The pictures are pretty but the floor for public investment for sports facilities should be an equity stake in the team. Socializing costs and privatizing profit needs to end.
I will support taxpayer subsidies for the Bears stadium if and only if they continue to call it Stadium and keep the signage in the concepts with no changes. /s
So many things about the rhetoric put forth about the Bears plan that avoids key elements:
- The contribution from the Bears will be personal seat licenses (PSLs) from fans for nearly every seat, and nothing directly from ownership, which will limit attendance at games to fewer “regular” fans while ownership avoids dipping into their own pockets.
- Taxpayers, and not the owners, will be entirely on the hook for shortfalls in hotel tax revenues.
- The “infrastructure costs” are entirely on taxpayers and nothing more than rough (and likely undervalued) estimates.
- No accounting for the “lost taxpayer investment” in the current stadium, including lost team lease payments through the end of the scheduled bond payments.
- No accounting for the inevitable departure from this new stadium by the Bears before the 40-year bonds are retired to finance it.
- No accounting for the substantial maintenance costs to keep the new city-owned stadium up to date — the Minnesota stadium that Warren helped bring about has huge maintenance costs that are now falling on taxpayers there.
- No public engagement on sites other than the lakefront that makes Chicago a world-class city.
Disappointed that Mayor Johnson has signed onto the Bears’ initial proposal, leaving others to advocate taxpayer interests that must be accounted for in any final deal. Can only imagine how the mayor (through his CTU-friendly appointees to the Chicago Board of Education) will handle the teachers contract negotiations.
It’s now 14 bucks to take the skyway , was 75 cents if I remember right when it was sold for a short term cash injection to the city . A new stadium will have a similar hit in coming years add to that a pension fix that keeps getting pushed out. Hard pass for da bears
@OneOpinion you are on it with the loss to the landlord The stadium, the parking lots, the land. what is the ownership structure regarding the current owner?
- flea - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 8:12 am:
new bull calf this morning.
- Welfare for Billionaires - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 8:52 am:
Billionaire sport team owners need to pay their own way - Chicago and the State are already facing big financial challenges. Put is to a referendum
- Grandson of Man - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 9:18 am:
Big draft day for the Bears. Shouldn’t they be concerned first with improving the team than getting a new stadium?
- Bentoh's - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 9:37 am:
The pictures are pretty but the floor for public investment for sports facilities should be an equity stake in the team. Socializing costs and privatizing profit needs to end.
- ChicagoVinny - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 9:45 am:
I will support taxpayer subsidies for the Bears stadium if and only if they continue to call it Stadium and keep the signage in the concepts with no changes. /s
- vern - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 10:14 am:
Happy Caleb Williams Day to all who are celebrating. I assume that doesn’t include Caleb Williams.
- OneOpinion - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 10:24 am:
So many things about the rhetoric put forth about the Bears plan that avoids key elements:
- The contribution from the Bears will be personal seat licenses (PSLs) from fans for nearly every seat, and nothing directly from ownership, which will limit attendance at games to fewer “regular” fans while ownership avoids dipping into their own pockets.
- Taxpayers, and not the owners, will be entirely on the hook for shortfalls in hotel tax revenues.
- The “infrastructure costs” are entirely on taxpayers and nothing more than rough (and likely undervalued) estimates.
- No accounting for the “lost taxpayer investment” in the current stadium, including lost team lease payments through the end of the scheduled bond payments.
- No accounting for the inevitable departure from this new stadium by the Bears before the 40-year bonds are retired to finance it.
- No accounting for the substantial maintenance costs to keep the new city-owned stadium up to date — the Minnesota stadium that Warren helped bring about has huge maintenance costs that are now falling on taxpayers there.
- No public engagement on sites other than the lakefront that makes Chicago a world-class city.
Disappointed that Mayor Johnson has signed onto the Bears’ initial proposal, leaving others to advocate taxpayer interests that must be accounted for in any final deal. Can only imagine how the mayor (through his CTU-friendly appointees to the Chicago Board of Education) will handle the teachers contract negotiations.
- Lurker - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 10:48 am:
3-21
*smh*
- Hank Sauer - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 11:14 am:
It’s now 14 bucks to take the skyway , was 75 cents if I remember right when it was sold for a short term cash injection to the city . A new stadium will have a similar hit in coming years add to that a pension fix that keeps getting pushed out. Hard pass for da bears
- Amalia - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 12:57 pm:
@OneOpinion you are on it with the loss to the landlord The stadium, the parking lots, the land. what is the ownership structure regarding the current owner?
- Gravitas - Thursday, Apr 25, 24 @ 3:47 pm:
Former Chicago Mayor Edward Kelly feature prominently in stock footage about Wrigley Field being 110 years old.
https://youtu.be/b818-npMxkI