39 Comments » - Rahm's Parking Meter - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:03 pm: “Wake me up before you go-go Don’t leave me hanging on like a yo-yo, we’ll be here in Arlington Heights..” With disagreement to Sen. Cunningham, as Marc Silverman of ESPN 1000 said to the Kane County Chronicle, it is a topic in the northern burbs and it is more talked about than Caleb Williams losing DJ Moore. - Southsider - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:11 pm: I’m one of Senator Cunningham’s constituents and I agree with him. Also a lot of us would rather they just go to Hammond instead of Arlington Heights if they can’t get them to stay in Chicago. Closer for those going to the game and a lot easier for anyone who works at the games. Out of towners will also opt to stay downtown Chicago and spend their money there. If they go to Arlington they will stay and eat and drink in Arlington, Schaumburg or Rosemont. - Johnny B - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:17 pm: Were your constituents coming to your office to lobby about the tax certainty for the new soccer stadium or United Center expansion granted? Do you think the Bears staying in Illinois with a PILOT program for the stadium like every other city including Los Angeles seems is able to structure would ultimately generate more tax revenue, jobs and economic activity for Illinois residents? Is it good for the state of Illinois to carry the prestige of world class facility, suitable for the Super Bowl and Final 4 or can you stomach the words “we go live to Hammond Indiana for this Super Bowl broadcast? - Rich Miller - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:17 pm: ===Marc Silverman of ESPN 1000 said to the Kane County Chronicle, it is a topic in the northern burbs=== So, a sports talk dude who spends his life in that bubble is you evidence that regular people are talking about it? Anecdotes are not data. - Keyrock - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:19 pm: Economists and voters agree: Don’t spend lots of taxpayer money on a sports stadium that benefits the wealthy owners. - Downstate - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:21 pm: I’d suggest that with proper infrastructure, getting out of Hammond and into downtown Chicago, will be the same travel time as trying get out of Soldier Field. NW Suburbs might have it even better. - Remember the Alamo II - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:24 pm: === Is it good for the state of Illinois to carry the prestige of world class facility, suitable for the Super Bowl and Final 4 or can you stomach the words “we go live to Hammond Indiana for this Super Bowl broadcast? === That isn’t really the question to be asked. The question that should be asked is “Does keeping the Bears in Illinois take priority over all of the other critical issues that need to be addressed?” The answer is “No”. - StarLineChicago - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:27 pm: == can you stomach the words “we go live to Hammond Indiana for this Super Bowl broadcast?== Absolutely. I don’t think New York City loses any sleep over the Giants and Jets playing in New Jersey. MetLife Stadium has only hosted one Super Bowl since it opened 16 years ago, by the way. Same with Lucas Oil Stadium in Indianapolis. Zero reason to believe the Bears would get more than one Super Bowl hosting gig in the next 25 years regardless of where they end up. - Three Dimensional Checkers - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:28 pm: “No one has come to my office to complain about the Bears stadium” is also an anecdote, just saying. It is hard to know with data how voters would react if the Bears leave. - Rahm's Parking Meter - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:32 pm: No, Rich, it is more than a sports talk dude, I hear it as well. My Rep, Rep. Canty also addressed it at her town hall for over 20 minutes last night in Prospect Heights. - Google is Your Friend - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:54 pm: ==- Johnny B - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:17 pm:== Name the repeat northern Super Bowls. You won’t be able to because there haven’t been any. The NFL threw a bone a few times to Detroit, Minnesota, and New Jersey, but only as one-offs. If there was a Hammond Super Bowl, it’d be one and done never to be heard from again. - NIU Grad - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:57 pm: Wait, I thought Indiana was a final decision? Are they implying that the announcement on that was another sad attempt at leverage by an out-of-touch leadership team at the Bears? I’m shocked! - Proud Papa Bear - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:59 pm: I also have anecdotal stories of people (regular people, not sports radio hosts) talking about it here in McHenry County, where a trip to Hammond would be about two hours. The overall consensus is: let them go. By the way, why are people so hung up on where the Super Bowl is hosted? It’s highly unlikely that most people could afford the tickets, even if they could