While the Illinois General Assembly didn’t end up passing legislation this session that helped or hurt the Chicago Bears’ stadium efforts, one suburban lawmaker said the legislature got close to a deal on property tax legislation — a measure widely seen as a way to ease a team move to Arlington Heights.
“We were super close and just ran out of time,” state Rep. Mary Beth Canty, a Democrat who represents the northwest suburb and surrounding areas, said Sunday.
Rep. Kam Buckner pushed back on the idea that any agreement was close, as no deal was ever actually introduced in the legislature.
“The Bears have made it clear — they no longer want to be in Chicago. That’s their decision,” Buckner, a Chicago Democrat whose district includes Soldier Field, said in a text message Sunday. “But if they want to leave and use state dollars or ask for special tax protections to do it, they’ll have to come through Springfield. And in Springfield, that means facing the Chicago delegation directly.”
As House Speaker Pro Tempore Buckner told Isabel on Friday about a rumor that language to help the Bears build a stadium in Arlington Heights might be included in the BIMP: “I would take serious umbrage with that.” If a top leader says something like that and can’t follow, then he’s not a top leader.
Yeah, and the Reinsdorfs/Wirtzes have come super close to getting a deal to be on Xfinity, they just merely failed to get Comcast, the only party whose opinion actually matters, to agree to their terms.
The only funding I would support for a new Bears stadium is only for one in Decatur. Forcing them to come back home to the Land of Staley. A new Bears stadium would be great next to the Farm Progress Show permanent (albeit every 2 years) site.
Otherwise, not one dime for any professional sports teams.
There are a some things that Speaker Welch’s 60-Dem vote rule make darn near impossible. Extending the sunset on the private school tax credit scholarship was one. A bill to help the Bears leave Chicago is another. You can’t get to 60 without the Chicago members of the caucus. And why would any member of the General Assembly vote for a bill to incentivize a business to leave a town they represent? The Bears are gonna have to pair up their efforts with something Chicago members want.
Knowing Jerry, he probably thinks that Xfinity and Comcast are complete separate companies. When Xfinity is actually the same old Comcast crud rebranded into a “cool futuristic” name.
“Yeah, and the Reinsdorfs/Wirtzes have come super close to getting a deal to be on Xfinity”
If you’re a Cubs fan, you don’t want that to happen.
Xfinity has said that the moment that it comes to an agreement with CHSN, Xfinity will place both, CHSN and Marquee, on its Ultimate TV tier, costing 20 dollars a month more than its Popular TV tier
Arlington Heights is still Cook County, the Bears will get something.
Certainly not all they want but something that site will generate money for the County and that is something
They do not need nor should they get much but it is a business that will generate jobs and income
=Xfinity will place both, CHSN and Marquee, on its Ultimate TV tier, costing 20 dollars a month more than its Popular TV tier=
They have already done that with the Fanduel Sports Midwest (whatever used to most recently be Bally Sports, originally Fox Sports Midwest) or whatever it’s called that has Cardinals and Blues games. Up on the highest tiers they go, as opposed to being put with “popular TV tier” aka “regular cable” (i.e., still on channels under 100).
- Friendly Bob Adams - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 11:57 am:
Watching sports on tv is becoming way too expensive. Attending games is way too expensive. The trend is not good.
Three quick predictions: 1) the Bears “mega project” bill fails to move in veto session 2) Bears threaten to move to Northwest Indiana 3) No one believes them
President Warren works for a private corporation worth gazillions. No need for Government Handouts. Pay for it yourselves. Especially since it looks like your games will go behind a paywall with the new TV contract.
- thechampaignlife - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 12:13 pm:
The Chicago delegation should offer their support of a bill moving the Bears to Arlington Park, contingent on extending the Chicago city limits 12 miles along a narrow corridor of railroad tracks to the new stadium location.
