Arace: Cleveland Browns' Dee and Jimmy Haslam leverage for public-private partnership
Our old friend, Ohio Revised Code 9.67, was back in the news earlier this week. Remember the savage days of #SavetheCrew in 2017 and ‘18? ORC 9.67, otherwise known as the Modell Law, was an instrumental tool in the saving. It was like a life vest hanging on the wall, at the disposal of the people and their public trust. The crooks who wanted to steal the team away had no desire to test its constitutional buoyancy.
The short version of ORC 9.67: An owner of a sports team that uses a tax-supported facility or accepts financial assistance from a governing body in Ohio cannot move the team from that facility unless a) the owner and the relevant governing bodies agree to the move or b) the owner gives the governing bodies six months to find local owners to purchase the team.
Columbus Crew: Cucho Hernandez absent, but Crew record 1-1 draw vs Tigres in CONCACAF play
The threat of ORC 9.67 allowed time to arrange a sale of the Crew to local owners who would keep the Crew in Columbus. Those owners turned out to be the Edwards family in the minority and Dee and Jimmy Haslam in the majority.
![Lead by leaders of the supporter groups, fans sing their support for the team at the Save The Crew rally at City Hall in Columbus, Ohio on Sunday, Oct. 22, 2017. [Emma Howells / Dispatch]](https://s.yimg.com/ny/api/res/1.2/L1ip_c8DlCEFbUkKYztqdw--/YXBwaWQ9aGlnaGxhbmRlcjt3PTk2MDtoPTY4OA--/https://media.zenfs.com/en/the-columbus-dispatch/a90c7e774def13bed3113d4328ee63ed)
The Haslams want a dome
Now, Dee and Jimmy’s outfit, Haslam Sports Group, is having ORC 9.67 waved in their faces. They own the Cleveland Browns. Their stadium is among the worst in the league. They have been working with the Cleveland mayor on a public-private plan for a $1.2-billion renovation, but ...
It seems the Haslams want something beyond renovation. They want a dome, which would double the price of the project. Reportedly, they also want control over parking and revenues from mixed-use shoulder development – which is all the rage these days (see: what’s rising around the new Crew stadium; how Navy Yards has been built out around the D.C. stadia; the new village that has sprung up around the Atlanta Braves’ stadium in Cobb County; and so on).
To this end, as first reported by NEOtrans, the Haslams have taken an option to buy a parcel of land by the airport in Brook Park, where, conceivably, they can build their own dome, control all the parking and build a ballpark village. These are things the Haslams say they cannot do in Cleveland. And that is why the ORC 9.67 was trotted out in a Cleveland City Council meeting earlier this week.
Councilman Brian Kazy said the Haslams must abide by ORC 9.67, “whether they want to move the team to Timbuktu or whether they want to move the team to Brook Park or Lakewood or to any other state.”
Isn’t it delicious? The Modell Law, which went on the books after Art Modell moved the Browns to Baltimore in 1996, is now being waved in the faces of the owners of the Browns.
Brook Park ruse?
My lawyer, Randy Kilbride, is a constitutional scholar who grew up in Philadelphia and Cleveland, which is to say he is a born-and-raised litigator. Those who tuned into The Dispatch’s Soccer Speakeasy podcast during the days of #SaveTheCrew might recall that he was prescient in his predictions when the lawsuits started flying in Columbus. He saw the endgame. What does he think about his beloved Browns?
“I think the Brook Park idea is a ruse,” Kilbride said.
Kilbride said the Brook Park site, once home to two Ford manufacturing plants, doesn’t seem feasible. The time and money it would take for environmental cleanup could be considerable. That is just the beginning of the outlay required to prepare a new stadium next to an airport.
“The Haslams know they can’t leave Cleveland. (What other city) is going to build them a stadium?," Kilbride said. "This sounds to me like the saber-rattling we’re hearing from the (Chicago) Bears and the White Sox. They keep raising the specter of movement, but where are they going to go? That said, however, if they’re going to build a new stadium or spend $1.2B on a renovation, they should build a dome. Detroit, Minneapolis and Indianapolis have them and soon Buffalo will, too.
“It also strikes me that owners now can’t count on public support for new stadia. ... I don’t care how much of his own money Haslam invests, some government is going to be on the hook for at least the same, but likely close to (double).”
How much? That is the question.
Anyway, that’s the way my lawyer sees the Brook Park situation – as leverage for the Haslams against city officials. Jimmy wants his dome and his shoulder development, He wants to save as much as he can on the one and squeeze as much as he can out of the other. The mayor must calculate how much it is willing to give on both without getting fleeced. And now, the city council is getting involved and talking about the Modell Law.
Public-private partnership! Parallel Path!
The Browns’ lease at FirstEnergy Stadium runs through the 2028 season.
This article originally appeared on The Columbus Dispatch: The stadium game is afoot between Cleveland Browns owners and pols
