Cleveland (Special to ZennieReport.com) – It looks like the Ohio Legislature pulled a fast one on Cleveland and allowed the NFL’s Cleveland Browns a nice escape hatch from which to leave Cleveland and for a suburb called Brook Park. In the plan to depart the City, the Cleveland Browns threaten to leave Cleveland without an effective way to revitalize its Downtown. So, in one legislative action, the Ohio lawmakers robbed Cleveland of the standard benefits due its designation as a “home rule” City. This NFL Vlogger’s argument is that the Commerce Clause was misapplied, and in its zeal, the Ohio Legislature illegally altered the Modell Rule.
First What Is The Commerce Clause?
First, lets’ get out of the way what the Commerce Clause is. It’s this: “the Commerce Clause allows Congress to regulate various aspects of commerce, including the movement of goods, services, and money across state lines, as well as with foreign nations and Native American tribes.” Stop right there.
This NFL Vlogger’s argument is that the matter of the Cleveland Browns move to a suburban city has nothing to do with state lines, so Cleveland’s home rule power must supercede any Commerce Clause argument, including the one the Ohio Legislature used in allowing the Browns to leave Cleveland.
Second, Cleveland’s Home Rule Rights Have To Be Considered
Indeed, Cleveland’s home rule legal power is essential in all matters of economic development. Building a healthy tax base calls for a City to have industrial activity that furthers such objectives. No city willingly gives away its business activities to suburban municipalities simply because it does not get a tax revenue benefit from the action.
For example, Roselle, Illinois states that “The purpose of home rule is to allow for local solutions to local issues and problems. A municipality with home rule status can exercise any power and perform any function unless it is specifically prohibited from doing so by state law. In contrast, a non-home rule municipality may only exercise powers for which express authority is provided bystate law.” (See: https://www.roselle.il.us/DocumentCenter/View/6032/Home-Rule-Referendum—IML-Documents)
Thus, for all practical purposes, the Ohio Legislature took Cleveland’s home rule power away from it in the way it gutted the intent of The Modell Law.
The Modell Law reads as follows (https://codes.ohio.gov/ohio-revised-code/section-9.67): “
No owner of a professional sports team that uses a tax-supported facility for most of its home games and receives financial assistance from the state or a political subdivision thereof shall cease playing most of its home games at the facility and begin playing most of its home games elsewhere unless the owner either:
(A) Enters into an agreement with the political subdivision permitting the team to play most of its home games elsewhere;
(B) Gives the political subdivision in which the facility is located not less than six months’ advance notice of the owner’s intention to cease playing most of its home games at the facility and, during the six months after such notice, gives the political subdivision or any individual or group of individuals who reside in the area the opportunity to purchase the team.
While The Modell Law does not specifically mention Cleveland, everyone knows that the The Modell Rule was formed to keep teams in Cleveland. Thus, The Modell Law’s intent is to protect the home rule status of the City of Cleveland.
In closing, because this is a matter that’s inside Ohio and has nothing to do with any move to any other state, or for that matter, the other side of the state, it’s an issue that directly impacts Cleveland’s home rule status. And, if the court results in Nashville are any indication, where Tennessee was found to have violated that City’s home rule status, then Ohio has done the same with respect to Cleveland. Have a read from The Tennesee Lookout (https://tennesseelookout.com/briefs/panel-rules-against-tennessee-lawmakers-allowing-nashville-to-keep-its-40-member-council/):
Nashville can keep its 40-member Metro Council size intact after another court panel ruled against Tennessee Republican lawmakers in their quest to dictate the operations of the state’s capital city.
The latest decision negates a 2023 state law requiring all forms of metro government to have 20 or fewer members on local governing bodies. Tennessee has only three metro governments, and Nashville is the only one with more than 20 members.
In a 2-1 ruling, the judges said that despite the law applying to all metro governments, it only impacts Nashville, running afoul of Tennessee’s home rule law. This law prevents state lawmakers from passing legislation specifically targeting a local government without its permission.
In The Cleveland Browns Debate There’s Been No Talk About The Matter Of Cleveland’s Home Rule Status
To date, the Cleveland Browns move debate has not included any mention of home rule status. The Commerce Clause is referred to in a way that’s do knee-jerk unthinking one wonders if people actually read anymore. A good read of the history of the Cleveland Browns move controversy and the modern chapter involving team owner Jimmy Haslam, will show that the City’s home rule rights were first ignored, then trampled on.
That’s got to stop.
But Cleveland Must Come Up With A Viable Plan To Build A Stadium For The Browns
Saving The City of Cleveland’s home rule rights does not give Cleveland Mayor Bibb the right to come up with a plan to finance the Browns New Stadium in a way that’s not viable. A $600 million subsidy is possible for a Downtown Cleveland site, and is logical compared to $400 million distributed in smaller chunks over time. That does not even start to help pay construction costs. Mayor Bibb should want a plan that brings the Super Bowl to Cleveland and is a catalyst for new development that makes Downtown Cleveland affordable and desirable all at the same time.
Stay tuned.