==it is a business that will generate jobs and income==
Which the team is now, in Chicago. There’s no net gain to the county or state to having the team move to Arlington Heights. The only loss is having the team move to another state entirely. Maybe San Diego is up for giving big tax breaks to losing teams, but I don’t see Illinois doing it.
=== There’s no net gain to the county or state to having the team move to Arlington Heights. ===
Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner.
The Bears want a deal that means they will not be paying additional property taxes.
Also, if you ask around, I bet that Arlington Heights voters are not that crazy about it either.
A stadium just means traffic gridlock anytime there is an event.
People in Arlington Heights are not going to be landing jobs hawking beers at the games.
If The Bears are winning, there might be a smidge more “Hometown Pride.” But fighting through traffic on a Sunday when the Bears are 3-11 is only going to remind voters they got a sweetheart deal.
I’ve always looked at this beyond the Bears. The United Center holds 23,000 max for concerts and about 21,000 for Bulls games. For comparisons sake, the Cowboys stadium (which is in Arlington, not Dallas) holds 80,000 but can go up to 105,000. The NCAA requires a minumum of 60,000 seats for a Final Four. If the onus is on the locals and a similar incentive is available for other communities (I doubt there will be), this makes sense. I think we automatically get a Super Bowl with the new stadium too.
=The NCAA requires a minumum of 60,000 seats for a Final Four.=
I realize that Final Four hosting standards have probably changed in the last 30+ years since the UC was built, but you would think that the UC would have been built with at least a capacity of 60 to 100k in mind, all with the idea “they want to come see Mike.” Typical Krauses and Reinsdorfs failing to plan for the future.
The UC is plenty big (for an indoor arena). It’s the largest capacity NBA arena. The issue is that over the last decade major (non-NFL events) have migrated to football stadiums, which we’re never really designed for those type of events because of the greater capacity and money they can make off of that
- TJ - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 9:26 am:
Yeah, and the Reinsdorfs/Wirtzes have come super close to getting a deal to be on Xfinity, they just merely failed to get Comcast, the only party whose opinion actually matters, to agree to their terms.
- Candy Dogood - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 9:29 am:
It is a little entertaining that the Chicago Bears’ approach to lobby has turned the Chicago Bears into a poison pill.
- Leatherneck - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 9:35 am:
The only funding I would support for a new Bears stadium is only for one in Decatur. Forcing them to come back home to the Land of Staley. A new Bears stadium would be great next to the Farm Progress Show permanent (albeit every 2 years) site.
Otherwise, not one dime for any professional sports teams.
- McD - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 9:48 am:
There are a some things that Speaker Welch’s 60-Dem vote rule make darn near impossible. Extending the sunset on the private school tax credit scholarship was one. A bill to help the Bears leave Chicago is another. You can’t get to 60 without the Chicago members of the caucus. And why would any member of the General Assembly vote for a bill to incentivize a business to leave a town they represent? The Bears are gonna have to pair up their efforts with something Chicago members want.
- Dupage - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 10:05 am:
Bears leave Chicago and move to Arlington Heights. That would be the best thing they could do.
- Leatherneck - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 10:09 am:
Knowing Jerry, he probably thinks that Xfinity and Comcast are complete separate companies. When Xfinity is actually the same old Comcast crud rebranded into a “cool futuristic” name.
- The Farm Grad - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 10:09 am:
“Yeah, and the Reinsdorfs/Wirtzes have come super close to getting a deal to be on Xfinity”
If you’re a Cubs fan, you don’t want that to happen.
Xfinity has said that the moment that it comes to an agreement with CHSN, Xfinity will place both, CHSN and Marquee, on its Ultimate TV tier, costing 20 dollars a month more than its Popular TV tier
- Day by Day - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 10:32 am:
Click bait is exactly right. This was never going to happen.
- DuPage Saint - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 11:01 am:
Arlington Heights is still Cook County, the Bears will get something.