access them. Are we that desperate to have the country think about our area? - Flyin' Elvis'-Utah Chapter - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:59 pm: Welch called the Bear’s busted straight. …and Warren should have never sat at the table. - Google is Your Friend - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 1:10 pm: ==- Rahm’s Parking Meter - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 12:32 pm:== A person whose district stands to personally benefit. Again, is there a groundswell in Mussman’s district? What about Cassidy? Ann Williams? Harper? Slaughter? Will Davis? Go on down the line to Scherer and then swing over the Metro East. Add in the Republicans. Nobody cares outside of the immediate area of Arlington Heights, which is the area that would benefit. The Bears are running their same failed 1990s playbook all over again. It would be pathetic if it weren’t so familiar. 1995, Crain’s: https://archive.ph/LhXwQ - Jerry - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 1:13 pm: The “super bowl” is a TV show that Hammond may get once every 50 years. If Indiana has trillions of dollars of taxpayers money to hand out for such an frivolous purpose more power to them. Bear down Hammond Bears! - Frequent Commenter - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 1:22 pm: 1. I disagree with Senator Cunningham - it is one of the Top 3 constituent issues being heard 2. For those saying let them go - The Bears currently bring in close to $40M a year in tax revenue. Income tax on both Home & Away players income, Sales tax on tickets, parking, concessions, stadium merchandise, Hotel Taxes, etc. IMO - Not to many institutions coming to Illinois that can replace that type of income - H-W - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 1:25 pm: === Why else would the Bears still be talking to Illinois lawmakers? === Indiana sticks? - H-W - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 1:26 pm: Sticks = Stinks - DS - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 1:33 pm: The Hammond Bears would be better for the City of chicago than the Arlington Heights Bears. Let them leave. - JS Mill - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 1:41 pm: =I also have anecdotal stories of people (regular people, not sports radio hosts) talking about it here in McHenry County,…+ I see your anecdote and addmine… Where I live I have yet to hear a single comment in support of money for the bears. - Proud Papa Bear - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 1:59 pm: = The Bears currently bring in close to $40M a year in tax revenue.= At that rate, it’d take 20 years to break even just on the $800 million in infrastructure. - Rich Miller - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:05 pm: ===The Bears currently bring in close to $40M a year in tax revenue=== ===At that rate, it’d take 20 years to break even just on the $800 million in infrastructure. === With a $41 million annual payment at 4 percent interest, it would take 40 years to pay off that debt. - Sox Fan - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:10 pm: ==Were your constituents coming to your office to lobby about the tax certainty for the new soccer stadium or United Center expansion granted?°== Neither of those required state assistance - Benniefly2 - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:11 pm: “$40M a year in tax revenue. Income tax on both Home & Away players income, Sales tax on tickets, parking, concessions, stadium merchandise, Hotel Taxes, etc.” Okay… First of all, the players aren’t moving out of Illinois. Hallas Hall is in Lake Forest. Their income tax is going nowhere. Secondly, you really think out of town fans will stay in Gary or Whitting when coming to town for a bears game or a concert??? No. They will still be staying downtown and eating in the city. 95% of the hotel and food sales tax revenue is staying here. Losing tax sales revenue at the stadium for maybe 11 to 12 games per season plus a few concerts is what Illinois will lose. I will be generous and say that is $10 million per year. So if Illinois gives them a billion or a billion and half dollar subsidy, that should pay itself off with in 100 to 150 years if you ignore inflation. Folks… Not a single one of these publicly subsidized football stadiums has ever even come close to paying back what was given to them. Not one. If Indiana wants to be a sucker, let Indiana be a sucker. - Archpundit - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:13 pm: Every independent study that I’m aware of finds that sports stadium subsidies aren’t worth what they cost to the government and city, but that’s especially true for football where there are limited number of games. - Six Degrees of Separation - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:23 pm: As an issue of discussion, the talk around my office is usually oriented toward the exhaustive and sometimes laughable process this new stadium is going through, and not whether it will be a benefit to the state. No one wants their taxes to go up, especially when the property tax