Previous versions of this story misstated the number of port board members approving a 2011 agreement. The vote was 6-0. The story also misstated the nature of a meeting between the port and Browns officials. The meeting concerned the Browns' lakefront development proposals. Lastly, the Browns say that the team did not propose changing the rental fee for parking from $225,000 to $200,000. Port officials say that change resulted from the Browns completing paying back the port for capital improvements.

CLEVELAND, Ohio — Federal corruption investigators have subpoenaed the Cleveland-Cuyahoga County Port Authority for records dealing with parking lot leases with the Cleveland Browns, including a price-cutting deal approved last year.

The subpoena makes no mention of what investigators suspect, but a member of the port’s governing board accused some of his colleagues in May 2011 of meeting illegally with the Browns to discuss the team’s development proposals for the port.

And the board’s first vote on the price cut resulted in a 3-3 tie, with one member absent, though the board voted 6-0 two months later in favor of a similar deal.

Port Authority President and CEO Will Friedman said Wednesday that the subpoena came as a surprise.

"I have no idea what it’s all about, I am really clueless," Friedman said. "Obviously, we will comply and get everything together as quickly as we can."

The subpoena was issued by Assistant U.S. Attorney Antoinette Bacon, one of the lead prosecutors in the ongoing Cuyahoga County corruption investigation, which resulted in the March racketeering conviction of former county Commissioner Jimmy Dimora.

Bacon sought all records dealing with parking lot deals, including communications documents and records of invoices and payments. She instructed port officials to turn over the materials to an FBI agent, who will present evidence to a federal grand jury meeting May 22.

A spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office declined to say whether the subpoena means corruption investigators are now looking into the tax-supported port.

Fred Nance, an attorney representing the Browns, said Wednesday that the team has not been served with a subpoena and does not consider itself the subject of an investigation.

Nance said the lease agreement reached last year with the port removed risks faced by both sides and "balanced the interests" of the two.

"The Browns have had an agreement in place with the Port Authority for many years," Nance said. "Our lease has always been about securing as much parking as possible for our fans that is safe, convenient and affordable."

For more than 30 years, the Browns have leased thousands of parking spaces on Port of Cleveland docks west of the stadium. The Browns had paid the port $225,000 a year from 2000 until last year.

Last year, the port and Browns negotiated a new deal that reduced the base fee from $225,000 to $200,000. The Browns and the port say that the team did not request the reduction. Port officials say that change resulted from the Browns having completed paying back the port for capital improvements.

Minutes of port board meetings indicate that the Browns sought a pro-rated discount if the team played less than 10 home games because of a threatened NFL players strike that never materialized.

The minutes also state that construction projects on the dock property and downtown had forced the port to reduce the number of parking spaces available to the team by 1,150 — leaving the Browns with 3,878 spaces within easy walking distance of Browns Stadium.

At a May 2011 meeting, three board members objected to granting a concession to the Browns.

"It’s setting a bad precedent, pro-rating and discounting parking rates because they’re not doing so well," board member Richard Knoth said at the meeting.

At the same meeting, Knoth accused three of his colleagues of meeting illegally with Browns officials.

Board member Steve Williams joined Knoth and Robert Peto in voting against the proposed lease deal, arguing that it appeared as if the port was subsidizing the Browns. Their three dissents resulted in a tie vote.

But at their next meeting in July, board members voted 6-0 to approve a deal that included a $25,000 price cut and the pro-rated discount for missed home games. But the revised deal called for the Browns to pay the port $20,000 for each of any home playoff games.

Knoth and board President Robert Smith did not return calls Wednesday to explain the board’s about face. Board member Anthony Moore declined to comment.

Friedman said Wednesday that the revised deal is a better bargain for the port because the Browns are paying more per parking space than under the previous agreement.

"I’m just perplexed," he said. "The deal was open and above board. There were no concessions on our part. We balanced their desires with ours."