Cleveland City Council holds off on mayor’s ask for more lakefront planning money amid Browns relocation thre - cleveland.com

CLEVELAND, Ohio – Cleveland City Council’s finance committee on Monday delayed its vote on Mayor Justin Bibb’s request for more money to plan for different scenarios that could unfold on the downtown lakefront.

The request comes after Cleveland Browns owners Jimmy and Dee Haslam last month said they were considering a move to a new stadium in Brook Park, and not necessarily committed to the renovation of the existing stadium on Cleveland’s lakefront. Meanwhile, much of the design work already completed by City Hall’s lakefront planning consultant, Field Operations, features the stadium as a centerpiece.

While city officials on Monday did not explicitly say the extra money they’re requesting is to plan for scenarios in which the Browns or the stadium are no longer present on the lakefront, Finance Chief Ahmed Abonamah said the final lakefront master plan will account for all potential outcomes, including what the lakefront could look like with a stadium, and without one.

Council members on Monday declined to vote on Bibb’s request to extend Field Operations’ contract and approve $400,000 worth of additional planning work, because some of it was already completed last year. Council President Blaine Griffin and other members objected out of concern that Bibb’s team had already accumulated a good chunk of that bill -- about $260,000 of it – before council had been given a chance to weigh in.

Back in 2022, when council first authorized Cleveland’s contract with Field Operations, council imposed a $500,000 spending limit. Bibb’s team went on to rack up $760,000 in charges through the end of 2023. If council doesn’t approve the growing tab, Field Operations stands to lose out on money for work that it has already completed.

“That does not sit well,” Griffin said.

Planning Director Joyce Huang last week said the additional $260,000 on the tab includes charges for community engagement efforts, as well as transportation designs for an anticipated land bridge connecting downtown to the area around the stadium.

Confronted with Griffin’s concerns, Abonamah said at Monday’s committee meeting that no taxpayer money was actually paid out without council’s approval. As for the growing tab, he said Field Operations’ planning work ended up being more complex and more costly than originally anticipated. He recognized council’s concerns but said city staffers had been acting in “good faith” and with no “intention to undermine council.”

Griffin wasn’t satisfied with Abonamah’s response. He said he wanted more details from Bibb’s team before he would consider putting the request to a committee vote, including more details about the work that was done in 2023, and which city official allowed Field Operations to rack up a bill in excess of council’s spending limit.

Griffin was less concerned about the other portion of Bibb’s $400,000 request, which, in addition to the $260,000 for past work, would also cover $140,000 in future work related to Bibb’s “Shore-to-Core-to-Shore” downtown taxing district, and “scenario planning” for the lakefront, Huang said.

The “scenario planning” City Hall is looking to undertake is related to “a few details that we need to tweak and refine” as “things continue to change through the planning process,” Huang had said.

While both Huang and Abonamah declined to share many details about the “scenario planning” they want to complete, Huang described City Hall’s need this way: “How do we make sure this is a lakefront for all Clevelanders…regardless of what happens in the future.”

After Monday’s finance committee meeting, cleveland.com asked Abonamah whether council’s pause on the legislation would hold up or otherwise impact Cleveland’s negotiations with the Browns, considering the owners’ recent threat to relocate.

Though Abonamah said it wouldn’t, he did ask council to at least pass the $140,000 request for future scenario planning, even if it wanted to take more time to understand how and why the city’s 2023 tab exceeded the original spending cap. Council declined his request.

Adblock test (Why?)