Brook Park Browns? Cleveland Reaches Tentative Deal With Haslam and the Browns

After months of legal wrangling and political maneuvering, the city of Cleveland has reached a $100 million agreement with the Cleveland Browns and Haslam Sports Group that clears the way for the team’s relocation to Brook Park. The deal, approved by the city’s planning commission and awaiting final council authorization, ends a heated chapter in the city’s relationship with its NFL franchise.

Under the agreement, the Browns will pay the city a total of $100 million, including an initial $25 million payment by the end of this year and additional installments spread over the next decade. The team’s ownership group will also cover the demolition costs for the current lakefront stadium, which has been home to the franchise since its 1999 return. The city will drop all litigation against the team and formally support its development plans for a new domed stadium and entertainment district near Cleveland Hopkins International Airport.

The decision has drawn some criticism from Cleveland City Council and the community. Mayor Justin Bibb’s administration framed the deal as a pragmatic compromise to avoid years of costly litigation and to open the lakefront for new redevelopment opportunities. Opponents, however, see it as a capitulation — a loss of one of Cleveland’s defining institutions and a handout to billionaire owners who are also receiving hundreds of millions in state support for their suburban project.

The controversy deepened after the Ohio General Assembly and Governor Mike DeWine approved roughly $600 million in public funding for the new stadium earlier this year. That money, included in the state budget, effectively removed one of the city’s last points of leverage. Critics argue that public resources are being diverted from pressing community needs, while the franchise walks away from a publicly funded facility without penalty.

The so-called “Modell Law,” designed to prevent teams from leaving publicly financed venues, offered Cleveland little protection after lawmakers clarified that it only applies to teams relocating out of the state. That legal interpretation left the city with limited recourse as the Browns pursued their move just a few miles away.

For downtown Cleveland, the departure represents both loss and opportunity. City officials are already touting plans to transform the lakefront site into mixed-use development, potentially including housing, retail, and public park space. But many residents worry that the absence of the Browns — and the crowds that come with them — will drain foot traffic and economic energy from the city’s core.

The deal must still clear Cleveland City Council, where members are divided. Some view the $100 million settlement as an acceptable price to resolve a losing fight and redirect focus toward lakefront redevelopment. Others argue it is far too low for the loss of a franchise that helped define Cleveland’s civic identity.

If the agreement is approved, the Browns’ final season at the lakefront will likely be 2028. Their planned move to Brook Park, with a $2.4 billion domed stadium and surrounding entertainment complex, would mark the second time in three decades that Cleveland has seen its team leave.

For many, the question remains whether the city has traded away more than a football team — and whether the promises of new development can ever match what is being left behind.