* As subscribers know, the Indiana Bears stadium bill is starting in the Senate, which, as we saw during re-remap, is quite an interesting group of folks.
But the Hoosier House Speaker has issued a message to the Chicago Bears even before his chamber takes up the bill…
The speaker of the Indiana House said yesterday he wants a commitment from the Chicago Bears that they will move the NFL franchise to Northwest Indiana before his chamber finalizes legislation to finance a stadium.
Speaker Todd Huston, R-Fishers, told reporters he supports a bill moving through the Indiana Senate that sets the framework for financing a stadium for the team, which has been frustrated by a lack of action on a deal in Illinois. […]
[Indiana Gov. Mike Braun] told the Indianapolis Business Journal the stadium legislation keeps Indiana “in play” with the Bears and he “would hope that something more concrete develops here within 10 days to couple weeks.” […]
A spokesperson for the Chicago Bears declined to comment on the action in Indiana and Braun declined to be specific about his conversations with the team.
So, if Huston’s position holds (and things can change), the Bears will quickly have to decide whether Indiana is merely leverage or their real destination.
* From Gov. Pritzker’s office…
The Governor has always said he wants the Bears in Illinois while maintaining a hardline against using taxpayer dollars to fund a private stadium.
At the same time, the Governor has consistently supported other efforts like public infrastructure development and giving local governments reasonable tools to offer their own incentives on large economic development projects like keeping the Bears in Illinois, which has been made clear both publicly and privately for more than two years.
It is fair for any legislators to seek certainty and clarity before spending their constituents’ taxpayer dollars, especially if it subsidizing privately-owned stadiums.
- Roadrager - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 1:19 pm:
Sounds like someone in Indiana is aware the Bears are holding a 2 and a 7 off-suit.
Fishers, by the way, is a suburb to Indy and no stranger to a stadium gambit. The WNBA Fever, ECHL Blackhawks affiliate Fuel, Major League Volleyball Ignite, and the Pacers’ G-League team all play in the facility they built.
- Peoples Republic of Oak Park - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 1:23 pm:
I would imagine this is a time for organized labor to start doing its thing on this one. Indiana is a RTW state, the trades in NWI have a pretty decent market share so I would not imagine that the building of the stadium would go bad but all of the facilities work that would be covered are going to go to scab vendors. I don’t know who represents the concession, secuirity workers, and other people who keep soldier field running smoothly but this could be a major problem for the folks who represent those workers if they dip.
- New Day - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 1:28 pm:
Bluff called. Leverage play may be in trouble. Zero chance the Bears are going to commit to that at this point - nor should they. If there was ever a chance of the Bears moving to Indiana, this could kill it. All the Bears can say is, “we are exploring all viable options and we certainly view Indiana as one of those potentially viable options.”
- Chooch - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 1:32 pm:
All the union trades people who live in northwest Indiana cross the border twice a day for our higher wages.
- Thomas Paine - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 2:08 pm:
What exactly would that “commitment” mean and how would he hold them to it?
I guess the main thing would be if The Bears publicly committed to Indiana, then Illinois and Arlington Heights would stop negotiating with them? So they truly would be committed whether they liked it or not?
It is a pretty funny situation, and I give the Speaker credit for that bold move.
I do not think the Bears really like the deal with Indiana, location issues aside, they won’t own the stadium for 35 years.
We are about to find out.
- Tom - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 2:13 pm:
The politicians are already going to get blamed for them leaving Chicago. Maybe not initially, but it will eventually happen. What’s the difference between playing in Arlington or NWI? Illinois pride? The Bears will still have a fan base and a free stadium. Economically, it makes sense. I don’t think any bluff has been called.
- Pundent - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 2:34 pm:
=What’s the difference between playing in Arlington or NWI?=
Ask the season ticket holders and suite owners as they’re the ones who would be impacted. And then consider which area is more likely to support the entertainment district the Bears are looking to create. There’s a reason that Gary has been an economically depressed area since the steel mills closed over 50 years ago.
- Jerry - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 2:34 pm:
The Bears would also be leasing the Free Stadium in Indiana. I thought they wanted to be owners instead of tenants. Did anybody explain this to President Warren?
I disagree with the Governor. The Bears already had a stadium, built to their specification, paid for with handouts. They should pay for the infrastructure too and be Good Corporate Citizens and donate the work for the public good. That shows some responsibility and Tax Certainty.
- Homebody - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 2:38 pm:
== I would imagine this is a time for organized labor to start doing its thing on this one. ==
I’m very pro workers rights, pro unionization, and pro collective bargaining. But this sort of crap is what gives unions bad names among the larger public. Spending public dollars just to create temporary work for unions isn’t a good justification to give away money to a private business.
How about we just spend those exact same dollars on public infrastructure or public projects?
- Rich Miller - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 2:41 pm:
===thought they wanted to be owners===
Read this morning’s subscriber edition. They got a sweet, sweet deal.
- Fenton - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 2:58 pm:
Interesting that the only committee amendment offered to the Bears’ bill in Indiana was to strip out the language that required minority contractor participation. No questions about how much in tax dollars is going to go to the stadium — just make sure no local Black owned firms get any of the work.
- Jerry - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 3:21 pm:
So they are really big moochers. They cant afford to build a new stadium. Sell. The. Team. Thats what a good businessman does.
- DuPage Saint - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 3:37 pm:
Indiana should require a 5 million dollar non refundable option to be applied to construction or forfeited if they walk away
- 47th Ward - Friday, Jan 23, 26 @ 4:05 pm:
Interesting move by the IN Speaker.
One angle I haven’t seen discussed much is the impact on non football events for an Indiana stadium. Does Taylor Swift or the Tolling Stones or whoever play in Hammond or at the Bear-less Soldier Field? I thought a key reason for the Bears quest for its own stadium was to capture revenue from non football events like huge concerts which go to the Park District instead under the current deal.
If that is a big driver of the strategy inside Halas Hall, that seems to make Indiana far less appealing.