Earlier this week the City of Cleveland Ohio released an economic study questioning the viability of a multi-purpose indoor football facility in Brookpark Ohio. The study shows a 30-million-dollar annual loss in economic output for Downtown Cleveland. And it estimates an annual 11-million-dollar loss in tax revenue. The Study was commissioned by the City of Cleveland. The study itself was conducted by EConsult Solutions in Philadelphia Pennsylvania. The study also questioned the sufficient the demand for the indoor facility. Pro Football Talk Mike Florio brilliantly pointed out what we are seeing here and that this is politics as usual.

https://www.nbcsports.com/nfl/profootballtalk/rumor-mill/news/cleveland-pushes-back-on-browns-brook-park-stadium-plan

In Florio’s article he did say that anyone can commission a study to say whatever they want it to say. This is another shot in the public relations battle that the Haslam Sports Group is having with the City of Cleveland. Don’t be surprised to see a counter study released that shows the economic benefit of having the dome built in Brookpark Ohio. Also, there was information missing in the EConsult Solutions study that is relevant to the situation.

My understanding is that the study isn’t showing the condition of the current stadium. It was poorly built in a rush almost 30 years ago. Also, the City of Cleveland pays anywhere for 1.5 to 2 million dollars a year to keep the building up to code. That doesn’t include the normal maintenance and upkeep of the building. All that is taxpayer money being spent on an outdoor football only stadium being used at the most 15 days out of the year. And the City of Cleveland will not finish paying off the current stadium until 2028. If the current stadium was a house, it would be considered a money pit.

The public debate for the new dome stadium will continue until the Brookpark deal is final. This study can be another misrepresentation of the truth. I always suggest doing your own research and getting the facts. If you do not support taxpayer money going to a football stadium? Then you should support the Brookpark project. Because that is already 2/3 privately funded and the last 1/3 will be funded by a usage tax of the facility itself.  And that would include cost overruns and maintenance.