Despite lawsuit, unclaimed funds for Browns stadium moves forward
As it stands, $1 billion will be taken from Ohio's unclaimed funds program. That money could be an uncashed check or a forgotten bank account that the state holds onto for its citizens until it is claimed.
How Ohio's recently passed budget will expand driver's education requirements
Lawmakers now want to use some of that money to build new sports stadiums while Ohio resident Felicia Snell said the move is misguided.
'A stadium is not going to feed a child; a stadium is not going to put someone in an apartment,' she said. 'It doesn't make sense to me.'
Right now, that fund houses $3.7 billion. Lawmakers want to capitalize on what they call idle money and use it for a new 'Ohio Cultural and Sports Facility' fund. The $1 billion that is used will be money that has been in the fund for more than 10 years; $600 million of it will go to the Cleveland Browns for a new stadium.
Snell did not know that the state plans to give $600 million to the Cleveland Browns or use the other billions of dollars in the fund for sports stadiums in the future. She said she is shocked the state hasn't notified residents.
840-acre Knox County solar farm approved; opponents promise to continue fight
'Since I'm not that important, I mean, I guess why not take it,' she said. 'They're snatching funds and not focusing on children who are with crime, people that are homeless, people in addiction.'
So, what is the class action lawsuit? It argues that using unclaimed funds unconstitutionally seizes Ohioans' private property without due process.
'I'm confident we're on good constitutional grounds and I'm also confident that they're not going to be able to prove damages by anybody,' Ohio Senate President Rob McColley (R-Napoleon) said. 'Everybody who has money in the fund still has ten years to come get the money and so there is no harm, there are no damages for those individuals, so I think it's going to be a tough case to prove all the way up.'
McColley said he does not think the lawsuit stands a chance, in the higher courts, at least.
'They may win it at the local trial court level but that's something that we're confident as it advances through the stages that we'll be successful,' he said.
Ohio equal rights amendment would outlaw discrimination, void same-sex marriage ban
Senate Finance Committee Chairman Jerry Cirino (R-Kirtland) said that unclaimed funds have been used before, like in emergencies.
'This is not the first time, and we didn't recall any challenges to those occasions when that money was used,' he said.
The lawsuit was filed by Marc Dann, a former Ohio attorney general who also sued the state — and won — over $900 million in COVID-era unemployment funds for Ohioans.
'The way they've decided to do it, by taking people's money that doesn't belong to the state, is uncosted and it's unconstitutional for several reasons,' Dann said. 'One is the government can't take your money or your property without compensating you for that. Secondly, they can't take your money at all, for a, for something that's not a public purpose and I think there's a pretty good argument that a, a football stadium for, for, that will benefit only the Cleveland Browns and Jimmy Haslam is, is is, is not a public purpose. The third reason is that, that there's not good due process.'
Unless the courts say otherwise, the money will be taken from the fund on Jan. 1, 2026.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Solve the daily Crossword
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Miami Herald
an hour ago
- Miami Herald
The right's pro-life hypocrisy: Pregnant women face harm in ICE custody
Cary López Alvarado should have been resting. One week from her due date, she should have been counting down the days with equal parts exhaustion and joy. Instead, on June 8, she was shoved to the ground and shackled in a U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement raid in Hawthorne. A U.S. citizen, nine months pregnant, she was held for nearly eight hours before being hospitalized with stomach pain. ICE agents alleged she was obstructing their access to two undocumented immigrants in a public parking lot, one of them her boyfriend. There's a quiet violence in how ordinary this has become. A technical violation — no threat to public safety, no criminal record otherwise — somehow became enough to justify brute force. López Alvarado's story joins others: pregnant women pulled from cars, cuffed on asphalt and pushed onto the ground. These moments don't just reflect a lack of trauma-informed training among agents who could have made a conscious choice to de-escalate the situation, they suggest something more deliberate: the rescission of ICE's own 2021 11032.4 directive, meant to shield pregnant people from exactly this kind of harm. What frustrates me most, however, is a deeper hypocrisy in the moral fabric of the political right, especially those who claim to be 'pro-life.' I am disappointed in their severely myopic definition of the phrase, their selective drawing from conservative theology to protect only the fetuses deemed to be future children of white American citizens, while permitting violence to mothers and children who do not visually check said boxes. To be pro-life means to stand for the right to life; it is a conviction in the inherent dignity and consistent worth of all human beings. It means advocating for lives of safety: in immigration, in our daily lives and, most directly for me, as a medical student and future physician, in health care. An unborn child's worth should not disappear the moment their mother enters a detention center or is perceived by ICE as potentially undocumented. During President Donald Trump's first term, the detention of pregnant women rose by 52% after an Obama-era policy that