If you are packing things up and heading for the suburbs, you’d better not expect us to pay for transportation. That is exactly the message the Cleveland City Council wanted to send to the billionaire owners of the Cleveland Browns.

Jimmy Haslam and the franchise have dished out over a million dollars of their own money to handle emergency safety repairs at Huntington Bank Field. Under the long-standing lease agreement, local officials were contractually obligated to reimburse them for every dime. Only this time, the council decided they were not going to be playing ball.

The Browns reportedly completed $1.2 million worth of emergency infrastructure repairs to the stadium ahead of the 2026 season, but the problem is that this city-owned stadium is set to be demolished when the team leaves downtown following the expiry of the lease in 2028.

This lease was signed all the way back on October 23, 1998. It was meant to secure the return of the expansion Browns franchise after the original team moved to Baltimore. The city retained full ownership of the stadium, while the Browns took over its operations. Under the agreement, the city was legally required to maintain the structure and keep it fit for use as an NFL-caliber sports facility by reimbursing the Browns for eligible expenses.

Before the season began, several problems at the stadium needed urgent attention. The sewage system suffered pump failures, while concrete throughout the stadium bowl had cracked and deteriorated after years of harsh Ohio winters. The insulation around major water lines had also worn down and needed replacing. On top of that, the stadium’s large overhead doors needed mechanical repairs to keep the building secure and ensure staff could operate safely.

The Browns spent the money, but the City Council voted 7-6 to reject the legislation that Mayor Justin Bibb supports to reimburse the Browns. When Signal Cleveland journalist Nick Castele shared the news on X, 92.3 The Fan’s Daryl Ruiter made another unexpected announcement.

“Cleveland will be in breach of the lease with [the] Browns by doing this. Guess city council would rather spend another $1.3 mil on lawyers instead. Btw, the $70 mil cash portion of [the] settlement for Brook Park move is more than 3x net revenue Cleveland has taken home over [the] last 27 years,” he wrote.

According to Castele, this is the first time in recent history that the city council has rejected a stadium reimbursement request. Just last year, the council reimbursed the Browns for various stadium maintenance expenses, including large commercial air-conditioning units. The year before, it approved a much larger $2.6 million package to cover a backlog of health and safety repairs. The latest decision suggests growing discontent over the Browns’ planned move to Brook Park.

“I think that a lot of people are giving each other high fives right now, but when those bills start rolling in, I want us to also…make sure that we let everybody know why we’re spending all of this money on all of these legal battles as well,” Council President Blaine Griffin said after the vote. 

The City of Cleveland was not happy with the Browns’ decision to relocate. Officials had offered a $1.1 billion package to renovate Huntington Bank Field, but owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam chose to move because they wanted a year-round, weather-proof destination. Despite facing legal roadblocks, the Browns finalized a $100 million settlement that cleared the way for them to build a $2.4 billion domed stadium in Brook Park.

“Sometimes I wish somebody had the cojones to stand up to that sports group and say, ‘Thank you for the work, but we ain’t paying you a dime. See you in court,’” Ward 13 Council Member Brian Kazy said.

Bibb administration officials stated that the repairs were necessary to ensure health and safety at Huntington Bank Field, the name that will also be used for the Browns’ new stadium in Brook Park. With winter approaching, James DeRosa, director of the Mayor’s Office of Capital Repairs, warned that the pipes could have frozen and sewage could have backed up had the Browns not made the repairs.

To make matters worse, the stadium will need about $117 million in repairs between 2024 and 2034. However, the Browns requested reimbursement only for the essential repairs needed to ensure fan safety.

Signal Cleveland also revealed that the city still owes about $18.6 million in debt incurred in the 1990s to build the stadium. Over the next few years, the city will also pay an additional $4 million for the 2014 upgrades.

What do the new renderings by the Cleveland Browns suggest?

The Huntington Bank Field in Brook Park, as per the new renderings, will have a 500-unit residential area, a 300-room hotel, and 232,000 square feet of retail space. Once the project is completed, the retail space will be around 300,000 square feet, with more than 450 rooms, and 1,500 apartments with 695,000 square feet of office space. 

The Browns also plan to build a 10,000-space parking lot within a mile of the new Brook Park stadium, with sidewalks connecting it to the venue. The domed stadium will seat around 75,000 fans and have a 377,000-square-foot concourse.

The new stadium will also feature a bigger concessions area, large video boards, and a redesigned Dawg Pound. Meanwhile, back at the aging downtown stadium, getting the city to pay for essential safety repairs has become a tough ask for the Haslams.

The pushback against public funding for the Haslam family’s sports projects reflects concerns among state lawmakers.

State Representative Munira Abdullahi of Columbus previously argued that public money should not go toward sports projects when schools remain underfunded and food banks struggle to meet demand. Representative Juanita O. Brent of Cleveland also said the money should instead go toward helping working families and improving local communities.

The Cleveland City Council’s refusal to reimburse the Browns shows just how tense things have become over the team’s planned move to Brook Park. With the city potentially breaking its lease agreement, Haslam’s dispute over the stadium could end up back in court.