Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: Welch explains how his caucus avoided the city council’s divisive fight over immigrants
Next Post: It’s almost a law
Posted in:
* Background is here if you need it. The Daily Herald’s Jim O’Donnell…
When Bears President Kevin Warren met Naperville Mayor Scott Wehrli to discuss the possibility of a new Bears stadium in the giant west suburb, the password was “leverage.”
That’s a commodity the McMunchkins don’t have as they step up their campaign to strong-arm northwest suburban governmental entities impacted by any new development at Arlington Park.
The Bears want an array of “tax certainties” and other gift-wrapped concessions before ownership commits to building on approximately one-third of the 326 acres that housed Arlington Park.
From the side of a $5 billion sports entertainment company in which annual franchise profits are goof-proof, that’s a marvelous “ask.”
From the side of direct-hit communities including Arlington Heights, Palatine and Rolling Meadows, that “ask” has steadily edged toward dismissibly imperious nonsense.
A “nonstarter,” as Warren might say.
* Greg Hinz at Crain’s…
Initial reaction to Friday’s news generally was along the lines that the Bears are bluffing, using Naperville to pull a better property tax deal out of officials in Arlington Heights.
That indeed may be the case. But one key figure in this drama says he’s convinced the team’s threat is real.
“This is no bluff. They’re serious,” says state Rep. Marty Moylan, D-Chicago, who is the chief sponsor of a pending bill in Springfield to slash the Bears’ property tax on the Arlington track land. The bill would also provide some cash to neighboring towns and to the Chicago Park District to pay part of the debt on the team’s current home, Soldier Field.
“The team has a product and they’re just trying to get the best deal possible,” said Moylan. “But some people have delusions of grandeur,” he added, making it clear that “some people” doesn’t refer to the team but, rather, local school officials pushing to have the team pay more taxes than it prefers.
* The Question: Bluff or no bluff and does it really matter either way? Explain.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:21 am
Sorry, comments are closed at this time.
Previous Post: Welch explains how his caucus avoided the city council’s divisive fight over immigrants
Next Post: It’s almost a law
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
= But some people have delusions of grandeur,” he added, making it clear that “some people” doesn’t refer to the team but, rather, local school officials pushing to have the team pay more taxes than it prefers. =
Does he have any idea how silly that sounds to those of us who are already paying “more than we would prefer”?
How about “school officials pushing to have the team pay their fair share of taxes”?
Comment by JoanP Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:26 am
I don’t think it matters either way. At some point soon, the McCaskey family will either need to sell the team entirely, or bring in a new controlling investor.
A new owner will make the decision whether to move, to where, and how much to invest in a new stadium. It won’t be the McCaskeys, so I see their recent moves as attempting to increase the sale price of the Bears, not actual stadium negotiations.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:26 am
A bluff and not even a very good bluff and no one is buying it, it’s going to be a footnote in all of this, just like years ago when the Bears had an option to buy land in Aurora at Eola and 88, everyone saw through that BS as well.
Comment by OneMan Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:27 am
Absolute bluff. They’re sitting on a white elephant land deal. Now we’re supposed to believe they’d consider doing it again because the locals are savvy enough to have not immediately rolled over? They’re battling real skepticism that this ownership group is up for what it takes to get something like this done.
Comment by Bucknell Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:27 am
It’s an incredibly weak bluff.
When the White Sox threatened to relocate to Tampa, Florida, where a domed stadium was available for immediate occupancy, that was real leverage.
Comment by Gravitas Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:30 am
Doesn’t matter. Also I badly want to play poker with the Bears owners. Maybe at that racino that the General Assembly approved for Arlington Hei…oh wait.
Comment by ChicagoBars Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:30 am
Nope. It doesn’t matter.
The billionaire Bears do not have any leverage.
The billionaire Bears don’t have 60 or 30 for any of these plans. The governor called it a “bailout”
If anything? If anything, AH now has the stronger hand, and can offer “nothing”.., by merely saying… “go to Naperville”
It’s a boondoggle of sad and pathetic proportions, or typical Bears. You choose.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:30 am
I think it’s definitely not a bluff. Nothing’s been built anywhere yet. Doesn’t matter to me personally, professionally, financially, or as a Bears fan.
Comment by The Truth Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:31 am
The time to extract concessions was likely before they purchased Arlington Park. At this point I see it as nothing more than a bluff and I don’t think it will matter. There doesn’t seem to be a taxpayer appetite to help the Bears no matter where they go. And that’s likely because the average taxpayer realizes that this is all upside for the Bears with little if any benefit for the taxpayers.
