Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: *** UPDATED x9 *** State, county announce more money for asylum-seekers, but city conspicuously missing
Posted in:
* WGN’s Jarrett Payton interviewed Chicago Bears President and CEO Kevin Warren…
“The Arlington Heights property is incredible. Any time you have 326 acres near the city – and now we’ve cleaned everything so it’s a vacant piece of land – it’s a great piece of property. That said – to be able to have optionality with Chicago – I’ve made it very clear how I feel about Chicago. I think it’s the finest city in the world. I can’t think of another major metropolitan area that has beautiful lakefront that you can swim in, that’s clean, near a downtown. The architecture is phenomenal and just the history and tradition. It’s just something that feels right about the Bears in Chicago. But, this is a long journey and we’ll continue to work on it.”
How much longer is the question. Warren wants to have an answer by the end of the year.
“The timeline has to be in 2024. In a perfect world, I would like to have clarity in this legislative session that is coming up. Time is money. It takes probably three years once you put a shovel in the ground. ’24 should be the focal point. This is the year. I feel that we’re starting to get momentum.
“Even being here in Las Vegas with the Super Bowl, there have been a litany of individuals who have come up to me – fans, even individuals who work at other teams in and across the league – to say, ‘wouldn’t it be amazing for you all to get a stadium?’ Unsolicited, they’ve come and even have said, ‘can you imagine a Super Bowl in Chicago?’”
* But as a wise person continually notes online, be very skeptical of the bright, shiny objects being flashed in front of your face…
Concerts: 100% just shifting deck chairs on amusement tax concert ticket cruise ship from a (paid off in 2032 Soldier Field) to new $700,000,000 new taxpayer debt subsidized stadium? Silly.
By all means let the teams build and fund new stadiums, but our ROI on subsidies? Putrid
— Chicago Bars (@chicagobars) February 6, 2024
Unpopular opinion: For a small FRACTION of what upgrading Soldier Field to Super Bowl hosting (once every 20-25 years) would require Chicago & Illinois could money whip 2-3 new major conventions to come here annually and have a Super Bowl’s worth of economic impact EVERY YEAR. https://t.co/kn6Q6zI1yB
— Chicago Bars (@chicagobars) February 6, 2024
* Crain’s…
It remains to be seen how much funding is available via the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority, the agency that would likely be tapped to help foot the bill for stadium construction. Still unknown is whether there is enough money in that kitty to help offset the cost of a lakefront Bears stadium as well as a Sox stadium along the southern branch of the Chicago River.
* Meanwhile…
The Cook County Board of Review on Wednesday endorsed county Assessor Fritz Kaegi’s valuation of the Arlington Park property, which could stick the Chicago Bears with a tax bill millions above what they had hoped.
But the unanimous decision of the three-member elected panel isn’t final; the board is giving the Bears and three Arlington Heights-area school districts until Saturday to return to the negotiating table to hash out an agreement that could arrive at a lower figure.
posted by Rich Miller
Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 10:57 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: *** UPDATED x9 *** State, county announce more money for asylum-seekers, but city conspicuously missing
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
Most estimates have Super Bowl as $1 billion economic impact in LV. Wondering what 2-3 conventions can bring in $500m or $333m every year.
Get the overall point they’re making and am sympathetic though.
Comment by wowie Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:01 am
Reminder that Arlington Heights identifies as a village despite having a population of over 77000
Comment by Macon Bakin Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:05 am
There is plenty of “momentum”. Pay for it yourselves. It’s called Tax Fairness to paraphrase the new Bears President.
Comment by Jerry Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:08 am
===Most estimates have Super Bowl as $1 billion economic impact===
LOL
I’d love to see a few links to back that up. Even the always overly hyped-up Las Vegas tourism boosters are saying it’s only half that…
Las Vegas tourism officials say the economic impact of Super Bowl 58 may be better than expected.
