18.11 Cleveland Browns Stadium Proposal & Intergovernmental Conflict

The Cleveland Browns have proposed building a new 65,000+ seat domed stadium in the suburb of Brook Park, about 14 miles from their current lakefront stadium in downtown Cleveland. This ambitious project is estimated to cost around $2.4 billion and is planned as part of a 176-acre mixed-use “stadium district” development near Cleveland Hopkins International Airport.

In a notable act of intergovernmental collaboration, the Ohio General Assembly and Governor Mike DeWine approved $600 million in state funding to support the Browns’ plan, an amount directly set aside from Ohio’s unclaimed funds reserves (unused funds from dormant accounts and uncashed checks) rather than the general tax revenues. State leaders touted this as a creative way to help finance the stadium without tapping regular taxpayer dollars, framing it as an investment in Ohio’s quality of life and economy.

In addition, the City of Brook Park sought approximately $71 million through an Ohio Department of Transportation program to fund new highway ramps and road improvements around the proposed site, showing how local governments petition the state for infrastructure grants to support major projects. Brook Park Mayor Edward Orcutt has championed the project, calling it “a once-in-a-lifetime opportunity” to transform the city’s economy and position it as a regional destination.

Notably, the region’s metropolitan planning agency, NOACA, has withheld their initial support for Brook Park’s transportation funding request. They cite that the stadium project wasn’t yet in the area’s long-range plan and needed further traffic study. This indicates that even cooperative efforts must go through planning reviews in intergovernmental bodies.

Local Opposition and Legal Challenges

Despite the state’s and Brook Park’s enthusiasm, leaders in the City of Cleveland and Cuyahoga County quickly voiced strong opposition. This shows us that intergovernmental relations can involve conflict as well as cooperation.

Cleveland officials were alarmed at the prospect of losing the Browns (a major regional asset) to a suburb. Mayor Justin Bibb argued that moving the team would “divert economic activity from downtown, create a competing entertainment district, and disrupt the momentum of our lakefront redevelopment.” The City of Cleveland even filed a lawsuit in early 2025 to block the relocation, invoking Ohio’s existing “Modell Law.” This state law (enacted after the Browns’ 1990s relocation saga) was meant to prevent sports teams from leaving an Ohio city if public funds have been used for their facilities, unless certain conditions like advance notice or a chance for locals to buy the team are met. In essence, Cleveland’s leaders argued the Browns, benefitting from city funds, could not simply exit the city without permission.

However, the Ohio legislature responded through the budget bill by amending the Modell Law to explicitly apply only when a team moves out of state, clearing the path for the Browns to relocate within Ohio. This unilateral state action exemplifies tension in state-local relations: a state-level decision overriding a city’s legal tool for self-preservation.

Cuyahoga County leaders likewise opposed the stadium plan, primarily out of concern for regional impacts and financing. County Executive Chris Ronayne (who also chairs the NOACA board) labeled the proposal a “bad idea” and a potential “boondoggle.” He noted that many fans and residents did not want the team to move from downtown. He raised practical concerns that a stadium next to Ohio’s busiest airport could worsen traffic congestion on shared highways and even pose safety or logistical issues for air travel and shipping. In fact, county officials formally requested detailed reviews by ODOT and the Federal Aviation Administration, underscoring how multiple levels of government (local, state, and federal) become involved when large projects have transportation and safety implications.

Furthermore, Ronayne made it clear the county would not commit local funding or bonds toward the Browns’ project. He balked at any expectation that Cuyahoga County help finance another $600 million in stadium costs on top of the state’s contribution. This rift between Brook Park’s development ambitions and broader county priorities illustrates intergovernmental competition: one municipality’s gain can be seen as another’s loss (the City of Cleveland).

Intergovernmental Relations in Action

The Browns’ new stadium saga is an example of Ohio’s intergovernmental relations at work.

On one hand, it shows cooperation through fiscal support and grants: the state government stepped in to assist a local community (Brook Park) with a massive economic development project by reallocating state-held funds and potentially funding infrastructure upgrades. This kind of state-to-local financial assistance, essentially a large grant or subsidy, is a form of intergovernmental interaction often designed to spur regional growth or keep a valued institution (like an NFL team) in-state.

On the other hand, the case also highlights conflict and negotiation in intergovernmental affairs. Different jurisdictions have clashing interests, in this case the suburb hosting the new development versus the central city aiming to retain it.

This case the complex layers of intergovernmental relations in Ohio. It involves state lawmakers, multiple city governments, county authorities, regional planning agencies, and even courts, all interacting over issues of funding and development. The case shows both the positive aspects of intergovernmental relations (such as funding partnerships) and the inevitable tensions when governmental units have competing goals. Ultimately, intergovernmental relations encompass not just the flow of grants and resources but also negotiation, compromise, and sometimes conflict between different levels of government.

References

https://www.cbssports.com/nfl/news/funding-plan-for-new-cleveland-browns-stadium-is-unconstitutional-and-unlawful-lawsuit-claims/

https://www.enr.com/articles/60987-ohio-sets-aside-600m-for-cleveland-browns-24b-stadium-plan

https://www.news5cleveland.com/news/local-news/ronayne-asks-odot-faa-to-weigh-in-on-traffic-safety-impacts-of-proposed-browns-stadium