Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: Isabel’s afternoon roundup
Posted in:
* Gov. JB Pritzker was asked today about his thoughts on the Bears’ domed stadium proposal…
Well, let me start out by saying I’m a Bears fan.
But you know, before I became governor, I was a businessman, and I’ve tried to be a good steward of taxpayer dollars throughout my term in office. And as you know, I’ve been very active in attracting businesses to Illinois and helping companies in Illinois expand. So that’s something that I do with, again, the role of protector of the Illinois taxpayers dollars in mind at all times.
But I remain skeptical about this proposal. And I wonder whether it’s a good deal for the taxpayers. It’s early and I have not even heard the announcement today, but obviously read your reporting and others. But it’s very important to me that with all the state needs to accomplish, that, you know, we think about what the priorities are of the state. You know, here we stand talking about the Health Care Protection Act. Later today I’m going to be talking more about birth equity, and helping to build birth centers in areas of the state where people don’t have options for their for giving birth, that are outside of hospitals. And that requires capital. There are a lot of priorities the state has and I’m not sure that this is among the highest priorities for taxpayers.
Q: …I know you’ve also said you’re open to listening to proposals from sports teams. What would it take to put the Bears over the finish line with this? Given, you know, are there any lessons to be learned from the last 20-30 years and state governments familiarity with this topic?
Pritzker: Well, maybe one lesson that can be learned just from the last few years is stadium deals and taxpayers putting money forward for stadium deals, not particularly popular around the country.
Take note that the winner of the Super Bowls this year, the team went out to try to get a stadium financed by the public and it was rejected by the public in a place where the Super Bowl champions reside. And I think this is, you know, a recognition that these are private businesses, that the owners of these private businesses need to put a lot more forward in order to get, you know, have their dreams fulfilled and not just rely upon the taxpayers of Illinois to make that happen for them.
Having said that, I think all of us want success for the state. We want more commerce, we want more jobs, we want our teams to be successful. So you know we share all of that in common, but we’ve got to use our dollars wisely.
Please pardon any transcription errors.
You can watch the team’s press conference today on the Bears’ homepage.
…Adding… Bears President and CEO Kevin Warren was introduced as the man who shepherded Minnesota Vikings’ new stadium project. From a recent local newspaper story…
U.S. Bank Stadium, the home of the Minnesota Vikings, will require some $280 million in maintenance to remain in top condition over the next decade, including nearly $48 million next year, according to an architectural assessment released Friday.
…Adding… Mayor Johnson is going all-in with effusive praise, and claimed: “This project will result in no new taxes on the residents of Chicago.” Except, nobody has yet said how that new capital spending will be paid for.
…Adding… The mayor just said the new venue would host several events. What he doesn’t say is that the plan allows the Bears to keep the revenues from those events.
…Adding… Is it weird that they’re doing a splashy news media briefing before briefing the governor?
…Adding… This is the capital plan. The Bears claim they’ve worked “closely with the state” on funding sources, but the governor’s office says they haven’t talked to them about it…
That’s $1.5 billion in capital longterm.
Also note the fine print at the bottom. “Financial forecasts subject to change.”
…Adding… $15 million for the state ain’t much. Just sayin…
…Adding… Click here for the full press release. Renderings are here. Economic impact study is here.
…Adding… Gov. Pritzker just pointed out during another press conference that three professional sports teams are hoping to build new stadiums, but the Bears plan uses all the available bonding authority for this project, leaving nothing for the other two.
…Adding… Isabel just asked how the capital plan will be funded. “There are dollars that we believe exist at the state level, at the potentially federal level, [and] at the city level,” CEO Williams said. So, he didn’t answer the question.
Isabel asked a follow-up about specific funding from the state, but Williams would only say “We do look forward to having some detailed conversations with the state here in the near future.”
…Adding… Senate President Harmon react…
Senate President Don Harmon (D-Oak Park) issued the following statement regarding the Chicago Bears’ stadium proposal unveiled Wednesday:
“At first glance, more than $2 billion in private funding is better than zero and a more credible opening offer. But there’s an obvious, substantial gap remaining, and I echo the governor’s skepticism.”