Comment by Pundent Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:31 am
=== I think it’s definitely not a bluff. Nothing’s been built anywhere yet.===
Still need legislative support, a gubernatorial signature…
Hey, if the Bears wanna pay “full freight”, build anywhere they want.
They want, so it’ll cost em, plus the Bears paying taxes on the AH land, even $1 is a self own to ineptitude
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:34 am
“That’s a commodity the McMunchkins don’t have”
The laughter I’ve heard in the past few days around the suburbs also shows this to be the case.
What is the negotiation attempt the team is making here, exactly?
“Give us everything we want, or we won’t drain money from your local school budget - and we’ll just try to convince some other town to let us cripple their school budgets instead.”
Marty might be too close to the situation to see the forest for the trees, to have made the statement he did trying to put this poorly played and hilariously transparent negotiation tactic in a serious light.
-local school officials pushing to have the team pay more taxes than it prefers.–
Not more than is legally required, like every other residents of those towns. More than it prefers.
Pressing on this angle much harder, is going to backfire for the McMunchkins.
Comment by TheInvisibleMan Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:36 am
I don’t think it is a bluff. I think Bears ownership is just extremely frustrated with not getting everything they want. They are used to getting everything they want, unless we are talking about football.
Comment by Ducky LaMoore Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:37 am
Someone’s going to pay, the only question is whether it’s the team or local property owners.
Comment by Socially DIstant watcher Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:38 am
Completely irrelevant, but an obvious bluff. The bigger question is why anyone is carrying the water for the Bears at all.
Comment by Jibba Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:41 am
Come on, when have unreasonable demands from Cook County ever forced a business to leave the county?
Comment by Lucky Pierre Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:42 am
It’s a bluff but does not matter as so far, enough people are willing to call them on it, and not nearly enough are willing to be Marty Moylan.
==The Bears want an array of “tax certainties” and other gift-wrapped concessions before ownership commits to building on approximately one-third of the 326 acres that housed Arlington Park.==
As OW pointed out Friday, the time to ask for any of this was before they bought the property.
The state isn’t interested in paying out money on a bad investment to relocate out of the city center and statewide revenue engine to a suburb or exurb.
The McCaskey/Halas family, notorious cheapskates since the days of helmets being optional and perhaps the most illiquid billionaires in the NFL, are not about to sell the Arlington property at a loss, nor will they find a land deal sweet enough to counter that loss anywhere north of I-80 and east of I-39.
DuPage County doesn’t have the money to go it alone and probably lacks the interest as well. Grant Wehrli certainly doesn’t have the availability of funds at the municipal level to pull it off, he doesn’t have a constituency clamoring for such a development in Naperville, and he doesn’t have any political juice at the state level to get the right strings pulled. He has his last name and an affinity for seeing it in headlines.
==The team has a product==
This is the most polite description possible of the last three decades of Chicago Bears football.
Comment by Roadrager Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:44 am
Doesn’t really matter. Getting the PILOT legislation out of the General Assembly is what matters. The Bears still have to convince a majority of the GA and the Guv to support a massive tax break for billionaires and do it with few if any votes from Chicago members. Arlington Heights or Naperville doesn’t really change the political dynamic in Springfield.
Comment by Telly Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:44 am
A bluff…and a weak one at that.
==pushing to have the team pay more taxes than it prefers.==
The McCaskeys have a lot of nerve saying the property is worth less than the 197 million they paid for it.
Comment by Jocko Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:50 am
It’s either a bluff or an indication that the team doesn’t really have a real plan. It’s got all the feel of wait 3 weeks and a new community will be the favored site. Hard to negotiate with a corporation that lacks commitment.
If these suburban communities giveaway millions in property taxes, perhaps the local officials could then quit whining year after year about Springfield not providing property tax relief for the property taxes the local officials control.
Comment by Michelle Flaherty Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:51 am
I don’t think it matters either way. The Bears are trying to get a completely unreasonable deal out of someone and they are looking for a sucker to give it to them.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:57 am
Naperville Mayor Wehrli initiated this meeting, not the Bears, a fact rarely emphasized in these stories. Nevertheless the Bears were smart to jump on it. And I think it was a smart PR move by Wehrli.
Is it a bluff, or a fortuitous and timely opportunity that the Bears took full advantage of? I think it is the latter.
What is the familiar refrain from football coaches and commentators: “take what the other team gives you.” I think that just what the Bears did.
Comment by Suburbanon Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 11:58 am
“But some people have delusions of grandeur…”
Now that’s rich.
Comment by Politix Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:04 pm
It is a bluff, but I don’t care.
