A report requested by Senate Democratic Leader Nickie J. Antonio raises concerns about the legality and economic benefits of the proposed funding plan for a new Cleveland Browns stadium in Brook Park.

Antonio's office asked the nonpartisan Ohio Legislative Service Commission (LSC) to analyze the stadium funding provisions included in the House-passed version of the state budget.

The LSC report stated that the bonds as described in the budget bill would be special obligation bonds, not backed by the full faith and credit of the state. It also noted the absence of clear constitutional authorization for stadium bond issuance.

Regarding economic claims, the LSC found Haslam Sports Group's projections to be "overly optimistic and lack transparency." The report suggested that some of the projected new jobs in the mixed-use development surrounding the stadium could come at the expense of similar jobs in Cleveland. The LSC also stated that decades of research have failed to find significant employment impacts from new sports stadium construction.

The LSC questioned HSG's estimate of 1.5 million new visitors to the Brook Park location, calling it "overly optimistic." Additionally, the report projected that the stadium's construction would result in an approximate $10-11 million annual loss in tax revenue for the city of Cleveland, with no clear evidence that cost savings from vacating the current stadium would offset those losses.

"The overwhelming conclusion from this body of research is that there are little to no tangible impacts of sports teams and facilities on local economic activity," the LSC report stated. "A second conclusion is that the level of government subsidies given for the construction of facilities far exceeds any observed economic benefits when they do exist."

Antonio said in a statement that the proposed funding plan raises "serious legal and financial concerns" and that HSG's projections are "overly optimistic at best."

"Let’s be clear: most of the so-called ‘new jobs’ are simply moving jobs away from Cleveland– stadiums like this do not deliver the economic windfalls they promise," Antonio said. "We should not move forward until we know the courts, the numbers, and the public are on board."

Antonio also announced that she has requested a legal opinion from Attorney General Dave Yost regarding the constitutionality of the bonding provisions.

Haslam Sports Group, in a March 18 press release, detailed what it called the "key benefits" of the proposed enclosed Huntington Bank Field in Brook Park. The group stated it would invest more than $2 billion in private capital in the stadium and adjoining mixed-use development, with the total project representing $3.4 billion in economic development. HSG also emphasized its commitment to keeping the Browns in Northeast Ohio and asserted that the project would not impact existing taxpayer revenue streams or require Cleveland to incur stadium-related expenses.

HSG is currently involved in a federal lawsuit challenging the city of Cleveland's attempt to use the so-called Modell Law to halt the project. The Modell Law was passed in response to the Browns' relocation to Baltimore in the 1990s. HSG argues the law is not applicable as the team intends to remain in the region.