…Adding… House Speaker Chris Welch…
The Speaker is happy to continue engaging in conversations regarding the future of our Chicago teams, and is encouraged by the private investments being proposed. In the current legislative environment, with many important budget pressures, there hasn’t been a strong appetite for these projects. Environments can and do often change in Springfield, but the Speaker’s priority is to stay focused on passing a balanced budget and continuing the positive outlook we saw announced by Moody’s yesterday.
Welch also told reporters today that if he put this plan on the big board today it would fail miserably.
…Adding… Asked if he thought the plan could run this spring or if they would wait until the veto session, Warren said…
I mean, we feel that the time is now. I mean, every year that we wait, it’s 150 to $200 million of increased costs. That ultimately will, we’ll have to figure out, but we don’t think that’s prudent The time is now. So our expectation is in this session. And the reason why we’re staging that now and not even in a fall veto session is because even if we’re approved in a veto session, we wouldn’t be able to get into the ground because of the weather, we would push it back a year. If we’re approved in May, then that will allow us to be able to start construction to put people to work next summer. and that would allow us 36 months later to open up our building in 2028. So this truly is one of those adages that time is money, and we do need to figure figure this out. And that’s why we’ve put forward such a robust program and plan.
…Adding… Mayor Johnson was asked: “You have a host of progressive priorities in the capital such as more education and migrant funding. How are you going to make a progressive case for a publicly funded sports stadium?” The response…
Well, because of the public benefit, you know. I mean, again, the best way to grow our economy really requires partnerships with public and private entities. That’s exactly what this does. We’re investing in people. You know, look, these these pictures are miraculous. We’re talking about thousands of lives that will benefit from this investment. You know, the fact that we have not just a storied history with this franchise, but with the McCaskey family, with Kevin Warren’s leadership with the entire Bears organization, my administration. We know that the sooner we can put shovels in the ground and put people to work, that is our surest way to secure a better stronger, safer Chicago and it benefits the entire region. We’re talking about $8 billion of economic vibrancy as a result of this investment. The time is now for that. Think about how long people have been waiting for investments like this.
…Adding… A top Pritzker administration official says the Bears “have no risk under this scenario. The risk is 100% on the state.”
…Adding… Asked about the White Sox plan, Warren admitted the Bears’ plan “doesn’t include any money for what they want. But it doesn’t mean that money does not exist for what they want. So that’s why we’re continuing conversations.” Um. OK. Magic money?
…Adding… Gov. Pritzker went from saying he remained skeptical this morning, to saying he is “highly skeptical of the proposal that’s been made” this afternoon. He continued: “I believe strongly that this is not a high priority for legislators and certainly not for me, when I compare it to all the other things when we’re talking about health care here, even when you talk about capital for health care as they’re asking for capital for a stadium.”
…Adding… Gov. Pritzker said he could eventually support a plan, but this plan “can be a lot better for taxpayers than what they put forward.”
…Adding… Speaker Welch told reporters today what he said he told the Bears privately last week: “If we were to put this issue on the board for a vote right now, it would fail and it would fail miserably. There’s no environment for something like this today. Now in Springfield environments change. Will that environment change within the next 30 days? I think that’s highly unlikely.”
…Adding… More from Welch today…
Again, environments do change in Springfield. I mean, people’s minds can be convinced, there’s gonna be a lot of conversations. But as the governor noted, there’s three teams in Chicago. You have the Bears, the White Sox and, and the Chicago Red Stars, the women’s soccer team. They’re all wanting a share of this pot. And I think you have to seriously have those conversations as well. You know, in sports, equity is very important. Equity is at the center of everything we do in the House and so I don’t think anyone can be left out of that conversation. And so I think what’s happening today is really the kickoff, no pun intended.
…Adding… Sen. Peters…
State Senator Robert Peters (D-Chicago) released the following statement in response to the Chicago Bears’ proposal for a new domed lakefront stadium:
“I haven’t had the opportunity to thoroughly examine every aspect of the proposal just yet. I do want to give the Chicago Bears credit on putting forth private dollars. However, I remain skeptical using public dollars to fund private sports teams.