=“But some people have delusions of grandeur,” he added, making it clear that “some people” doesn’t refer to the team but, rather, local school officials pushing to have the team pay more taxes than it prefers.=
Like Jibba wrote earlier, why are these people carrying the water for the Bears? I listened to the SCORE this morning and the same thing. A guy they had on was making the point that the locals need to look around the NFL and see that none of them pay the full tax.
This whole thing is absurd, why should they get a special break?
Comment by JS Mill Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:05 pm
===Naperville Mayor Wehrli initiated this meeting, not the Bears===
Meh. George Halas was a big investor in Naperville back in the day. The Wehrli family goes way back in Naperville.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:09 pm
==I listened to the SCORE this morning and the same thing. A guy they had on was making the point that the locals need to look around the NFL and see that none of them pay the full tax.==
I heard that guy, too, and for the portion I listened to, the hosts were happily setting the hook in their own mouths for him. He actually called the Bears’ proposal for Arlington Heights “a gift to the northern suburbs,” and I’m lucky I did not send my car into a ditch at that moment.
Comment by Roadrager Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:13 pm
What would be fun is hearing a Karen of Naperville complaining about the Bears because her life is a disaster, I mean, the $30K in property taxes, the child at the University of Michigan that got a ding in the brand new Jeep they got them for Valentines Day, and don’t get her started on the traffic on Sundays as she heads to Orangetheory and Trader Joe’s after… and the line at Starbucks… because the Bears are in Naperville now, paying less taxes.
She’ll want to speak to a manager… or a mayor.
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:18 pm
If the Bears interest in Naperville was sincere then the purchase of Arlington Heights was a bluff to gain leverage with other municipalities. Does anyone believe that to be the case? The problem facing the team is that most people, other than perhaps wealthy season ticket holders, are ambivalent where they play.
Comment by Pundent Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:26 pm
==The McCaskeys have a lot of nerve saying the property is worth less than the 197 million they paid for it.==
Agreed. They paid that price knowing they’d have to spend even more to tear down the buildings they had no use for. Presumably they would have paid more for the same property if it was just vacant since they wouldn’t have had the expense of demolition.
==pushing to have the team pay more taxes than it prefers.==
Breaking news for the esteemed representative: everyone who pays property taxes pays more taxes than they prefer. When is Rep. Moylan going to advocate for a bill to freeze property values for non-billionaires for 40 years at a rate below what was paid for the property so we don’t have to pay more than we prefer?
And yes, it’s a bluff. The Bears are bad at this, and the news related to the Big 10 contract with NBC that Warren kinda-sorta negotiated but didn’t finalize before he left for his new role makes you wonder about his business acumen as well.
And isn’t Moylan from Des Plaines, not Chicago? His district has minimal area in Chicago, it’s almost entirely in the suburbs. Not sure why Hinz referred to him as (D-Chicago).
Comment by Anon324 Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:26 pm
Maybe not a bluff if the Bears have a potential buyer of the AH property in a horse racing group. Bears have done no demolition of the barns, and currently removing seats and some interior demo (which could be easily redone or needed if new owner downsizes or remodels) that will reduce the Bears tax bill on the AH property while they try for a better deal in Naperville or Chicago. Longshot, but I like longshots
Comment by DEE Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:28 pm
Bluff. Where would they build a stadium in Naperville? The $200 million and demolition costs for Arlington Park are a sunk cost. Really doubt, billionaires or not, the bears can afford to walk away from Arlington Heights.
Comment by Huh? Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:30 pm
I think we need to consider that bad poker players really don’t think that they are bluffing. So, no, I don’t believe this is a bluff.
Comment by The Truth Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:30 pm
=== and currently removing seats and some interior demo (which could be easily redone or needed if new owner downsizes or remodels)===
Narrator: it would need to be completely be torn down.
Which racing group is buying it? Churchill Downs is the only group that made sense and they were the ones that sold it.
You can’t salvage anything now
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:31 pm
I know it is hard to get over McCaskey hating, but my eyebrows were raised when I saw the property tax calculation was roughly 6 times higher after they purchased the land and is based on what it will be after it is developed which will be in the billions. What developer wouldn’t want to change that? If deal gets $ to the directly and indirectly impacted burbs and provides something for the Chicago Park District, it seems like a reasonable area to find a compromise. But the hatred of the Bears’ owners is really, really deep.
Comment by levivotedforjudy Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:32 pm
People really enjoy hating on the Bears.
Comment by Hannibal Lecter Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:33 pm
=== What would be fun is hearing a Karen of Naperville complaining ===
Oh, it’s already started on social media. And I’d expect some entertainment during public forum at tomorrow night’s City Council meeting.