The NFL championship event held Sunday at Allegiant Stadium was estimated to bring in at least $500 million in spending, a figure that the Las Vegas Convention and Visitors Authority said could be lower than what future economic impact reports, expected in the coming weeks, will show.
https://www.reviewjournal.com/business/tourism/touchdown-super-bowl-brings-big-economic-victory-to-las-vegas-3000485/
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:08 am
I keep coming back to two thoughts, they own the land, and the state won’t make the same mistakes it did 20 and 30 years ago. Bears end up in AH in my mind but the dance continues.
Comment by Rahm's Parking Meter Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:11 am
HOW MUCH MONEY DO THE 2 TAXPAYER SUBSIDIZED HOTELS AT MCCORMICK PLACE LOSE EVERY YEAR. ? Add to that the DePaul basketball arena that is no where near the campus that cost how much to build? . Let the Bears from the money , the city gave the Rickets zero for wrigley give da bears zero
Comment by HANK SAUER Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:12 am
Vote Down, Chicago Bears
Make McCaskeys pay their own way for this facility
Vote Down, Chicago Bears
Fight with all your might the NFL forcing taxpayer liability…
Comment by hisgirlfriday Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:15 am
Something tells me the Bears will have their ‘24 certainty by the end of session
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:18 am
Few sentences later in the article you linked:
“And spending over the long Super Bowl weekend could reach as high as $1.1 billion.”
CNN Article saying it could be 700m to 800m: https://www.cnn.com/2024/02/10/economy/las-vegas-super-bowl-economic-impact/index.html
Arizona State University showing 2023’s Super Bowl ended up at over 1.3 billion in Phoenix: https://news.wpcarey.asu.edu/20231005-economic-impact-super-bowl-lvii-sets-record
Regardless, point taken I should’ve been more careful in my wording and not used such a high estimate. I’ll rephrase my original comment to:
What 2 conventions will provide $250m per year every year?
Comment by wowie Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:19 am
Will Chicago host the Super Bowl every year?
Comment by very old soil Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:28 am
The correct amount of taxpayer money that should should be available to the Bears or Sox is zero.
Comment by Homebody Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:29 am
To put these numbers above into perspective, an average CostCo location nationwide generates about $250 million per year. So we’re talking maybe a couple of costCo warehouses worth of impact if you take advocates’ arguments at face value.
Comment by Arvey's Legacy Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:38 am
New stadiums/casinos.
Whatever the estimated money that they reportedly will bring in, figure half.
That way you’ll only be mildly disappointed.
Comment by Flyin'Elvis'-Utah Chapter Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:40 am
Bears: We demand clarity.
Chicago: Get bent, losers.
AH: We don’t have the money.
Cook: No, we’re not helping out.
Springfield: No, we’re not helping out.
Bears: Why can’t we get a straight answer?!?!
Comment by TJ Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:41 am
@hank Sauer the two hotels at Mccormick Place don’t lose any money
Comment by sox11 Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:50 am
“. . . to be able to have optionality with Chicago”
“Optionality”?? That’s a word now, is it? All part of the slight of hand going on with wealthy franchises seeking public funding for their private benefits.
Agree entirely with Homebody at 11:29. Zero is a nice round number.
Comment by Flapdoodle Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:53 am
It isn’t just a Super Bowl, that line is being used the same way “Star Wars Museum” was used to run Lucas out of town. It is College Football Playoffs, Big Ten Championship, Final Four, winter concerts, large soccer matches (Copa America, Nations League).
Just look at the Jan, Feb, March event calendar at AT&T Stadium outside Dallas.
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 11:59 am
The sad thing is all the Bears fans who think Kevin Warren is here for reasons other than the subsidized stadium hustle they’re trying to run on taxpayers. A lot of fans think this guy is poring over draft prospects and weighing on coaching hires, meanwhile he’s just out there making clumsy fumbling threats on the behalf of the all the little heirs and heiresses up in Lake Forest.
Comment by Larry Bowa Jr. Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 12:14 pm
Wowie - The democratic convention is expected to bring 50k people and $150-200m to the city.
Comment by ChicagoAli Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 12:19 pm
@ChicagoBars is to be commended on some very good work. He is correct about the frequency of these large events and how some of them will merely vulture events from other local venues.
