Part of the debate surrounding Cleveland Browns Stadium revolves around the public funding aspect for building a new domed facility or renovating the existing infrastructure.
A new Associated Press report suggests that neither alternative will have an immediate impact on the taxpayers living in Cleveland or nearby.
In an article about Kansas City’s efforts to retain the Chiefs and Royals in Missouri, writer David Lieb surmised that the economic impact would not offset the public’s funding for a new facility.
“Many economists assert that while stadiums may boost tax revenue in their immediate area, they tend to shift consumer spending away from other entertainment and seldom generate enough new economic activity to offset all the public subsidies,” Lieb wrote.
The Chiefs and Royals are both out of their leases for their respective stadiums at the end of this decade, and Kansas offered public funding – up to 70 percent of the costs – to build a new stadium inside their borders.
Lieb also noted that this week Charlotte approved $800 million in public subsidies to renovate the Carolina Panthers’ facility while Jacksonville also approved splitting the Jaguars’ $1.25 billion stadium renovation.
The Haslam Sports Group – owners of the Cleveland Browns and multiple other sports franchises – is behind the push for building a new stadium in nearby Brook Park, requesting over $1 billion in public funding to build the facility.
Originally, the group had requested between $500-600 million from the city of Cleveland and other government groups to renovate the existing downtown structure.
NEXT: Browns Defender Earned Highest Pro Football Reference Rank