Comment by Tim Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:40 pm
===Which racing group===
maybe the same, or hybrid, of the one with whom Churchill refused to negotiate. Churchill isn’t the seller anymore.
Comment by DEE Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:41 pm
=== Oh, it’s already started on social media.===
lol
Likely too at the lacrosse field down by Mesón Sabika, that Karen won’t go to anymore because the margaritas there aren’t frozen enough during brunch.
I may need to watch that next council meeting
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:44 pm
===maybe the same, or hybrid===
Illinois racing is dying, that’s why they sold… if it’s not already “all but dead”
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:45 pm
It’s a bluff and a strong, effective one. But not by the Bears, by the mayor of a town of Karen’s that knows the move there is completely impossible.
Also, this helps AH, not hurt them.
Comment by Lurker Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:52 pm
Typical blunder by the NFL’s worst run franchise. Their lead lobbyist is a from the George Ryan era of Illinois government.. This is a bad bluff/play call.. moving to another location with multiple school districts and taxing bodies will still require negotiating the Pilot program.
Comment by NotRich Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:55 pm
Wake me when the Bears start “talking” to Gary.
Comment by 47th Ward Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:56 pm
=maybe the same, or hybrid, of the one with whom Churchill refused to negotiate. Churchill isn’t the seller anymore.=
So if your theory is correct, the Bears have found a buyer in a dying industry (see Maywood, Sportsman, Hawthorne, etc.) that’s willing to pay an exorbitant price for a race track that was barely drawing patrons before it closed. And now with that buyer in hand they are willing to start the processing of acquiring another property and negotiating with another municipality over the same issues that are hanging things up in AH?
Comment by Pundent Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 12:57 pm
I don’t think the team sees it as a bluff, they’re pretty petulant. But I also don’t think it matters because if everyone else sees it as a bluff, it’s a bluff.
Comment by Joe Bidenopolous Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:00 pm
More on why it is a bluff (or just a dumb move), the folks in Naperville will never accept a big (or even a tiny) property tax break to the school districts. They love their schools out there, love them. They will not let them get shortchanged in any way, shape, or form.
Where are you going to put it?
I can’t think of any open space remotely large enough in the Naperville portion of DuPage County to put a complex. There might be in the Will County portion off of 59, but that would be some distance away from Metra and the tollway. It would make traffic a nightmare. Finding enough space in the Will County portion of Naperville would be hard. There is a golf course you could rip up, and that would still be too small (not to mention the airport just to the north of it)
The more I think about it, the only space I can think of in DuPage in Naperville that would remotely work (and it is still likely too small) is a forest preserve.
Comment by OneMan Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:00 pm
Does Wehrli even have majority support from the City Council?
Comment by Napervillian Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:03 pm
===I saw the property tax calculation was roughly 6 times higher after they purchased the land===
Based on the selling price. Maybe the Bears paid too much? Or, maybe, unlike the Bears, old man Duchossois just knew what he was doing and had longstanding connections to the community.
Comment by Rich Miller Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:03 pm
- Anon324 -
Here’s a link…
https://www.espn.com.au/college-football/story/_/id/37693310/big-ten-new-commissioner-television-deal-coaches-uncertainty
When I read this in ESPN?
Now I know why the Bears stadium issues are horrendous. The guy they hired, he was a disaster for B1G, there’s huge problems for B1G because Warren couldn’t finish the one thing he needed to do; secure massive TV rights.
This Warren guy is so bad, Michigan, Ohio State, Penn State, along with… NBC… they have no idea what is what or how it’ll work and the money is not even gonna be there “after bills come due”.
The Bears, buying land, and having no idea on financing, “tax breaks”, local support, state support, “Chicago” issues… and a family that just wants to get paid in the end…
… this Warren guy is terrible times 100… ask B1G
Perfect Bears hire… and “unavailable for comment” to boot, truly ”a perfect Bears hire”, amirite?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:05 pm
Bluff.
They’re trying to make it look like they have other options when they don’t.
Comment by btowntruth from forgottonia Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:18 pm
I can imagine some circumstances where the Bears don’t move to Arlington Heights, so I think that means it’s not a bluff. But them moving to Arlington Heights is still the most likely outcome.
I don’t think the Bears had much of a strategy when this process started. They thought they would get a red carpet welcome from every stakeholder, so there was no back up plan when everyone started trying to, y’know, negotiate. They tried to pass a take-it-or-leave-it bill without doing much legislative or public engagement. That, unsurprisingly, didn’t work.
The Bears’ point person on this is Kevin Warren. As far as I can tell, he didn’t go down to Springfield once this session. Neither did any other Bears in-house employee. They didn’t even get Walker and Gillespie to yes before introducing the bill.
