Illinois General Assembly fails to come through with a deal for the Bears to move to Arlington Heights
The Illinois General Assembly closed out its session on the state budget without giving the Chicago Bears any new deals to facilitate a move to suburban Arlington Heights. So, what is next for the Bears' plans to move out of Chicago?
In May it was reported that the Bears organization is now more certain than ever to abandon the City of Chicago and move the team to the property that was once Arlington Park.
Since Mayor Brandon Johnson has failed to secure any agreement to keep the Bears at Soldier Field, the team put out a statement saying that they have made "progress" with the move to Arlington Heights, essentially signaling that they have all but decided to leave Chicago behind.
"Over the last few months, we have made significant progress with the leaders in Arlington Heights, and look forward to continuing to work with state and local leaders on making a transformative economic development project for the region a reality," the team said in a statement at the time.
But the deal in the suburbs is not a lock, either. The biggest hold up in Arlington Heights for the deal seems to be that the various revenue bodies can't agree on how much to soak the team for in property taxes. The school district, for one, wants as much as they can squeeze out of the Bears to further fuel their bloated “education” spending. Naturally, the team is looking to hold taxes down so they can put their money towards development, not just shovel it into the ravenous maw of the school district and other revenue eaters. But to date, there has been no firm agreement.
The chief reason the team seems less and less likely to stay in Chicago is the disinterest that both the city and the state legislature seem to have in loosening the purse strings for a new stadium and improved infrastructure.
And now, with the end of the budget negotiations, lawmakers made it clear that they are also in no big rush to help the Bears make their move to the suburbs after the budget was passed with no new money for the team.
The opposition is fierce to any concessions to the Bears. Indeed, according to the Chicago Tribune, state representatives from Chicago are warning that they will strenuously object to any deals at all for the Bears that don't include the team staying right where they are.
While Arlington Heights area Representative Mary Beth Canty (54) was telling the Tribune that she and her allies were inches away from a deal, but "just ran out of time" to get it done in the recent legislative session, Chicago area State Representative Kam Buckner (26) says that there was no such deal anywhere near being crafted. He further hinted that he and his Chicago allies would strenuously oppose any deals that take the Bears outside of their jurisdiction.
Buckner insisted he and his allies were "vigilantly" watching to make sure the Bears did not "try to sneak language through the legislature" in other bills to get their way cleared for the Arlington Heights move.
"I don’t care how many other lawmakers they talk to — there will be no chicanery, no shortcuts, and no sidestepping the people of Chicago," Buckner said.
One proposal amenable to the Bears would change state laws pertaining to "mega projects," such as building the team's desired new stadium complex. Democratic state Senator Mark Walker (27), also from Arlington Heights, has introduced several bills that would affect large scale projects in Illinois to give them special tax incentives to more easily facilitate their construction, the Daily Herald reported.
On the other hand, Rosemont Rep. Brad Stephens rushed in to demand language that would expressly forbid a new stadium for the Bears to be classified in with other so-called "mega projects."
But whatever its merits, the "mega projects" plan has gained little traction, so it is not in any position to help the team, anyway.
On top of all that, left-wing Govovernor JB Pritzker has also poured cold water on any state funding for the Bears. Last year, Pritzker insisted that it would be a "near impossible" task to approve a Bears stadium deal. On the other hand, Pritzker quietly spent $100,000 in public funds to hire an outside consultant to work with negotiations with the Bears on a new stadium deal, too. So, he may not be the hard "no" he has previously claimed.
Regardless, it is interesting to see so many Democrats shying away from handing the Chicago Bears the billions they want to build a new stadium. Usually, Democrats are all fired up over public funding boondoggles. And many sports supporters are fond of excusing away billions spent on sports stadiums with the claim that the "investment" will later bring great dividends to the host community.
However, research shows that this long-accepted claim used to cover massive public spending on sports facilities is mostly built on baldfaced assumptions and magic fairy dust. Nearly every study shows that massive public investments in new sports stadiums almost never get paid back, and the income brought to the community pales in comparison to the tax dollars sunk into construction and infrastructure upgrades, not to mention the constant maintenance needed to keep these stadiums operating. Indeed, according to Citizens Against Government Waste, "study after study has found that the construction of a new athletic facility has little to no positive impact on local economies."
So, clearly, the Bears are straining against gale-level headwinds that seem to be working against their plans, both in Chicago and in the suburbs.
It is clear that the Chicago Bears have a long way to go and a lot of opposition to overcome if they expect to make any changes at all from where they currently stand with their playing facilities. As of right now, they are still in limbo with an eye towards leaving Chicago behind sometime in the not-so-distant future.
Follow Warner Todd Huston on Facebook at: Warner Todd Huston | Facebook, X at @WTHuston, or Truth Social at @WarnerToddHuston.
