Browns Stadium Funding Approved Despite Mixed Fan Reactions

Listen to our one-minute audio summary here.

The Ohio Senate approved the state’s $60 billion biennial operating budget on June 12, which includes $600 million for the Browns’ new stadium project. Ohio lawmakers forged ahead on a plan to use unclaimed funds to provide the $600 million grant for the new Cleveland Browns stadium in Brook Park, clearing a major hurdle for the team’s planned move to the suburbs.

However, the funding is not yet guaranteed. The budget must be signed by July 1, and DeWine could veto parts of the final budget bill he doesn’t like. The governor has the right to veto the budget and send it back. When pressed to announce if he planned a veto, DeWine avoided directly answering the question, saying only that there’s time to negotiate and “We have a long way to go”.

The amount represents half of the $1.2 billion in public funding that Haslam Sports Group wants for the project planned for 176 acres in the Cleveland suburb. The controversial funding mechanism involves redefining all unclaimed funds that passed into state custody prior to 2016 as “abandoned,” which would then “escheat” to the state.

DeWine had originally proposed a different funding method. Instead of giving the Browns a lump sum of money, DeWine proposes adjusting the sports gaming tax and creating the Sports Construction & Education Fund for any professional team. He would double the gambling tax from 20% to 40%, which would fall on the backs of the betting companies. DeWine defended his sports facilities fund approach, saying “This will permanently solve our problem. If we don’t do this every legislature, every governor in the future is going to have to face the challenge of do we put $20 million here? Do we put $40 million here for this stadium or that stadium?”

Fan reactions to the stadium funding approval have been deeply divided. Season ticket holder Sue Barto expressed frustration, saying “We’re the Cleveland Browns not Brook Park Browns.” Another fan, Joel McVicker, said “I like the fact that we’re getting a dome. I hate that it’s moving out”.

Fans were split when they spoke with reporters about the potential investment, with some feeling like team ownership should front the bill, while others felt it was fair to pay for an upgraded fan experience. Fan Ben Bryson told reporters “As a taxpayer, I don’t want any dollars going toward it. It’s private enterprise. I don’t think it’s up to the taxpayers to pay for that. Especially when you’ve got billionaires involved.” However, Warren Davidson said from a tailgate “If you want a state-of-the-art stadium to be able to see your Brownies play on Sunday, that’s what you’re going to pay for”.

The funding approval faces significant opposition from local officials. Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne criticized the unclaimed property idea, arguing “This is not robbing Peter to pay Paul. This is robbing Bob and Betty Buckeye to pay (Browns owners) Jimmy and Dee Haslam”.

A pair of former Democratic state lawmakers warned the General Assembly not to approve the controversial plan and threatened a lawsuit, with attorney Jeff Crossman arguing “These are funds held in trust. This is not state property. These funds belong to all those hardworking Ohioans across the state with forgotten savings accounts, uncashed checks, overpaid utility bills”.

The Browns still need additional funding beyond the state contribution. In addition to the money from the state, the Haslams are seeking $422 million from the city of Brook Park and $178 million from Cuyahoga County. County Executive Ronayne is pushing lawmakers to consider his proposal to keep the Browns on Cleveland’s lakefront and renovate the current stadium, which he said would cost the state $350 million, rather than $600 million.

Jimmy Haslam said in March that if funding is approved in June, the Browns hope to begin construction in early 2026. The team’s current lease at Huntington Bank Field expires after the 2028 season.