The Bears also didn’t do anything to build support in Arlington Heights. They could have started donating to local non-profits and making deals with local businesses. They could’ve hosted meet-and-greets with players. Heck, they could’ve had players showing up to football practices at the schools currently giving them grief.
The Bears never really tried to get flies with honey on this. They’ve reacted to every potential conflict with escalation. Given that posture, I don’t think they’re 100% committed to AH, which makes this not a bluff.
Comment by vern Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:25 pm
Before grilling me, and maybe someone has the full explanation as I only did cursory investigation from Cook and Dupage property tax explanations on their website.
Not sure if my reading is correct but the Bears will pay more in actual property taxes in DuPage County rather than Cook County if they can find the same level of acreage needed?
In housing, Cook County residents pay 10% of EAV whereas DuPage and all other counties pay 33% of EAV. Looking at Cook County website it shows for commercial business it’s closer to 25% in Cook from my quick little research. I can’t imagine Dupage lessens the burden on Commercial in favor of homeowners?
Plus all formulation changes to property tax codes are required to go through the GA.
So this is a major bluff.
They could’ve said they were going to somewhere along the Elgin-Ohare on the west side of the airport? Why not take over the Schaumburg Boomers site? It’s on a major tollway right now, It’s also a Metra stop already. You just need to change the field configuration and acquire some extra parking property around the field? That would be a real possibility.
Comment by Frida's Boss Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:36 pm
The Bears are not moving out of state. Why would the General Assembly do anything?
Comment by Bear Down Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:37 pm
My guess is many AH residents would be quite happy not having the Bears in their town. It could be a win-win for AH and the Bears if they go somewhere else. I’ll admit the AH location is fantastic based on where it is located plus( train station and parking couldn’t be better). But, the Bears have to realize the community they go to might not want to pay their price.
Comment by Steve Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 1:56 pm
=== I can’t think of any open space remotely large enough ===
Local speculation is the BP/INEOS campus, which is known to be on the market. There are maneuvers to keep Amazon or other logistics outfits from buying it, or other nearby office buildings, and turning the corridor into an industrial park. https://www.chicagobusiness.com/commercial-real-estate/developers-mull-warehouses-naperville-office-campuses
There was a local banker soft-pitching the addition of a minor league baseball team to Naperville several years ago, with the idea they’d use the land at the southwest corner of 59/75th. I never saw that as realistic, and I don’t see the Bears as being realistic, either.
Comment by Tim Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 2:00 pm
(Tips cap to - Roadrager -)
Maybe bluff with Toronto, not Naperville?
Comment by Oswego Willy Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 2:07 pm
The Bears need to hear something like this:
My final offer is this: nothing. Not even the fee for the gaming license, which I would appreciate if you would put up personally.
Comment by don the legend Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 2:27 pm
== the folks in Naperville will never accept a big (or even a tiny) property tax break to the school districts.==
Yep. That’s in play in Arlington Heights as well and will be a problem for the Bears in any affluent suburb.
Comment by Roman Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 2:29 pm
I think they have options and time. I would not be in such a hurry to say a DuPge is not possible. All things are possible.
Comment by Annon3 Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 2:30 pm
Bluff but you never know in Illinois politics.
Comment by Rahm's Parking Meter Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 2:32 pm
Maybe it is a bluff but given connections it seems like a real attempt. However, in the end is means nothing the Bears want a lot of stuff in the deal. I agree with the comment the unless the Bears leave Illinois let them pay the going price wherever they want to be. It certainly would increase the already bad traffic in Naperville.
Comment by clec dcn Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 2:47 pm
After rebuilding sox park twice let’s find $1B to force the Bears to stay . Ticket prices should not be allowed to rise more than the pension cola
Comment by Bobby Douglass Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 6:22 pm
===Bluff or no bluff and does it really matter either way? Explain===
I don’t know if bluff is the right word. This is, simply speaking, a dumb political move. They could work their existing bill for their existing plan, and they could have involved the state holders in Government that they’re expecting to help line the pockets of a small group of people who already own hundreds of millions of dollars in equity in a sports franchise.
It is foolish and stupid to think that this puts any meaningful pressure on the legislature or the governor.
They’ve convinced me the want to leave Chicago. Well let those greedy billionaires flee meaningful history in the pursuit of more money. They don’t need public assistance to line their pockets.
Let them pay the higher taxes that come with their profit seeking.
The Chicago Bears are not a public good. They are not a public service. In the spirit of Mike Ditka, take no quarter, give no quarter.
Give them no quarter. They can buy it themselves.
Comment by Candy Dogood Monday, Jun 5, 23 @ 8:13 pm