The Bears get nothing and I wish the districts around AH would not give an inch, but I also know how it works when you getto the PTAB and courts on these issues so I hope they get all they can.
Comment by JS Mill Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 12:34 pm
The phrase that stuck in my mind about the lake front and swimming… what in the wide, wide world of sports does that have to do with the stadium? Do football fans do tailgating then hit the beach at Oak Street? Are the cameras at a roofed-over Chicago stadium superbowl going to cut away to beach shots in February?
Once the stadium is enclosed does it really matter where it is? No lakefront skyline in the tv wide shots? Then it might as well be at Arlington. I watch the superbowl and very little of the hosting towns gets detailed coverage that might make a viewer consider going to that town if they weren’t already.
Comment by Give Us Barabbas Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 12:34 pm
Do they want a big property tax break for their Arlington Heights stadium, or a tax subsidy for a new lakefront stadium?
Kinda nervy to ask for clarity when you’re not providing it yourself.
Comment by TNR Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 12:36 pm
===It is College Football Playoffs, Big Ten Championship…===
All addressed above.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 12:49 pm
==All addressed above. ==
But it isn’t, Chicago Bars simply ignores CF playoffs, winter concerts, the combine, and other potential events. Neither mentioned the Big Ten Championship game. Chicago Bars chose the events that are much less frequent to make their argument.
The World Cup isn’t the only national soccer tournament. AT&T Stadium is hosting CONCACAF matches in March, which we can’t do in current Soldier Field.
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 1:04 pm
Taking a peek at the 2022 & 2023 schedule for AT&T Stadium, which of these events being hosted in Arlington are things that are not capable of being hosted in the Chicagoland area with the facilities that exist today? Most of those are already available here in various iterations. I don’t see how throwing millions of tax dollars on the *hope* this privately-owned stadium gets into the rotation for a couple extra events spread out over a decade is being the best steward of funds.
Even the lure of a Super Bowl is probably a once-and-done for Chicago. AT&T stadium hosted in once in 2011 and MetLife in East Rutherford got it in 2014, and the game hasn’t gone back to either since. Meanwhile the Superdome in New Orleans and Hard Rock in Miami each host what seems like basically once a decade, Phoenix got it three times in less than 15 years (2008, 2015, 2023), SoFi Stadium in Inglewood had it in 2022 and will have it again in 2027, and Levi’s Stadium in Santa Clara had in 2016 and gets it again in 2026. Winter may be Bears Weather, but even with a dome Chicago is not gonna be in the regular Super Bowl rotation.
Comment by Leap Day William Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 1:06 pm
Can’t say that assessing the property near, actually less than, the value the Bears thought the property was worth in a recent sale is all that unreasonable. Also, the conversations that Kevin Warren had with individuals in Las Vegas, did they begin: “Sir, can you imagine a Super Bowl in Chicago?” like some other guy’s conversations with unnamed strangers begin? Sorry, that was mean, shouldn’t be doing that during Lent.
Comment by West Side the Best Side Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 1:14 pm
If it’s a no-brainer that these winter/non-NFL events are soooo profitable, somebody will offer to finance the stadium for a cut. I’m having a hard time thinking of winter music tours where Chicago missed out because 1-2 nights at the United Center wouldn’t do.
Comment by lake county democrat Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 1:22 pm
I have a lot of clarity. It is a big fat “no” from me.
Comment by Jibba Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 1:30 pm
“A great big, strong man came up to me, tears in his eyes, and said ‘can you imagine a Super Bowl in Chicago?’”
Comment by Mark D Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 1:30 pm
I have not heard it discussed, but tackle football is declining in participation and viewership with younger population. It is an expensive and dangerous sport. I know the sport won’t disappear, but I question making huge investments in a stadium for a dying sport. Its interesting they want to build the stadium at the site of the Arlington horse race track, another dying sport.
Comment by City Guy Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 1:33 pm
This topic make me think back to the campaign for Chicago as a summer Olympics site. Kind of glad that didn’t happen.
Comment by Give Us Barabbas Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 1:49 pm
@wowie The Arizona State “independent” study is a perfect example of how and why these phony, ridiculous numbers get reported re: the economic impact of new NFL boondoggles.
