Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Oberweis company sues Democrats
Next Post: Greed and the 1st Amendment
Posted in:
[Note from Rich: This was obviously written by my intern, a notorious Cub fan. lol]
* Former Governor Jim Thompson has been doing a lot of damage control lately to calm down fans over Sam Zell’s brash comments regarding the possible sale of Wrigley Field. He’s assuaged concerns over a sacrilegious name change, revocation of cherished landmark status, and moans over another TIF on sales taxes.
As a Cubs fan, I think the proposal sounds moderate enough. I think most of my latte sipping, Birkenstock wearing, yuppie counterparts will tell you that they really don’t care if you relax the landmark status, so long as they don’t change the name.
Many have even expressed positive sentiments over a compromise by selling the naming rights of the plaza, and not the Wrigley Field name. I can live with something like “Wrigley Field at the Bank of America Plaza.”
* Furthermore, a $350 million face lift to the stadium is much needed:
The upgrades to the Friendly Confines could include repairs to deteriorated concrete, enhancement of kitchen and food service facilities, additional luxury seats, widened concourses, parking, and neighborhood improvements, he said.
Real fans will tell you that, honestly, they just want to see their team win a Championship before they die.
* But the proposal is alienating Cubs fans less and less, and is instead angering many taxpayers, especially downstate ones:
Don’t let ’em fool you. Tax dollars spent to refurbish Wrigley are dollars that can’t be spent anywhere else. The needs of institutions like the schools and parks will have to be offset by service cuts or other tax hikes. As Zell likes to tell his employees, there’s no such thing as free lunch.
* The argument is a valid one, and deserves debate. But many will tell you that the state did the something similar for the Soldier Field renovations. Lawmakers approved a $587 million package for Soldier Field. That plan included about $400 million worth of taxpayer-supported bonds issued by the Sports Facilities Authority, which was created in the 1980s to build U.S. Cellular Field, home to baseball’s White Sox.
The bubble that is more likely to burst is the faction of downstate voters and legislators who are still angry over the CTA bailout fight, and the lack of a capital bill to finance necessary infrastructure improvements:
“I think it’s a bad idea,” said Sen. Dave Koehler, D-Peoria. “It’s nice we can all be nostalgic about the Cubs, but I’m not sure how any of us downstate (benefit) unless they put together a package that does benefit us.”
* What do you think should be done about Wrigley Field? Try, as hard as it may be, to keep your team biases aside.
***UPDATE*** This is the link to the audio of Former Governor Jim Thompson on the Spike O’Dell Show earlier this week that Reddbyrd talked about in their post. It’s pretty funny.
posted by Kevin Fanning
Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 10:53 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Oberweis company sues Democrats
Next Post: Greed and the 1st Amendment
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
It comes down to this: Why should I help rich people make more money, beyond buying their products or services?
Free market? Why do the ones who utter that phrase the most always seem to favor subsidies for rich people?
Then again, I’m a Cards fan, so what do I know?
Comment by tom73 Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:15 am
With a 3 million gate, $6 beers, broadcasting rights, t-shirts, concessions, not to mention their own in-house ticket scalping system, the new private owners would have no problem going to a bank and getting a loan for any improvements. I suspect if they did it on their own, it wouldn’t be $350 million (!?)
Soldier Field, I think, is a great example of why the state should not get involved. Way too much money for very few events that the great majority of citizens can’t afford to attend even if they had the opportunity or inclination.
Comment by wordslinger Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:23 am
Us downstaters, we be sharpening the tines of our pitchforks. Yep.
Comment by Prairie Pasha Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:24 am
The name change is relatively immaterial, and should be a decision solely in the hands of the current or prospective ownership group. It will have little, if any effect on the constituency at large (read: not adverse to taxpayers).
I need help understanding two items:
1) How will the sales tax revenue increases swallowed up by the TIF be replaced?
2) What evidence can Thompson et al cite that the renovation and preservation of Wrigley Field is best left in the hands of state government, as opposed to private ownership? No one’s going to relocate the team or demolish Wrigley, and adding luxury suites and better amenities will only serve to increase profits for the new ownership group.
Comment by The Doc Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:27 am
Lol Prairie
Comment by Kevin Fanning Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:32 am
I could care less if the Cubs ever play another game ! I have roads that are falling apart,schools that need to be rebuilt and a Cardinal team that can get the job done from time to time. Let’s face it,the Cubs are only going to win a series when hell freezes over and with global warming it just ain’t going to happen in our life time!
Comment by NIEVA Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:32 am
Easy, veary easy. Do nothing. The State refuses to buy it. let the new owner flip the bill for improvements, or decide to tear it down etc. Revoke the historical landmark designtion. Let the new owner decide how much or how little to change. Let the people who worry about adding lights to the field, changing the stadium, and fear having this new fangled electricity piped straigh to their homes go the way of all the dinosaurs.