“Illinoisans are facing many challenges, and my job first and foremost is to take on those challenges and improve the lives of everyday Illinoisans. I’ll always keep the door open for further conversations, especially as I look more into the details of this proposal.
“Chicago is a world-class city and we must do all we can to maintain a strong tourism and entertainment culture but I just want to make sure I do that responsibly.”
And Sen. Lewis…
Officials with the Chicago Bears unveiled a new stadium plan on Wednesday that has Illinois taxpayers on the hook for half of the cost of the multi-billion-dollar project. In response to the new stadium details and cost, State Senator Seth Lewis (R-Bartlett) issued the following statement:
“For the past several months, Illinoisans have heard stadium proposals from the White Sox and Chicago Bears, but what has been missing has been statements of accountability for taxpayers and the fans. As Minority Spokesperson for the Appropriations-Public Safety & Infrastructure Committee, the Sports Finance Authority will be coming before us with their Fiscal Year 2025 budget request. During this hearing, I will be very interested to hear if they are seriously considering this proposal, and if so, how they are planning to protect taxpayers and ensure a positive return on their investment. Additionally, and perhaps more importantly, I will be interested to learn if they have the ability to hold the team’s ownership accountable for producing results that will satisfy the team’s fanbase. These issues could include protecting seat license-holders, ticket prices, and perhaps even producing a playoff-contention team.”
posted by Rich Miller
Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:12 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: Isabel’s afternoon roundup
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Not sure this would even be feasible, but if there were a way for the stadium to be used for many of the summer festivals that take over Grant Park for weeks on end, that’s something I could consider “some” public funding for. Beyond that, not a fan of taxpayer dollars for stadium projects.
Comment by Guy Probably Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:20 am
I’m having a lot of trouble understanding how they’ll get to 60-30-1. The Governor clearly doesn’t want to give up any money. City progressives have a huge wish list, none of which includes money for billionaires. Suburban reps don’t seem likely to vote for something that forecloses on Arlington Heights possibilities. Republicans definitely aren’t going to be interested.
There’s a lot of proverbial ballgame left to play, but the Bears seem to be starting closer to 6-3-0 than they are to 60-30-1.
Comment by vern Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:25 am
Well that’s an understatement. As for this taxpayer I’d rather not spend tax money for a billionaires club. Even if the team actually got decent.
Comment by Mason born Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:32 am
More reasonable responses out of JB. I think the KC stadium ballot measure is an intriguing canary in the coal mine. The KC funding stream is similar the 2% hotel tax in Chicago, and KC voters said no to extending a local sales tax another 40 years.
The Royals also wanted to shoehorn a new baseball park into a tight window of the city, not unlike the White Sox plan.
Comment by Cool Papa Bell Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:32 am
Sorry if this is another silly question - if the stadium is going to have a roof over it then why does it have to be on the previous lakefront? Surely they can find another location with better transportation options.
Comment by Just Me 2 Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:34 am
===why does it have to be on the previous lakefront? ===
Pretty TV
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:37 am
That is a consistent answer.
Comment by Rahm's Parking Meter Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:51 am
A well crafted response by Pritzker. Didn’t say never, but didn’t leave much of an opening.
Comment by Friendly Bob Adams Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:53 am
At this point, I wouldn’t even want Pritzker to validate their parking if the Bears came down to Springfield for a meeting about public financing with him.
Comment by TJ Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:54 am
I wish JB would be more vocal in just saying absolutely no. JB doesn’t have to be nice on this issue. A homeless shelter for that area would be a much better use of taxpayer dollars.
Comment by Steve Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:55 am
Thank goodness for the governor. It has been a real long time since we have had a governor with his head screwed on straight.
Comment by DuPage Saint Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:56 am
How pretty can it be, it’s just a couple of seconds of cutaway of the outside of a dome, maybe some skyline in the background. Maybe. Not sure that’s worth the money. Once it’s not an open air venue, the world outside the dome becomes mostly an abstraction. When you look at aerial cutaways of the United Center, it doesn’t scream “Chicago” to me. Just saying that “the view” would not be a selling point for me to spend tax dollars.
Tax money for the roads and infrastructure around it, fine. Free tax money for billionaires who can afford to build a stadium themselves, nope.
