* 6:24 pm - Jim Thompson pulls out for now. From a press release…
Press Statement of Governor James R. Thompson, Chairman, Illinois Sports Facilities Authority
The Chicago Tribune organization and representatives of the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority met today to determine whether we could reach an agreement on a plan for ISFA (the current owner of U.S. Cellular, the home of the Chicago White Sox) to acquire and restore Wrigley Field.
The Tribune believes that ISFA’s participation in such an acquisition requires either the transfer of future sales and amusement tax revenue from transactions at Wrigley Field for the next 30 years, or the imposition of new taxes, or the transfer of existing ISFA funds now pledged to projects at U.S. Cellular. ISFA cannot agree to this. In our judgment, there are no votes in the City Council or in the Illinois General Assembly for transferred or new taxes for Wrigley Field. And we cannot break the promises we have previously made to the White Sox under our lease terms.
We believe that we would be able to offer the owner of the Cubs (present or future) a plan whereby ISFA could acquire Wrigley Field through the issuance of taxable bonds paid for by lease revenues from the team and associated naming rights. This would cost Illinois taxpayers nothing.
We believe that sufficient funds can be raised from the sale of newly constructed seats in an Equity Seats Rights offering which would give the new owners of the team a fully restored Wrigley Field. This would be done within the policies and rules of Major League Baseball, would produce more revenue that would allow the Cubs to be even more competitive, the fans and players to enjoy enhanced facilities, the neighborhood to enjoy more amenities and parking. This would cost Illinois taxpayers nothing.
When Governor Blagojevich asked ISFA to explore this opportunity, he wanted to insure that under new ownerships the Cubs would stay at Wrigley Field in Chicago and that Wrigley Field would be restored. We have no doubt that these two goals will be reached — whether or not ISFA acquires and restores Wrigley.
We stand ready to resume negotiations with the Tribune or any new owner of the Cubs at their request.
- archpundit - Monday, Jun 9, 08 @ 6:35 pm:
The question not answered is why the Tribune Company could not issue such bonds on their own–that would be very similar to what the Cardinals did actually.
- Cubs Fan - Monday, Jun 9, 08 @ 6:46 pm:
Does that say naming rights of the field
- Levois - Monday, Jun 9, 08 @ 6:50 pm:
Good news I suppose. I wonder what the Cubs plan to do.
- problem - Monday, Jun 9, 08 @ 6:59 pm:
Its OK, renovation will still happen.
But, now, it will come at the cost of TIF tax dollars approved by the City Council and probably some State money thrown in via a grant down the road.
Its a shame. Would have been better for ISFA to take ownership and do it their way.
- Plutocrat03 - Monday, Jun 9, 08 @ 7:43 pm:
duuuuuh
I’ve got a secret. The new owners of the cubs will be able to build/rebuild themselves. What a concept.
As Russian comedian Jakov Smirnoff says, “What a country!
- Gregor - Monday, Jun 9, 08 @ 10:30 pm:
You know, I think a Governor Thompson could have pulled this off, even Edgar or Ryan might have. But not Blago. Everything is so poisoned and balled-up, there is such chaos and ruin, that Jim saw the writing on the outfield wall and gave up. Ironic, since Blago keeps insisting he’s the ultimate Cub fan.
I have to agree, it is hard to ask taxpayers to pay for renovations to a private field owned by a private corporation with many millions of dollars. But I think that’s how the really rich STAY rich; they find ways to use Other People’s Money for everything.
I like the Cubs, I think Wrigley Field is a classic urban treasure and part of the city heritage. I think though that the owners should pay for the bulk of the restoration.
- Louis G. Atsaves - Monday, Jun 9, 08 @ 10:31 pm:
Whew! What a relief. I kept envisioning another Soldier Field with a spaceship plopped inside the walls of Wrigley Field.
Let the new owners purchase it and deal with it.
- liz - Tuesday, Jun 10, 08 @ 12:08 am:
Let the man who bought the Cubs and Wrigley pay for the improvements himself. Why should any tax money even be considered when many people are just managing to get through day byd ay as it is. Greedy, rich people with the desire to have fun on someone else’s dime.
- VanillaMan - Tuesday, Jun 10, 08 @ 9:14 am:
Sounds like political reality has reaffirmed itself.
- wordslinger - Tuesday, Jun 10, 08 @ 9:28 am:
This deal stunk from the beginning. it was always about maximizing profit for Zell; the state had no interest.
A couple of interesting items about the Cubs came up the last couple of days.
One, Mark Cuban said the value of the Cubs franchise would go be less if it were purchased without Wrigley Field.
Second, a Sun-Times columnist speculated that Zell doesn’t fully understand that baseball’s anti-trust exemption gives the other owners veto power over any deal he might make for the team.
- The Doc - Tuesday, Jun 10, 08 @ 10:26 am:
Wordslinger, your second point is exactly why Mark Cuban will never, ever own the Cubs. MLB likes its owners to be cut from a very specific type of cloth, and Cuban doesn’t fit the mold. John Canning (via Madison Dearborn Partners) is a much better bet, and his relationship with Bud Selig, plus local ties, make him the front runner.