Cubs Chair Tom Ricketts “must maximize revenue opportunities at Wrigley Field to make the baseball better the way the Red Sox did" at Fenway Park during Cubs President of Baseball Operations Theo Epstein's tenure with the club, according to David Haugh of the CHICAGO TRIBUNE. A study conducted by the Cubs shows that even though Fenway “was built two years earlier (1912), Wrigley remains the only major league ballpark with a restrictive landmark status -- costing the Cubs as much as $30 million annually in potential sponsorships.” The city of Chicago “lifted Soldier Field's landmark status before its renovation, yet Wrigley remains a protected relic.” If the Cubs “were permitted to lift landmark status to allow signage, increase the number of night games and redirect some of the revenue the amusement tax generates, it would considerably lessen the burden on the Cubs for the proposed $400 million Wrigley renovation.” Illinois state Rep. Mike Quigley said that the “arrival of Epstein represents an ideal time to take a fresh look at old issues.” Quigley: “I'm willing to help fund the expansion and give them some of the other accommodations as long as they understand we're mutually dependent and respectful.'' Chicago Alderman Tom Tunney “vowed to keep an open mind but didn't sound amenable to every concession.” Tunney: “We bent on concerts at Wrigley but more night games is going be tough.” Haugh wrote the Cubs “need someone to help finesse the project” such as Orioles VP/Planning & Development Janet Marie Smith, “an expert in stadium renovation.” Smith is “better known for overseeing the preservation and improvement project at Fenway for the Red Sox from 2002 to 2009.” She said, “If you ask the National Parks Service about their approach to historic preservation, they will tell you their No. 1 objective is to preserve a building in its original use. Not preserve a building, period” (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 10/30). One MLB GM “believes that Chicago fans should brace for changes at Wrigley similar to ones that have occurred at Fenway Park over the last decade.” The GM said, “I wouldn’t look for that old scoreboard to be sitting on top of the center-field bleachers for many more years. There’s $20 million (a year) sitting up there if they put up a giant Jumbotron. I know people are attached to the tradition, to that scoreboard, but is taking it down any bigger change than putting seats on top of the Green Monster?" (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 10/30).
LOOKING FOR EQUAL TREATMENT: In Chicago, Melissa Harris noted the Bears "have taken Cook County to court over the collection of more than $4.1 million in back amusement taxes and interest the county says the team owes on amenities sold to people in Soldier Field's luxury suites and club seats." And the Cubs, who are the "subject of a county audit, know a similar bill is coming their way soon." The White Sox "got this matter settled years ago" before the "worst of the county's budget woes." The terms of their June '08 agreement “appear to be more generous than what the county is seeking from the Bears and Cubs.” The White Sox “were required to pay $151,457 in back taxes for the period between Jan. 1, 2001, and Sept. 30, 2007.” According to the agreement, the White Sox are “paying amusement taxes on 60 percent of their luxury suite tickets when food and drinks are included in the price.” The Cubs “believe they are being pursued for taxes as high as 100 percent of the bill.” Cubs Exec VP/Community Affairs & General Counsel Michael Lufrano said, “We're working with the county and hoping to resolve it cooperatively. We assume we would be treated similar to the other sports teams” (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 10/30).