Comment by Give Us Barabbas Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:58 am
My thoughts on public money for the Bears’ domed stadium proposal?
N.O.P.E.
Not One Penny, Ever.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:02 pm
=== Pretty TV ===
But if the game is fully inside a stadium with a roof nobody will see the City, so there is no need for it to be on the lakefront.
Comment by Just Me 2 Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:04 pm
I’m so lost on why an increasingly unpopular mayor is anchoring himself to such an unpopular proposal. No common sense from the fifth floor.
Comment by One time for the one time Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:04 pm
- Rich Miller - Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 11:37 am:
On that note, there was a good amount of embarrassment for the 49ers when Al Michaels trashed showing shots of the city of San Francisco even though the 49ers are not located near there anymore on Thursday Night Football last season. Especially for a family like the McCaskeys, that stuff matters a lot. Maybe it shouldn’t, but it does.
Comment by Google Is Your Friend Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:05 pm
Annnnd, there’s no audio coming through on the conference feed (maybe it’s just on my end…)
Comment by CentralILCentrist Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:06 pm
Not to be a fanboy but it seems the Gov was pretty solid at the start and is getting even better.
Comment by What's in a name? Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:06 pm
===there’s no audio coming through===
Click the volume button on the lower right of the page.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:09 pm
=Pretty TV=
And that’s a lousy reason.
While not a dome, the area around Met Life stadium is far from pretty. Some might call it downright ugly. It also happens to be in New Jersey. Which is probably why the broadcasters always show footage of Manhattan which is over 10 miles away. The beauty of the lakefront will not be enhanced by a dome.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:10 pm
If they’re asking for bonding using hotel tax it isn’t entirely taxpayer dollars. Most residents are staying in hotels.
Comment by Say What Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:10 pm
== But if the game is fully inside a stadium with a roof nobody will see the City, so there is no need for it to be on the lakefront.==
I agree with this. The United Center is not near the lake or the river, yet game telecasts always have a nice shot of the skyline from the lake, or through the river.
I am curious how much business a domed stadium on the lake would take away from the United Center. Jerry certainly doesn’t want anything competing with his UC.
Comment by Henry Francis Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:10 pm
Fox 32 has it live and is ahead of WGN.
Comment by Rahm's Parking Meter Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:11 pm
Only ABC 7 is not carrying it
Comment by Rahm's Parking Meter Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:14 pm
Absolutely not a priority for me.
Comment by Just a Citizen Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:17 pm
I don’t understand why these teams, all sports teams, come up with a new model for funding their stadiums. Develop some sort of financial vehicle so that fans and others can invest their own money to build these stadiums. I’d invest in that. I get that the owners think its a better deal for them to take public money. But that is becoming less an option.
Comment by ClJ Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:17 pm
===Suburban reps don’t seem likely to vote for something that forecloses on Arlington Heights possibilities. ===
As a suburban voter, there is nothing I want LESS than the Bears moving to a neighboring town. What a freaking nightmare of traffic and inadequate infrastructure and noise and hassle, for little to no benefit to Arlington Heights, let alone neighboring communities suffering knock-on effects.
(How long have we been at this, a year? 18 months? And nobody’s put together a realistic plan for putting a football stadium right next to one of the busiest freight lines in the nation, with several of the most dangerous crossings. And the feds aren’t going to move the train line because you want a stadium there. Nor have I seen a realistic proposal to upgrade rt 53 to handle game-day traffic. Plus all suggested plans so far act like there’s not a freight line blocking 1/4 of the property. They all act like only SOME of the traffic will come in from rte 53 because naturally they’ll have 47 ground-level entrances on the NW Highway side, because the trains will magically not be there.)
Comment by Suburban Mom Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:17 pm
For comparison, IL’s entire closing fund budget for economic development projects across the entire state in 2023 was $400 million, and those are for 365-day-a-year-type jobs in communities really needing an extra boost (i.e. downstate).
Comment by DuPage Dad Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:18 pm
=If they’re asking for bonding using hotel tax it isn’t entirely taxpayer dollars=
Who pays the hotel tax, a magic fairy? I thought it was the person staying there, e.g., a taxpayer
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:19 pm
well, based on the Mayor talking this is a Black Chicago quest. his words about his son.