While the press release touting the supposed $1.3B in economic activity and $726M boost to the local GDP describes the numbers as from “an independent study” by the ASU School of Business, the study was never released publicly. Why not?
“The Institute’s analysis has not been made public. Evans said there were some elements of the report he could not discuss in-depth due to NFL policy.
“’This report is commissioned by the host committee on behalf of the NFL and the NFL, as a client, is quite protective over the breakdown of numbers,’ Evans said.
“(Kennesaw State economics professor J.C.) Bradbury said it was ‘completely inappropriate’ to release a report with a number that large without an explanation of the methodology or rigorous backing of the results.
“’It’s no more reliable than tarot cards,’ Bradbury said.”
link: https://cronkitenews.azpbs.org/2023/12/12/super-bowl-2023-economic-impact-arizona/
If building a stadium was such a great investment, these teams would happily do it themselves. No more billionaire welfare, please.
Comment by Skokie Man Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 1:53 pm
The lakefront is supposed to be kept “forever open, free and clear” according to original maps of Chicago. Aaron Montgomery Ward wen to the IL Supreme court at his own expense to enforce this doctrine.
As it stands, the roads around Soldier Field are absolutely jammed on Sundays. State street is backed up to Congress as drivers inch their way towards the stadium.
All these factors demonstrate that the lakefront is a bad location for the Bears. Maybe locate in a disadvantaged part of the city that needs economic development and has better vehicular access.
Comment by low level Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:03 pm
I may be wrong, but I think the Bears will ultimately make money on the Arlington Heights location with the right development partners without a stadium. Lease it to a farmer, and sit on it for now. There seems to be no compromise with the school districts to be had, Pursuing a build on the Lakefront yields an even higher value asset upon completion. It’s a better investment long term. But why would anyone pay 100% to build a $1B stadium on land you don’t own? Who would own the ground in Chicago?
Comment by Lincoln Lad Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:04 pm
==which of these events being hosted in Arlington are things that are not capable of being hosted in the Chicagoland area with the facilities that exist today?==
It isn’t about if those events can happen in Chicago, it is whether they can happen in the winter. In March 2024, AT&T is hosting a Billy Joel/Stevie Nicks concert and 3 CONCACAF semifinal/finals matches.
You can’t host those events in Soldier Field in March. This ignores November, December, January, February, and April where outdoor events are also iffy in Chicago.
https://attstadium.com/events/
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:06 pm
**t I question making huge investments in a stadium for a dying sport.**
LOL.
I’d be ok if football died, but it is nowhere near dying.
The Super Bowl was the most watched ever. Overall
the NFL just saw their highest ratings in years: https://www.sportsbusinessjournal.com/Articles/2024/01/09/nfl-viewership
Yes, youth participation is down, but if you think that football is dying, I have no idea what to tell you.
Comment by JoeMaddon Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:09 pm
==But why would anyone pay 100% to build a $1B stadium on land you don’t own? Who would own the ground in Chicago? ==
They won’t own the land or the stadium. They want a better deal with the Park District to control the gameday atmosphere and to own some of the entertainment options nearby.
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:09 pm
===In March 2024, AT&T is hosting a Billy Joel/Stevie Nicks concert===
Most musical tours aren’t exclusive to one season, including that one. The Billy Joel/Stevie Nicks concert is in June at Soldier Field.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:14 pm
==The Billy Joel/Stevie Nicks concert is in June at Soldier Field. ==
With a dome, you could have it in the winter and hold a different concert/event in June, right? I assume that’s what is happening at AT&T. A dome gives you many more potential dates to hold events.
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:41 pm
@ supplied_demand
There are some events that Soldier Field can’t accommodate in the middle of winter. However, most of those events can take place elsewhere in Chicago (concert in the United Center), can be held at Soldier Field in the summer (Joel/Nicks concert as described above), or also could not happen in a domed stadium in the middle of winter (Concacaf only holds games in outdoor stadia historically).