Certainly not all they want but something that site will generate money for the County and that is something
They do not need nor should they get much but it is a business that will generate jobs and income
- Leatherneck - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 11:19 am:
=Xfinity will place both, CHSN and Marquee, on its Ultimate TV tier, costing 20 dollars a month more than its Popular TV tier=
They have already done that with the Fanduel Sports Midwest (whatever used to most recently be Bally Sports, originally Fox Sports Midwest) or whatever it’s called that has Cardinals and Blues games. Up on the highest tiers they go, as opposed to being put with “popular TV tier” aka “regular cable” (i.e., still on channels under 100).
- Friendly Bob Adams - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 11:57 am:
Watching sports on tv is becoming way too expensive. Attending games is way too expensive. The trend is not good.
- TNR - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 12:06 pm:
Three quick predictions: 1) the Bears “mega project” bill fails to move in veto session 2) Bears threaten to move to Northwest Indiana 3) No one believes them
- Jerry - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 12:07 pm:
President Warren works for a private corporation worth gazillions. No need for Government Handouts. Pay for it yourselves. Especially since it looks like your games will go behind a paywall with the new TV contract.
- thechampaignlife - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 12:13 pm:
The Chicago delegation should offer their support of a bill moving the Bears to Arlington Park, contingent on extending the Chicago city limits 12 miles along a narrow corridor of railroad tracks to the new stadium location.
- Formerly Unemployed - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 12:48 pm:
==it is a business that will generate jobs and income==
Which the team is now, in Chicago. There’s no net gain to the county or state to having the team move to Arlington Heights. The only loss is having the team move to another state entirely. Maybe San Diego is up for giving big tax breaks to losing teams, but I don’t see Illinois doing it.
- Streator Curmudgeon - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 12:58 pm:
==“I would take serious umbrage with that.”==
Besides Foghorn Leghorn, who says ‘umbrage’ any more?
- Thomas Paine - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 1:01 pm:
=== There’s no net gain to the county or state to having the team move to Arlington Heights. ===
Winner, winner, Chicken Dinner.
The Bears want a deal that means they will not be paying additional property taxes.
Also, if you ask around, I bet that Arlington Heights voters are not that crazy about it either.
A stadium just means traffic gridlock anytime there is an event.
People in Arlington Heights are not going to be landing jobs hawking beers at the games.
If The Bears are winning, there might be a smidge more “Hometown Pride.” But fighting through traffic on a Sunday when the Bears are 3-11 is only going to remind voters they got a sweetheart deal.
- levivotedforjudy - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 1:17 pm:
I’ve always looked at this beyond the Bears. The United Center holds 23,000 max for concerts and about 21,000 for Bulls games. For comparisons sake, the Cowboys stadium (which is in Arlington, not Dallas) holds 80,000 but can go up to 105,000. The NCAA requires a minumum of 60,000 seats for a Final Four. If the onus is on the locals and a similar incentive is available for other communities (I doubt there will be), this makes sense. I think we automatically get a Super Bowl with the new stadium too.
- Leatherneck - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 1:36 pm:
=The NCAA requires a minumum of 60,000 seats for a Final Four.=
I realize that Final Four hosting standards have probably changed in the last 30+ years since the UC was built, but you would think that the UC would have been built with at least a capacity of 60 to 100k in mind, all with the idea “they want to come see Mike.” Typical Krauses and Reinsdorfs failing to plan for the future.
- Paul Powell - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 3:12 pm:
The United Center has the largest seating capacity of any basketball/ hockey arena in the US.
No NBA or NHL team would want to play in an NFL domed stadium
- IlliniSpartan - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 3:22 pm:
The UC is plenty big (for an indoor arena). It’s the largest capacity NBA arena. The issue is that over the last decade major (non-NFL events) have migrated to football stadiums, which we’re never really designed for those type of events because of the greater capacity and money they can make off of that
- Candy Dogood - Monday, Jun 2, 25 @ 7:37 pm:
===Bears threaten to move to Northwest Indiana===
The Gary Indiana Chicago Bears.