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:20 pm
When the Mayor is for that probably hurts more than helps. His approval rating is in the 20’s and more importantly before he gives tax payers money away maybe he can pay that long over due water bill.
Comment by Long Time Independent Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:25 pm
===His approval rating is in the 20’s===
In the city. They need more than just city lawmakers on board. Just imagine what that approval is statewide.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:27 pm
I just saw the images of the new stadium. Looks like the Monsters of the Midway want to become the Monster on the Lakefront. It is huge and ugly. Way out of scale with everything around it.
Comment by City Guy Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:30 pm
I would like to see a 200% federal excise tax on any state and local money given to a for profit entity. For sports teams, the tax rate be 10,000%.
Comment by George Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:38 pm
Funny that Warren touted the success of the MN stadium - not only does it need millions in maintenance, as mentioned, but also every single Minnesotan hates that stadium. Sports fan or not, it’s the great unifying opinion of the Twin Cities.
Comment by Minnesotan Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:40 pm
“This project will result in no new taxes on the residents of Chicago.”
I didn’t know City residents were not also residents of the State of Illinois.
Comment by New Day Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:48 pm
$900 bonding for stadium request Will be interested to see if all costs involved or if additional infrastructure costs are needed. goodbye tailgate
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:48 pm
The promises being made by Kevin and Brandon in this are borderline hallucinogenic, and I dang near fell over when Warren nixed a retractable roof because he’s being “fiscally responsible.”
Also, Warren thinks this could land Chicago the Olympics, that big-time momeymaking event locals famously want in their backyards.
These are not serious people.
Comment by Roadrager Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:57 pm
It is nice that Brandon Johnson has already decided he isn’t running for re-election. Between this and the CTA, I think we can all just write him off now, and start asking who our next mayor should be.
Comment by Homebody Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 12:58 pm
It’s being pitched now as an economic and tax boon for Chicago and Illinois. The claim is 70% will not be paid by taxpayers. It’s Mayor Johnson’s baby, good or bad. The Bears can’t make a winning organization, it’s very understandable about taxpayers not wanting to pay for repeated failure.
Comment by Grandson of Man Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:01 pm
is there like a deep state in Illinois that the Bears are talking to or are they just implying that the Governor doesn’t know what is going on or is a liar? How real smart the Bears are to cut the governor or his staff out because they will just get in the way
Comment by DuPage Saint Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:04 pm
Why is this announcement the day before the team drafts a supposed generational talent that will change the fortunes of the team? Is anyone going to be thinking about this proposal after the draft?
Roll out Caleb and the other draft picks, build some interest in the team. Get fans bullish on the teams future. Once you’ve created that atmosphere, then you drop this.
Comment by Henry Francis Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:08 pm
=The Bears claim they’ve worked “closely with the state” on funding sources, but the governor’s office says they haven’t talked to them about it…=
For some reason I’m thinking back to when the Bears had “hired” Dave McGinnis before they had offered him a contract or agreed to any terms.
https://www.si.com/nfl/titans/news/titans-dave-mcginnis-nf
Comment by Cool Papa Bell Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:09 pm
So every non-Cook county legislator is being asked to take a tough vote on something that will bring in $15m more to states coffers. Good luck with all of that.
Comment by Red Ranger Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:12 pm
Isabella getting the first question in the Q&A, making all of CapFax proud
Comment by thoughtsarentmyown Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:13 pm
Did the Bears new president say how much Erin Rogers is contributing since he “owns” the Bears?
Comment by Jerry Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:14 pm
=Isabel just asked how the capital plan will be funded. “There are dollars that we believe exist at the state level, at the potentially federal level, [and] at the city level,” CEO Williams said. So, he didn’t answer the question.=
Three people didn’t answer it. Rousing start for the Bears.
Comment by Cool Papa Bell Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:17 pm
Great question from Isabel.
Comment by Rahm's Parking Meter Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:18 pm
The Governor, The Senate President and the Speaker are all very skeptical of using taxpayer $$$$ for this so I have not clue who they worked “closely with the state” but clearly they were not in charge. And working closely must mean simply inform or discuss as no state folks - ya know the people they need to get this done - were present.
