently shared that it expects $150 million in capital repairs at the arena and stadium in the next few years, and another $261 million in capital repairs through the end of the current leases. (2034 for Rocket Arena and 2036 for Progressive Field, respectively.)
But Gateway doesn’t have the money—not nearly enough. It’s already had to get creative to cover past bills, including landing bailouts from Cuyahoga County and Cleveland. The current sin tax revenue, the mechanism by which it has in the past funded all repairs, pales in comparison to the growing list of bills. And all sides admit there are no firm plans for future revenue streams.
Down on the lakefront, Cleveland Cleveland City Council in July approved $2.7 million for capital repairs on Huntington Bank Field, which the city owns and operates. That brings the total Cleveland has spent on repairs to the stadium in the last 11 years to $30.7 million.
The Brook Park dome is an entirely different beast. First of all, it would be owned, in theory, by a new community authority formed by the suburb with authorization from the state of Ohio. But that authority wouldn’t have recourse to collect or levy any taxes or fees outside of the footprint of the project.
There simply exists no structure to pay for repairs going forward as it stands, which has local stadium financing expert Ken Silliman worried.
“In my opinion, for Brook Park to not have tied down the responsibilities long term for routine maintenance and capital repairs at this late of a stage is a major problem,” he told Scene.
Silliman, the author of Cleveland Sports Facilities: A 35-Year History, spent years at City Hall negotiating deals with team owners, including the infamous tug-of-war around Art Modell moving the Browns to Baltimore in the mid-1990s.
“In my view, [we’re] at the team’s mercy as far as who’s going to pay for routine maintenance, who’s going to pay for capital repairs,” Silliman said.
It is part of the current talks between Brook Park and the Haslams, though.
“Mayor Orcutt and the City of Brook Park are in regular communication with the Cleveland Browns regarding all aspects of stadium planning, including long-term maintenance and management considerations,” Paul Marnecheck, Brook Park’s Commissioner of Economic Development, told Scene. “The question of capital repairs is a key component of the broader negotiations currently underway.”
“No final agreements have been reached at this time,” he added. “The Mayor remains focused on ensuring any arrangement is fiscally responsible and in the best interest of Brook Park residents.”
In Brook Park, the Haslams are intent on having the suburb create a new community authority, which would require state authorization, to own and operate the stadium. But that authority would have no legal mechanism to collect taxes or revenue outside of its footprint, or perhaps through taxes levied by Brook Park.
The Haslams, meanwhile, have expressed a desire to double or triple the county sin tax. But that proposal has its own litany of problems. While the state recently approved legislation allowing Cuyahoga County to go back to voters to seek a doubling of the tax rate, Executive Chris Ronayne has said he will not pursue that both because it would still not be enough to cover the capital repair bills at Progressive Field and Rocket Arena and because polling shows voters are unlikely to approve a new sin tax bump if part of the money is diverted to the Brook Park dome. Both the Cavs and Guardians have expressed similar concerns about the Browns being included in future sin tax referendums.
“There’s substantial doubt whether a measure submitted to the voters that includes the Brook Park stadium as an eligible recipient would pass given that hesitancy about move,” Silliman said.
Spokespersons for the Browns and Cuyahoga County either did not respond to a request for comment or declined to comment.
Stadium authorities are seen today as the new golden model. It’s one the Browns are pursuing.
The Raiders’ Allegiant Stadium is owned by the Las Vegas Stadium Authority, which collects Clark County hotel tax dollars to fund maintenance and reapirs. In other words, Nevada owns Allegiant; Nevada’s tourists pay to keep the Raiders happy.
A similar model around Paycor Stadium—the Banks New Community Authority—uses a one-percent amenity tax collected on dollars spent in the district to pay for events and promotions.
In theory, a Brook Park Stadium Authority could do the same, with an okay from state legislators. Which would mean the financial responsibility would fall on anyone who visits the dome or surrounding development, paying more in parking, beverages, food and tickets.
Or, Brook Park could be on the hook, at least partially.
“Unless and until they get those terms tied down,” Silliman said, “the responsibility would presumably fall on Brook Park.”
Subscribe to Cleveland Scene newsletters.
Follow us: Google News | NewsBreak | Reddit | Instagram | Facebook | Twitter
Related
PHOTO: Eric Hartline/Imagn Images
PHOTO: Philadelphia Eagles