Comment by Ghost Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:36 am
Knock it down and build a new stadium in Evanston or an area just north of Chicago. If Cubs fans really are more concerned about winning a championship and remaining viable in an era of high pitcher salaries and $5 million utility men, they would gladly toss aside their love for Wrigley. The state should not throw money at restoring a “landmark” that is more of a party haven and hangout for yuppies.
Comment by Team Sleep Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:41 am
Hey, Kevin, what happend to the link I sent you? heh
Comment by Rich Miller Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:54 am
Haha. I didn’t think you actually wanted me to post that.
Comment by Kevin Fanning Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 11:59 am
Rich never makes us keep our team bias to the side. I don’t think I like these rules. Lets be honest, Wrigley is a dump. Chunks of cement are falling from the ceiling and the restrooms are awful. Tear it down, privately and build a new one, privately funded.
Comment by leigh Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 12:05 pm
Hopefully this post won’t have to be shut down due to miscreant, out of context partisan (errr, I mean, “baseball”) rants!
The Sox got gub’mint money for their cliff-dwelling stadium so turnabout’s fair play. That said, this whole practice of subsidizing the wealthy and the entertainment franchises they own is getting way out of hand. If “welfare” is supposed to be a bridge for the poor, then why do the uber-rich need any welfare at all? It’s not like people are going to stop spending entertainment dollars if all the pro teams suddenly disappeared — movies, museums, etc. will just see that much of a bump as people’s “fun” dollars go to other venues.
Go Cubs!
Comment by Rob_N Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 12:08 pm
—Rich never makes us keep our team bias to the side. I don’t think I like these rules. —
Leigh, notice I said try. Obviously some ranting is going to come with the territory.
Comment by Kevin Fanning Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 12:13 pm
Why should the State of Illinois purchase Wrigley to allow a huge corporation the opportunity to maximize its profit from the sale of the team and the stadium?
If I, a little guy, can get that same option when I sell something, I will withdraw my objections. Until then, let the rich “only” obtain a modest profit from the sale, or begin investing in the company in order to obtain a better investment. Isn’t that the American way?
The Cubs put together a dynasty and win several world series in a row, and the cash cow will get even fatter.
Comment by Louis G. Atsaves Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 1:26 pm
$300 Million to renovate a steel mill or factory? Can’t do that, that’s corporate welfare! $300 Million to renovate Absolutely! Think of the jobs it creates! The city will lose stature and crumble if leaves!
I think you get my drift.
Comment by What planet is he from again? Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 1:47 pm
Hmmm, guess I shouldn’t use Greaterthan and Lessthan in my posts….kind of messes with the text!
Comment by What planet is he from again? Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 2:20 pm
Someone needs to get POA’s Lawyer(aka Big Jim) interview with Spike O’Dell …he seems to imply that after the taxpaayers subsidized work at the new Comiskey Park and the Alien Crash Site (aka Soldier Field) the teams won big.
It is very funny
Comment by Reddbyrd Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 2:25 pm
Hey I got an idea why not give Wrigley field a casino license. Instead of more skyboxes, more slot machines. Then along with the hope of the Cubs ever winning a World Series, you could at least put a little money back in the coffers that bought and fixed the place up. I guess depression and gambling don’t mix…
Comment by bizarro Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 2:40 pm
the Sox stadium deal was to keep the team in the area. That was understandable from a public policy perspective. The Cubs aren’t going anywhere, so the issue is merely: “if you don’t ask, you’ll never get.” Zell expects to be turned down by the virtually bankrupt State of Illinois, I am sure.
And I remind you of what happened to the neighborhood around Sox Park - it all was leveled for parking, with that parking revenue a major part of the bonds repayment. Will we be destroying Wrigleyville in order to save Wrigley Field, probably renamed Blagojevich Field since the financing is under state control…
Comment by Capitol View Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 3:31 pm
The Trib on March 5 said the only reason to sell Wrgiley Field to the taxpayers was so Zell could get more for the Cubs. Because the Cubs, unemcumbered by a Wrigley, will have all the leverage to squeeze the state and Lakeview dry for cheap rent, imporvements, night games, and then when they get a better offer form another state or locality they can walk away. And Chicago gets to keep a white elephant stadium with no possible tenant. Since no one is bidding for Wrigley the FMV for Wrigley is $0. In fact is it is liability. Either Zell keeps Wrigley or he sells it with the Cubs. Anything else is a disservice to Illinois and a huge subsidy to a billionaire.
Comment by Jake Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 3:36 pm
I have an old truck in the driveway and very well used, heavy foosball table in the basement. Will the state be willing to buy these items from me for the public good?
Comment by zatoichi Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 4:04 pm
Hey there will be use after the cubs leave Chicago it could be used for the summer games that might be coming.
Comment by bizarro Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 4:21 pm
Maybe Zell will threaten with moving the team if he doesnot get what he wants and the Mayor will move the team like he did to the Bears. Good Riddence to them. The Cubs once where loveable losers lately though just greedy.
Comment by the ole precinct captain Friday, Mar 7, 08 @ 8:16 pm