Comment by New Day Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:19 pm
This is all pretty pathetic honestly. Given all the hyperventilating press releases the Bears have put out about their corporate hires the last few years, you’d think these people would have had something more up their sleeve than “the least popular mayor in America thinks this is great!”
Comment by Larry Bowa Jr. Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:19 pm
I’m loving how everyone is saying the Mayor wants economic development for the City and downtown when just a few weeks ago he was a proud supporter of a new tax on that very investment.
Comment by Just Me 2 Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:22 pm
One other thing, I don’t know who designed this but it sure as heck ain’t Jeanne Gang. This thing is U G L Y with a capital U.
Comment by New Day Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:22 pm
=Develop some sort of financial vehicle so that fans and others can invest their own money to build these stadiums.=
Although it is not favored by professional sport owners, I believe the concept which you’re describing is referred to as a “lender.” Now I can see the appeal of not using a lender. I would much rather have the public pay for the construction of my home rather than taking out a mortgage. But alas that was not an option.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:23 pm
I love the design and how they repurposed the old stadium space. City residents could use something to rally around. I remember all the hatred toward the idea and the construction of Millennium Park, but today, it’s one of the crown jewels. This will be, too.
Comment by Tom Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:24 pm
If the Bears are going to demand all of the revenues generated by every other event at the new stadium (which I imagine will create significant public trust issues) then the state should get any incremental increase in value of future NFL TV contracts. But that’s never going to happen.
Comment by Juice Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:28 pm
==I love the design and how they repurposed the old stadium space. City residents could use something to rally around. I remember all the hatred toward the idea and the construction of Millennium Park, but today, it’s one of the crown jewels. This will be, too.==
Well, at least now we know the playing surface at the new stadium will be Astroturf.
Comment by Roadrager Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:29 pm
=I love the design and how they repurposed the old stadium space.=
All the open space without either stadium would be even better.
Comment by Cool Papa Bell Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:29 pm
Listening to parts of the press conference. What a bunch of baloney. These people are incapable of embarrassment.
Comment by Friendly Bob Adams Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:35 pm
So even if everyone is onboard and this happens…what about parking during construction? Parking after completion of the new stadium and repurposing of Soldier Field? People will be walking over a mile to just get through the gates. This is honestly a joke of a proposal.
Comment by Stas Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:35 pm
“The time is now.” If they really thought they’d get movement now, they needed to be really working this and coming up with the private dollars months ago. Y’all new at this? This ain’t how this works. Not in 2024.
Comment by New Day Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:37 pm
What’s the over/under on what happens first; Springfield’s Hunter Lake welcomes boaters or the new Bear’s Stadium opens?
Comment by Give Me A Break Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:41 pm
The Bears have added to their stadium information page a form letter to automatically send to state lawmakers. I’m curious if we’ll ever hear from GA members how many they end up receiving.
Link here: https://act.chicagobears.com/lp/f62b8f/
Comment by Panther Pride Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:42 pm
“The risk is 100% on the state.”
This is not a serious proposal and it will go nowhere.
Comment by New Day Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:43 pm
The new Bears stadium is the new Springfield monorail from “The Simpsons”. Lots of pretty imagery to be paid for by “somebody” other than the team. As Mr. JM said “NOPE”. People might want to read this report: https://www.cagw.org/reporting/fields-of-failure
Comment by thisjustinagain Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:45 pm
I’m all for using taxpayer dollars to build a new stadium…if the state picks the design, gets the revenue from the 1%er boxes, has the naming rights, and rents it for a “reasonable” price to the Bears. If we pay for it, we should design it, own it, and get the revenues. Any sports team would be a renter and treated as such.
It could be the Land of Lincoln Stadium or Visit Illinois Stadium or Illinois Land of the Free (if somewhat overly taxed for this ridiculous behemoth) Stadium or CapitolFax (’cause we all read it) Stadium
Comment by Pot calling kettle Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:48 pm
Is it just me, or does this seem to bury Soldier Field? Maybe that is setting the stage for neglecting that space so that in another 30 years they can build another new stadium in the footprint of the then neglected and forgotten memorial.