In fact, I don’t believe another stadium in North America has hosted the Gold Cup more often than Soldier Field, which has done so in 2007, 2009, 2011, 2013, 2015, 2019, and 2023.
https://www.concacaf.com/gold-cup/article/concacaf-announces-host-cities-and-stadiums-for-2023-concacaf-gold-cup/
Again, if building a stadium was such a great investment, these teams would happily do it themselves. No more billionaire welfare, please.
Comment by Skokie Man Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:43 pm
And if the Bears want build a dome no one is stopping them. They are a privately owned, for profit corporation.
And the Bears can get Billy Joel and Stevie Nicks to play in January if they want.
Comment by Jerry Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:50 pm
@supplied
ATT has a monster truck show, Billy/Stevie, Kid Rock, Conocacaf, Kenny Chesney, a Rodeo and COPA basically between now and August.
Solider Field gets Billy/Stevie, Kenny, The Stones, Pink and Metallica. Its’ a wash, besides a few soccer games that are so in demand there is no guarantee that they would ever come to Chicago.
And so what you can’t host them in the winter. Major stadium shows don’t really tour all that strongly in the US in the winter in the first place.
To that point ATT from October 1st 2023 to March 31st of 2024 will have hosted Dolly Parton and Billy/Stevie. *Two more concerts that Solider Field had.
Comment by Cool Papa Bell Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:53 pm
I am still assuming this is all a smokescreen to try and spook Arlington and get them to back off on their property evaluation demands.
And I am still assuming Arlington sees right through it and isn’t spooked.
Comment by ZC Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 2:53 pm
Are we really to the point of debating public taxpayer subsidies of a Billy Joel and Stevie Nicks concert?
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 3:03 pm
===Are we really to the point of debating public taxpayer subsidies===
lol
Apparently so.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 3:04 pm
As Rich notes, the Stevie Nicks/Billy Joel concert is playing Chicago in June. Lots of events rotate around based on favorable weather and when big tours are chaining together their events, weather is a factor in getting everything moved around. I don’t see Taylor Swift being thrilled with having to cancel/reschedule a set of February shows because the day before the weather decides to drop a foot of snow then drop to 10 degrees in Arlington Heights.
According to that calendar you shared, looks like the only thing AT&T hosted in November 2023 through March 2024 were a bunch of Cowboys games, the Cotton Bowl, a high school tournament, Monster Jam, and AMA Supercross. Every single one of those things can and does happen with current venues that exist today. Looking ahead, AT&T Stadium has nothing on the calendar at all for April, then there is absolutely no way a domed stadium in Chicago steals the PBR World Finals from Texas, the Kenny Chesney Show they’ve got in May will be at Soldier field a month later June, and that Morgan Wallen Tour they’re hosting in July was at Wrigley last summer. Other than that, it’s a whole lot of downtime for that venue.
Clearly the Chicago market is not getting skipped by these tours, and the only thing we’re missing out on from the list this is CONCANAF and CONMEBOL matches. Soldier Field hosted CONCANAF finals in 2019, and the CONMEBOL Copa America is a quadrennial event that when the US last hosted in 2016, Soldier Field was one of the 10 host venues and AT&T Stadium was not.
So again, I ask, what is not being met by the current market? Asking the taxpayers to fork over several million dollars so we can see Stevie Nicks in March instead of June and be one of several other venues in the rotation for two soccer tournaments that would happen once a decade is an insane proposition.
Comment by Leap Day William Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 3:10 pm
If the future economic benefits are so clear and obvious the Bears should have no problem in getting money the old fashioned way, borrow it from a bank. Because the McCaskey’s want nothing more than having the taxpayers bestow them with additional wealth which will solely benefit their family when they sell the franchise. Just say no.
Comment by Pundent Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 3:47 pm
==dying sport.==
I’m all for derision of public spending on stadiums and arenas, but football as a dying sport? This past Super Bowl was the most watched thing in the United States since the first moon landing, a list of the most watched broadcasts ever is absolutely dominated by the Super Bowls interspersed with extremely unique historical events and gargantuan TV show grand finales, and NFL ratings are always through the roof.
Football has never been more popular than it is right now.