generally directed immigration officials to release pregnant women from federal custody was rolled back. Advocacy groups have long documented the inadequate medical care and dangerous conditions faced by detained women, leading to irreversible psychological trauma, physical harm and even miscarriages. Perinatal mood disorders, such as maternal depression, have been linked to hypertension, preeclampsia and gestational diabetes. For pregnant undocumented women, who already have baseline trauma from arduous immigration journeys where rape and disease are common, incarceration and the constant fear of deportation can serve as powerful stressors, contributing to a heightened risk of cardiovascular complications and, possibly, premature births. Along the border, immigration holding cells, colloquially referred to by migrants as hieleras or 'freezers,' often lack basic sleeping accommodations, showers and hygienic products like soap. Migrants spend up to several nights in congested quarters where infections spread quickly. For these women, it seems that their lives — and the lives of their children — are conditional. I chose to become a physician because there is relief in knowing the field of medicine endures on treating every human, regardless of their their past, politics or papers. Illness and death are universal, and in their universality, there is fairness. This vulnerability connects us far more than our ideologies divide us: I may never know whether my patient voted to build a wall or supported LBGTQ+ rights, and I also do not wish to know. What I owe, to myself and others, is to defend life with integrity. When advocacy on behalf of a patient falls short, the opposing party must be held accountable — whether it's myself, a colleague or a politician. López Alvarado ended up giving birth to a healthy baby girl, and the family has set up a GoFundMe to help cover medical costs and child care. Her boyfriend remains in detention out of state, unable to help with raising the child. Clarity doesn't come from choosing sides — it comes from choosing people. In every room, the fundamental respect of personhood — not politics — must lead. We are bound to complex social systems where race, socioeconomics and sex will always be relevant. Life does not begin and end in a womb. It is lived along borders where families are being torn apart; in mothers who have miscarried in detainment centers whose prayers say: 'When I die, bury me in comfy clothes and make sure my shoes are tied tight, because I have a long overdue play date with a little child.' When you hear someone is undocumented, let your first response be humanity, not fear or violence. There is enough space for all of us to win, even in a nation as broken as ours.
Business of Fashion
2 hours ago
- Business of Fashion
This Week: What's Ailing Louis Vuitton?
What's Happening: The luxury downturn is deepening, with sector bellwether LVMH expected to report a double-digit decline in its fashion and leather goods division when the group reports quarterly sales and first-half profits July 24. Is Bigger Still Better? In previous slowdowns like the 2008 financial crisis or Covid-19 pandemic, LVMH's staggering scale and exposure across competing categories helped it hold up better and bounce back more quickly than rivals. This time, jewellery-focused Richemont, standalone giant Hermès and smaller groups like Prada, Moncler, Zegna and Brunello Cucinelli have proved more resilient while LVMH's woes deepened. Unjustified price hikes — or 'greedflation' — in the group's key handbag category is largely to blame. The group is also navigating a generational shift in its top ranks. LVMH's marketing budgets and clout with landlords remain unparalleled. But in today's fast-changing luxury market, more focused companies appear to have the advantage when it comes to nimble decision-making and execution. The coming quarters will show whether the conglomerate's current down cycle represents a blip or a paradigm shift. Vuitton Under the Microscope: LVMH is facing challenges across key units — from layoffs at Moët Hennessey to falling sales at Dior to lacklustre performance at duty-free retailer DFS. But with a designer transition underway at Dior and new management in place at Moët, those works-in-progress are increasingly seen by investors as yesterday's story. Reviving momentum at Louis Vuitton, the group's biggest and most profitable brand, is now top of mind. 'The biggest luxury brand on the planet and more than half of the group's EBIT seems to be at a crossroads,' HSBC analyst Erwan Rambourg wrote last month in a note to clients. 'The aspirational skew of the brand is unhelpful currently. A schizophrenic pull between low-end (chocolate, beauty) and high-end (exclusive leather ranges), fashion content (Murakami) and more subtle travel-related luxury items begs the question: What does LV really stand for? Who is it targeting? What is its USP?' The creation of a new deputy CEO position (bringing over former Loro Piana chief Damien Bertrand in March to support chief executive Pietro Beccari) was a 'red flag' signalling challenges at the brand, Rambourg said. Balancing a variety of messages including hyper-visibility and sophistication, top-end and aspirational price points, core products and brand extensions has long been a part of the mega-brand formula. But another quarter of losing market share to the likes of Hermès and Prada — as analysts are currently forecasting — will lead investors to wonder: What's the plan? The Week Ahead wants to hear from you! Send tips, suggestions, complaints and compliments to Disclosure: LVMH is part of a group of investors who, together, hold a minority interest in The Business of Fashion. All investors have signed shareholders' documentation guaranteeing BoF's complete editorial independence.