Comment by thechampaignlife Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:52 pm
Seeing the state level reactions, all I can say is thank god for Pritzker, Harmon, and Welch being the voices of sanity and not getting in on giving public handouts to billionaires.
Comment by Homebody Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:55 pm
===Link here===
lol
They spelled Burnham wrong in the letter. Oops.
Comment by Rich Miller Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:55 pm
So they’re plan is to get the stadium built and opened in Phase 1, then at some point in the future I. Phases 2 and 3 work on parking and other transportation improvements? That sounds like a distaste waiting to happen.
Comment by fs Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:57 pm
*disaster, not distaste…although the scene of people attempting to get to a new stadium further south than the current one, with fewer parking and transportation options, in December, seems distasteful.
Comment by fs Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 1:59 pm
Glad to see Mayor Johnson stands for exactly one thing - Mayor Johnson.
Comment by low level Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:12 pm
Definitely don’t change their > form letter to what you actually think and then send it…
Comment by Toots Maytal Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:14 pm
I want to make sure I understand this.
The Bears “new” president holds a press conference to announce a stadium proposal from a privately owned corporation, is begging for guv’mint funds, forgets to invite the 3 people he’ll need help from in said guv’mint, the day before they draft the #1 pick.
I hope the draft pick takes a look at this and signs elsewhere:
Comment by Jerry Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:14 pm
I thought a “progressive” mayor could at least be counted on to oppose handouts to billionaires.
Clearly, I thought wrong.
Comment by Former Downstater Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:16 pm
“It could be the Land of Lincoln Stadium or … ” when Toronto built a new stadium, they had a naming contest. One of the entries (that will remain a classic) was “The Tax Payers Get Ripped Off Again Dome.”
Comment by Skeptic Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:16 pm
=They spelled Burnham wrong in the letter. Oops.=
You can also edit the letter. I would encourage everyone to edit and send on the Bears dime: “Do not give the Bears one penny or I will never vote for you again.”
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:21 pm
If Brandon Johnson thinks Chicago taxpayer’s money is best spent subsidizing a wealthy sports team, then I question his judgement. I just surely hope the rest of Illinois taxpayers won’t have to donate their hard-earned money.
Comment by Waldi Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:22 pm
Brandon Johnson: “We should put an extra tax on high end real estate.”
Also Brandon Johnson: “We should give tax dollars to build high end real estate for billionaires.”
Comment by Riversidian Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:22 pm
is the lakefront trail path still there going south?
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:24 pm
“You know, look, these these pictures are miraculous.”
It’s so rare when you hear a sentence that just totally sums up a person, a place, a thing, a time in office.
Comment by granville Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:27 pm
I don’t know what’s worse – this botched rollout or Johnson’s response on how this will benefit the residents of this city. I think leaders and the governor made it clear – this is not baked enough yet, and it is far from being a twinkle in the eye of this legislative session. And I usually don’t pay too much attention to comments on social media, but when you have like 98% of comments basically trashing this idea, you know it’s not going to end well.
Comment by Shytown Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:28 pm
On the other hand.
Nice renderings.
Comment by H-W Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:31 pm
I’d love for the Speaker or President to call the bill and make an amendment in order to redirect the bonding authority from the hotel fees to build preschools, schools, transit, and mental health clinics. That would do a lot better than 60-30.
Comment by Phineas Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:38 pm
=Erin Rogers=
I think you meant *Aaron *Rodgers ?
Comment by Just a Random Guy Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:46 pm
I appreciate that the Bears included a baseball field for the White Sox in their renderings.
Comment by Oklahoma Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:53 pm
I haven’t seen something this spectacularly disastrous since Evel Knievel strapped himself into the Sky Cycle X2 and tried to jump Idaho’s Snake River Canyon.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:55 pm
Mayor Johnson is the Trubisky of Mayors
Comment by Wowie Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 2:59 pm
The response on how the capital plan would be funded reminded me a lot of Bruce Rauner’s “grand bargain.” And we all knew how that worked out. And the tepid response from lawmakers tells me it will be a long, long time before the topic even warrants discussion. Doesn’t sound like anyone has the same degree of urgency as Kevin Warren. Might want to think about plan B.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 3:03 pm
Another source provided a lobbyist list this morning on who is lobbying for the Bears, while all formidable, they’ll need to get a bunch more in the upcoming weeks if they’re trying to get done before May 24.