bills just went out. As far as the infrastructure is concerned, maybe the Bears just get their tax certainty locally, build their stadium, do the minimum to address “infrastructure”, and if traffic gets too bad for a few Sundays in the fall, maybe the state will do something about it. People deal with it at Soldier Field, and attendance seems to fluctuate with how the team is doing moreso than any concern about the logistics of getting to and from the game. - Jerry - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:29 pm: Agree with Archpundit, except this is NOT a sports stadium. Its a TV studio that will broadcast a show 10 times a year. Pay the taxes. Sell the team. Get a loan. But dont mooch off of taxpayers. - Frequent Commenter - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:33 pm: So infrastructure improvements (not Stadium or Parking) now have a different ROI standard because it is the Bears? If the Bears leave Soldier Field, should the City or State pay the $630M in improvement requests being asked by the Chicago Park District? - Rich Miller - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:37 pm: ===now have a different ROI standard because it is the Bears? === Who said that? - Rich Miller - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:47 pm: ===If the Bears leave Soldier Field, should the City or State pay the $630M in improvement requests being asked by the Chicago Park District? === You’ve also conflated two completely different things. One is a private company. The other is a city park district. - Amalia - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:53 pm: of course no one is contacting a South Side elected official on the Bears. they still are not loved by many over there. Cardinals forever to some. the new stadium in Hammond would be a fine drive for South Siders. it’s the NW burbs folks who might be angry. - Frequent Commenter - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:53 pm: I believe the statements of 20 years or 41 years to pay back an $800M infrastructure investment imply ROI. To BennieFly2: you might want to look up the State Tax codes. Illinois is one of the States where State Income tax is collected on where you work. That is also why we collect a State Income Tax on every player who is “working” at Soldier Field independent of residence. - Frequent Commenter - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 2:58 pm: Rich, I do not see the “Conflation” (if that is even a word) Yes, Soldier Field is owned by the CPD, but it is not a place that is for the benefit of everyone. An attendee of an event at SF still needs to pay $$$ for the ticket that benefits a Private entity. Ie Taylor Swift concert. - Six Degrees of Separation - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 3:13 pm: ===If the Bears leave Soldier Field, should the City or State pay the $630M in improvement requests being asked by the Chicago Park District?=== I vote no. When the ISFA put together the funding/taxing structure for the Soldier Field renovation, the various parties to the agreement all contributed what was agreed to, and the hotel tax was supposed to carry all the remaining expense of retiring the bonds, and as far as I know has no sunset provision. That it didn’t perform as expected (largely blamed on low revenues for a few years due to COVID) doesn’t mean it couldn’t be adjusted, or left in place for longer than expected, to pay everything off. The possibility of the Bears not renewing their lease was acknowledged in the original agreement. - The Farm Grad - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 3:16 pm: Watching the USNMT last night on Telemundo. Commentator announced that USMNT next game would take place at San Jose-adjacent “estadio del área de la bahía de San Francisco” And I’m thinking, that’s precisely how a Hammond stadium would be described for a SB or FIFA game: Chicago Area Lakefront Stadium !!!!! - Frequent Commenter - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 3:29 pm: Six Degress…You are correct. 2% ISFA Hotel Tax will pay off the bonds in 2032-33. The City will then be reimbursed for the LGDF deductions that the State took for the years when the 2% would not cover the bond payments (primarily due to Covid) after that the 2% goes to McPier in perpetuity. It will take State action to modify this current course. Ie which could include a refurbishment of SF, or White Sox, or Stars, or ??? - Lisa - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 3:32 pm: I’m not a fan of Bears subsidies but why is someone who’s been given the role of “lead negotiator” openly stating that he cares not about the state in general but only for his constituents? - Rich Miller - Friday, Jun 26, 26 @ 4:06 pm: ===if that is even a word=== LOL Of course it’s a word. Look it up. Sheesh. Just because you’re ignorant about something doesn’t mean it isn’t real. TrackBack URI Anonymous commenters, uncivil comments, rumor-mongering, disinformation and profanity of any kind will be deleted. Name/Nickname - Required (required) E-mail - Not required (not required) URL - Not required