Comment by TJ Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 3:53 pm
–”I feel that we’re starting to get momentum.”–
The Bears stadium is getting momentum in much the same way the Bears playoff chances gained momentum after they won two games in November.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 3:59 pm
if the City and Park District would own the stadium and land it sits on, why would the Bears pay 100% of the cost to build a stadium they don’t own on land that they don’t own? there would have to be incentives of some kind.
Comment by Lincoln Lad Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 4:11 pm
==So again, I ask, what is not being met by the current market?=
The Big 12 Championship game is at AT&T every year until 2030. Plus all of the other events that have already been mentioned.
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 4:13 pm
===why would the Bears pay 100% of the cost to build a stadium they don’t own on land that they don’t own?===
Ironclad 50-year lease. It’s not unusual. Those of us who have houses on Lake Springfield know about this, as one example.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 4:14 pm
===The Big 12 Championship game===
Yeah, let’s put public dollars into a project so we can “compete” for a game we’ll never get. Right.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 4:17 pm
Mark D for the win…
(but you left out the “sir” reference)
Comment by Friendly Bob Adams Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 4:37 pm
Everyone on here is coming up with events a stadium could host. Could.
Fact remains that the Bears have zero commitments. At best they’ve got unnamed people who allegedly work for other teams fantasizing about a Chicago Super Bowl.
Get some commitments. Put a REAL plan together for how you would fill a schedule.
Show us, don’t tell us.
Here are the commitments we have for major events IF you help us develop this venture.
The “we’re leaving for the suburbs” approach didn’t work.
Be professional managers.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 4:43 pm
Let’s try a Midwest example. Lucas Oil is hosting multiple NBA all-star activities, a state robotics championship, the NFL combine, and a few concerts in the next couples of months. They also have the US Swimming trials this summer and state football playoff games in fall. WWE events like Wrestlemania or Royal Rumble use large indoor venues. Also, things like motorcross which we might have close by at Allstate Arena and could be significantly larger (more hotel and tax revenue) in a larger venue.
I’m pretty sure Lucas Oil has paid for itself at this point. The lack of creativity in these responses is baffling.
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 4:43 pm
=I’m pretty sure Lucas Oil has paid for itself at this point.=
If the economic benefits are so readily apparent then why the need for public money? If there’s nothing but upside then the Bears should have no issues or concerns in arranging private funding. The taxpayers learned a painful lesson on how these things work out following their last stadium foray.
Comment by Pundent Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 5:00 pm
===Show us, don’t tell us.===
Agreed.
Otherwise it’s just monorail.
Comment by Rich Miller Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 5:18 pm
== If the economic benefits are so readily apparent then why the need for public money==
Because many of the economic benefits are public not private. Money flows to the public through hotel room taxes and amusement taxes (tickets, alcohol). Soldier Field didn’t make money from Taylor Swift, hotel owners, restaurant owners, and the city made the money.
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 5:24 pm
“Create a schedule for a stadium that doesn’t exist and won’t for 5+ years.”
Comment by supplied_demand Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 5:27 pm
Why is it that when I read about the Bears and a stadium plan, all I can think about is Lucy holding a football and promising Charlie Brown that this is the time she’ll let him kick it?
Comment by Proud Papa Bear Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 5:39 pm
What is baffling is the bending over backwards to try and justify investing taxpayer money to shuffle events that are held elsewhere in Chicagoland and the state into a single facility that is privately owned. But, I’ll play along and pick this apart:
- 2020 NBA All Star Game was at United Center. Chicago has hosted this event three times, most recent in 2020 right before Covid. Events were held all over the city. The Indy All Star game isn’t being played at Lucas Oil, it’s in the 17k seat Gainbridge Fieldhouse, so this is not even close to a valid comparison.
- The Illinois FIRST Robotics league state championships are held at Elgin Community College, and is an event that does not require a 70k seat arena.
- Chicago has never hosted the NFL Combine, but it did host the NFL Draft, another event that didn’t require a massive suburban domed stadium. Nobody is competing for the NFL Combine, as Indy has held that event for 37 straight years, and a domed stadium doesn’t guarantee in any way that Chicago would win it from Indy given no other domed stadium has had a crack at it since Walter Payton and The Fridge were playing.