It could be done if they had more than 18 days on the Senate calendar and 21 days on the House calendar and they didn’t have 2 other stadium projects that needed to be done as well. Just saying.
Comment by Frida's boss Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 3:18 pm
The amazing thing about Mayor Brandon Johnson is, just when you think he’s hitched himself to the worst possible wagon, he finds a way to one-up himself and tie on to something even worse. And we haven’t event gotten to the CTU contract renegotiations yet…
Comment by Just a guy Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 3:25 pm
One of the main problems with Soldier Field is that is only holds 61,000, so the truly marquee events like the Super Bowl and World Cup are immediately out of the question.
The Bears’ new Magical Solutions Dome, which Warren said could bring in Super Bowls, World Cups, Final Fours, and Olympics, would seat a whopping 65,000.
If your stadium doesn’t seat at least 70,000 the NFL sends you an automated reply telling you to go kick rocks.
Comment by Roadrager Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 3:31 pm
Legit question - it was reported that Stacy Davis Gates was there. Why??
Comment by Rahm’s Parking Meter Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 3:46 pm
And I thought Dirk Lohan’s UFO was ugly. I had no idea.
Comment by JoanP Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 3:48 pm
What a joke! To extend the Illinois Sports Facility Authority debt and extend payments another 40 years just is disingenuous and absurd. Teams are practically wanting new stadiums after just 20-25 years of use (like the Bears). Who is to say they will not come back in another 20 years and try this again if we grant this to them. Do not even get me started on maintenance costs as we are seeing in Minnesota who got pressured to do similar stadium rebuild and are now freaking out on how to continue to pay for the maintenance costs.
Comment by Bald&Beautiful Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 3:49 pm
Waiting for the unions to speak up… this looks like 2-3 years of well paid construction jobs to me.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 4:01 pm
The Bears are asking for money for one clear reason: They don’t have enough money to pay for their own stadium. Amazing that after 104 years, in which George Halas was given the franchise plus cash in exchange for simply getting the team off AE Staley’s books, the family never diversified their wealth.
Sell the team to someone who can afford to pay for the stadium. Neil Bluhm seems an obvious choice.
Comment by Save Ferris Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 4:06 pm
=Mayor Johnson is the Trubisky of Mayors=
Ouch! That made me laugh haha.
Comment by Just a Random Guy Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 4:21 pm
==Another source provided a lobbyist list this morning on who is lobbying for the Bears, ==
I’d love to see that list. I’ll bet the McCaskey’s opened up their checkbooks early and got everyone they could. Sadly for them, even the best and the brightest contract lobsters cant change the fundamentals of this bad deal.
I’m trying to figure out how many votes this would get in both houses right now. Any guesses from anyone?
Comment by low level Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 4:28 pm
“Mayor Johnson is the Trubisky of Mayors.”
Except Mitch had one solid year. Brandon? Eh, not so much.
Comment by New Day Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 5:10 pm
I cannot get over the fact that the current stadium is part of the Chicago Park District. the Bears, a tenant, are now proposing that where they stay is demolished. Will have to look at the numbers to see what kind of an ownership stake the current owners have in the new project, which takes place on public land. Why was it only the Mayor who weighed in on it and no reference to the Chicago Park District?
Comment by Amalia Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 6:35 pm
Chat GPT, can you make a rendering of a Minnesota-like domed stadium that seats only slightly more than Soldier Field?
I’d like you to name it something generic, like “Stadium.”
Comment by Proud Papa Bear Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 6:40 pm
Soldier Field can not be demolished; it has historic preservation landmark status.
If the proposed new stadium is still too small for the superbowl, why waste our time even debating this? The Bears’ entire reason for needing a bigger stadium was predicated on it being eligible for superbowl games. Send them back to Arlington Heights and get serious about the seating, or send this idea to the showers.
Comment by Give Us Barabbas Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 7:49 pm
=Soldier Field can not be demolished; it has historic preservation landmark status.=
It lost that status in 2006 following the 2003 renovations.
Comment by Pundent Wednesday, Apr 24, 24 @ 8:05 pm