San Francisco Chronicle
3 hours ago
- San Francisco Chronicle
As Newsom ponders redistricting, California projected to lose as many as 4 congressional seats
California could lose as many as four congressional seats in the 2030 apportionment, researchers say. A recent report from the National Democratic Redistricting Committee (NDRC) echoes earlier forecasts of the state's declining political clout, including from the non-partisan American Redistricting Project and from the Brennan Center for Justice at New York University. All three reports found the state could lose at least three seats; the Brennan Center projected four. California isn't alone. Other Democratic-leaning states like New York, Illinois and Minnesota are also expected to lose one or two seats due to population declines. Meanwhile, Republican-leaning Florida and Texas could each gain as many as four new seats. Since districts in many of these states tend to be heavily gerrymandered, and because the Electoral College is winner-take-all, these changes would help Republicans in both presidential and congressional races if current partisan preferences hold. The zero-sum math behind apportionment has always been the same: Each state receives seats in proportion to its population at each Census. For decades, that math worked in California's favor. Between 1950 and 1990, the state added an average of 6 new seats every apportionment cycle as its population ballooned. But lately, the state's growth has stalled out. Sky-high housing prices have driven hundreds of thousands out of the Golden State — often to the same red states that are gaining seats at California's expense. That process accelerated during the pandemic, as many Californians left the state and worked remotely from places with lower living costs, said Michael Li, senior counsel for the Brennan Center's Democracy Program. A large number of Baby Boomers also moved out of the state after retirement, he said. What's more, the immigrants who have lately powered the state's growth are staying away. Their numbers declined during the pandemic and under subsequent Trump-era restrictions. The projected decline of California's clout matters as Gov. Gavin Newsom is considering a countermove to Texas Gov. Greg Abbott's redistricting plan favoring Republicans. Abbott called a special legislative session to redraw the state's congressional maps, a move that breaks from the custom of a once-a-decade redistricting cycle. Typically, new maps wouldn't be drawn again until after the 2030 census, unless ordered by a court. But Trump allies are pressuring Texas to make changes early to give Republicans an edge before the midterms. 'They are clearly very, very scared that they're going to lose the House of Representatives in this coming midterm cycle, and they're tipping their hand that they're going to need to cheat,' said John Bisognano, the president of NDRC, which fights for redistricting favorable to Democrats. For his part, Newsom could have a hard time using redistricting as a tool of partisan power. Even if the governor wanted to redraw congressional maps to favor Democrats, which state law already makes difficult, the math might only work out until the next Census. Data shows that not only is California's population stagnant, it's shrinking fastest in Democratic parts of the state. On average, between 2020 and 2023, Republican-leaning congressional districts in California grew, while Democratic ones shrank. California has limited tools to hold onto its political clout. For one thing, the state could invest more in boosting census participation, said Howard Fienberg, co-director at The Census Project. 'People may not be willing to report their information especially if they have illegal identity statuses or they are not proficient in English,' said Fienberg. 'It's also hard to count people accurately in rural or clustered urban areas.' Of course, California could also combat its declining influence by doing what it used to: attracting lots of new residents. Some signs are positive. As more companies require in-person work, people are moving back to the state and the trend could shift in the near future, said Li. 'We are still only halfway through the decade,' said Li. 'The future could look very different.'