- As for concerts, Morgan Wallen is playing Lucas Oil in April and then will be at Wrigley in June as previously noted. George Strait et. al. are playing Lucas Oil in May, and then will be at Soldier Field in July. This again does not require taxpayers to help foot the bill for a private company’s entertainment venue in order for them to perform here.
- Chicago has hosted three Wrestlemania events, albeit not in a while. This would be a valid point about weather concerns given their schedule being in early April, except Wrestlemania 29 & 35 were held at MetLife (outdoor stadium) and Wrestlemania XL is going to be at the Linc in Philadelphia (also an outdoor stadium). Clearly the potential of bad weather doesn’t preclude them from going to cities with similar climates and holding them in outdoor venues. Attracting those doesn’t require a new domed stadium, it requires a better marketing team for Soldier Field.
- The US Swimming Trials is a big get for Lucas Oil, but as a quadrennial event, does not justify the construction of a taxpayer-funded domed stadium to attempt to lure here, especially because it’s a summer event and the previous venue seated around 20k.
- The State Football Playoffs in Illinois currently flip between NIU and UIUC, and that flip is only because of the Illini’s “football” (in quotes, because whatever the Illini are doing on the field at Memorial Stadium doesn’t usually deserve to be called football) schedule getting in the way. Most state championship games are played downstate because unlike Indiana and Texas, our largest metro areas are not in the middle of the state, and it’s asinine to ask downstate communities to drive 3-6 hours each way to Chicago for every state championship.
There’s not a lack of creativity here, there’s recognizing this is mostly a zero-sum game here. A lot of these events already happen in other places in the state, and to move them to a Bears-owned stadium in the suburbs is in effect taking them from other communities. The state shouldn’t be putting another thumb on the scale for the McCaskey family to swoop in and get an event from another venue in the city or the state.
Comment by Leap Day William Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 5:43 pm
== Otherwise it’s just monorail. ==
But Brockway, Ogdenville, and North Haverbrook got new stadiums and by gum it put them on the map!
Comment by Leap Day William Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 5:45 pm
Tips hat to OW.
Not. One. Dollar
I hope I got that right
Comment by ill-will Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 5:46 pm
Let’s not forget that if the Bears are granted any taxpayer dollars the White Sox will be right behind them. Or perhaps it will go in the opposite order. Either way, the only good precedent is $0 in public funds.
Once it is determined how much is being asked for, I look forward to testifying in any committee hearing and reading off the list of programs benefiting the lowest income Illinoisans that legislators have declared we “don’t have money” for.
Comment by Jeremy Rosen Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 6:18 pm
== Maybe locate in a disadvantaged part of the city that needs economic development and has better vehicular access. ==
Now that could be a very popular idea, depending on the location. Not everything has to be on the lakefront.
Comment by Boomerang Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 7:48 pm
One thought concerning the position of the school districts, I keep thinking about, while not necessarily a popular consideration. The prior use (Arlington Park) and the possible stadium mixed use development had, and will likely have, very little impact on the districts themselves or services they provide.
Neither the racetrack, vacant land, or stadium mixed use are likely to cause a significant increase in student enrollment or residential housing units likely to draw more families to be served by the school districts.
If the bears don’t end up using the property, now you have a high likelihood of a large amount of residential development on the property that will directly impact the districts. Looking at the nearby ongoing redevelopment of the Motorola property in Schaumburg, and nearby former commercial properties, you now have hundreds more townhouse units and apartment units that will be sending more students into the same district’s schools.
It would seem like the school districts should be cautious with pushing this too far. In the long run a stadium and large amount of more commercial mixed use on that property will bring in more property taxes, albeit maybe less than what the school districts are asking for now, but require less services from the districts.
Additionally, could Arlington Heights and Rolling Meadows end up creating tif districts to cover their respective portions of the property to spur the future redevelopment? It would seem that would make the situation even worse for the other taxing bodies.
Comment by sbfisher Thursday, Feb 15, 24 @ 8:10 pm