PALM BEACH, Fla. — Could the Cleveland Browns end up staying on the lakefront instead of moving to a domed stadium in Brook Park? Team owner Jimmy Haslam conceded that it’s possible during remarks made to reporters at the NFL Annual Meeting in Palm Beach, Florida.

According to Mary Kay Cabot of 3News partner Cleveland.com, Haslam said it will come down to whether Ohio lawmakers approve $600 million in funding for the stadium proposal in the budget at the end of June. If so, the plan is to have shovels in the ground to begin construction in Brook Park in the first quarter of next year.

If not, Haslam told reporters that the Browns would move to “Plan B,” which would be renovating the existing Huntington Bank Field in downtown Cleveland.

“The stadium, we’re actually really excited about,” Haslam said in his remarks, per Cabot. “I think you all have heard me say on numerous occasions, when you try to build a stadium and it’s a combination of private and public money, it’s going to be a challenging process. This has been challenging. It’s been a little bit of a rollercoaster. I tell our team, Dee (Haslam) and I do, we have good weeks and bad weeks, but we feel good about the progress we’re making.”

Last month, the Browns shared details of their plan to finance the $3.4 billion economic development project near Cleveland Hopkins International Airport, which features a $2.4 billion domed stadium along with a mixed-use development.

The Haslam Sports Group, along with their development partners, have committed to invest more than $2 billion in private capital. The state of Ohio would be asked to issue $600 million in bonds that would be paid back by tax revenues, while the city of Brook Park and Cuyahoga County would be asked for an additional $600 million in bonds to be covered by an increased admissions tax, parking tax, bed tax and rental car surcharge.

Earlier this month, HSG told lawmakers that the Browns would provide “up-front” cash of $38 million to help alleviate any concerns about issuing $600 million in bonds. Days later, Jeremy Pelzer of 3News media partner Cleveland.com reported that the Ohio House Finance Committee would likely soon add language to the massive budget legislation to authorize $600 million in state-backed bonds to help pay for the new stadium, according to Finance Committee Chair Brian Stewart, a Pickaway County Republican.

However, Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne is against the HSG domed stadium plan, calling it “a risky bet.” He reiterated those sentiments on Monday.

“Cuyahoga County Executive Chris Ronayne has been consistent in his support of a downtown location for Browns Stadium,” Ronayne’s office said in a statement. “The proposal to build a new stadium in Brook Park does not make fiscal sense for Cuyahoga County residents and taxpayers.”

Haslam said Monday that he believes the project can move forward even if Cuyahoga County is not on board.

“Remember the city is not funding anything, the city of Cleveland,” he said per Cabot. “And so that would leave the county and there’s ways for us to do it without county support. I will tell you this, it’s much better for not just the Cleveland Browns and Haslam Sports, but for the community if the county will support us.”

“I think it’s incredibly exciting that we could have, in 2029, a domed stadium in Cleveland that would be arguably as nice as any stadium in the country that could host not only NFL games, but all kinds of athletic events, concerts, et cetera, that I truly think is transformational for Northeast Ohio, and we’re excited about it. It’s been a lot of work. We still have work to do, but we think directionally we’re correct if you will.”

The Haslams announced in March of 2024 that they were down to two options when it comes to their future stadium site: a $1 billion renovation to the existing downtown stadium, or a domed stadium outside of the city at double the cost. Word soon spread that the Haslams had optioned more than 170 acres of land in Brook Park near Cleveland Hopkins International Airport. 

On Aug. 1, in what the city called “a competitive deal to retain the Cleveland Browns at their current stadium site,” Mayor Justin Bibb put forth a $461 million financing proposal to the Haslams to renovate the 25-year-old facility. The plan included a 30-year lease arrangement. 

Six days later, the Haslam Sports Group unveiled renderings and video showcasing what a domed stadium complex in Brook Park would look like.

On Oct. 17, the Browns confirmed their plans to move to Brook Park with an adjacent mixed-use development alongside the domed stadium. Team owners argued renovating the current stadium would not solve long-term issues, and that a domed stadium would allow them to host big events year-round and generate more revenue in the region.

In a press conference that same day, Bibb expressed his deep disappointment in the Haslam Sports Group’s decision, calling the team’s choice “frustrating and profoundly disheartening.”

Since then, the city of Cleveland has invoked the “Modell Law,” the statute passed by the Ohio General Assembly in 1996 after Art Modell moved the original Browns from Cleveland to Baltimore, to try to keep the team downtown. The two sides are entangled in lawsuits at the state and federal level. 

In response to Haslam’s “Plan B” comment on Monday, Cleveland City Council President Blaine Griffin told 3News, “I’m extremely happy that they are keeping this option open.”

Two years ago, the Browns’ owners said they were committed to upgrading their existing stadium “in accordance with the City of Cleveland’s plans to upgrade waterfront area between Lake Erie and downtown.”

“Cleveland would benefit tremendously from the development of the waterfront,” Jimmy Haslam said in 2023. “Having the stadium down there seems to be in everybody’s best interest, so we’re committed to redoing the stadium. In all likelihood, it’s not going to have a dome, but it’ll be a substantial remodel of the existing facility, and we’re probably three, four, five years away from that happening.”