The Bears’ announcement that they plan to build a new stadium on the Chicago lakefront “lacked significant details and raised a host of questions” -- not only about how much public funding would be required and how that revenue would be raised, but also about how the Bears “might win over Chicago and Illinois lawmakers as well as overcome opposition from open space and historical landmark advocates,” according to a front-page piece by Robert McCoppin of the CHICAGO TRIBUNE. Among the new opponents to the planned stadium location was Landmarks Illinois because the 100-year-old Soldier Field remains on the National Register of Historic Places. The Bears’ proposal for a new stadium just south of Soldier Field calls for “saving the colonnades and increasing green space.” But an official with Landmarks Illinois said that the organization “wants to save the old stadium.” The city’s Lakefront Protection Ordinance calls for only “public uses” along Lake Michigan. McCoppin noted the Bears’ proposal “not only lacks any specifics about how much in taxpayer dollars they’d need to finish a new stadium” beyond the team’s $2B investment. While the Bears have said that their “focus is on Chicago now,” Arlington Heights officials said that the team told them Monday that its interest in the former Arlington Park site “has not changed," but State Rep. Mark Walker -- who represents Arlington Heights -- sounded “somewhat resigned” the Bears had actually turned the page from Arlington Heights (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 3/11).
AN ALTERNATIVE LOCATION: In Chicago, Fran Spielman reported the Friends of the Parks urged the Bears on Monday to “consider building a domed stadium on the old Michael Reese Hospital site to avoid a legal battle.” Friends of the Parks board member Fred Bates said that he “was not appeased” by the team’s promise to create nearly 20% more open space. Bates said that the organization “needs a better understanding of what exactly the Bears propose,” how they plan to pay for it and what, if anything, is “in the cards” for McCormick Place East and Northerly Island. Spielman also noted that Former Illinois Gov Pat Quinn is “vowing to reprise the fight he waged to keep the name ‘Soldier Field.’" In 2001, pressured by then-Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley, the Bears agreed to never sell corporate naming rights to the stadium, forfeiting $300M or more. Quinn said a new stadium may not be called Soldier Field, but “if the public owns the stadium, why do you let a private corporation sell the name and collect money?” (CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, 3/11).
WHAT’S IT GONNA TAKE: In Chicago, Justin Laurence noted both “would be accommodated with a domed stadium owned by the Chicago Park District.” Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson said yesterday that his parameters for eventually signing off on a stadium deal for the Bears were that the project provide a “public benefit and public use” of the stadium with a “365-day operation.” Johnson would not say how much public funding of the development he anticipates is necessary, but said that he would “represent fully the interests of the people of Chicago because that’s what they elected me to do.” The Bears have been meeting with members of Johnson’s administration -- including a Jan. 30 meeting between Johnson and Bears CEO Kevin Warren -- to “prepare for the threat of a lawsuit and to work out other details on the infrastructure work” (CRAIN’S CHICAGO BUSINESS, 3/11).
DÉJÀ VU: A Chicago DAILY HERALD editorial stated the Bears’ newly “serious flirtation with the city of Chicago” for a stadium proposal “should not be surprising.” Chicago's sports teams, including and especially the Bears, have “teased the suburbs before with dreamy visions that ultimately went nowhere.” The latest news that the team is turning its attention away from the property it spent $197.2M on last year also should “not be seen as a definitive conclusion to the prospects of an NFL stadium in Arlington Heights.” Even if the Bears turn out to be eager to offer up $2B to build a new stadium on the parking lot of the current one, they “face plenty of potential roadblocks beyond the negotiations over suburban property taxes that they've found difficult, if not also annoying.” The Bears cannot yet assume a partnership with Chicago “will come with the certainty of statewide support” as recent overtures from White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf for help getting a new stadium for his team “got a chilly welcome” in Springfield, and even some Chicago Democrats have been critical of the philosophy behind spending scarce resources to “buttress the profits of wealthy sports teams” (Chicago DAILY HERALD, 3/11).
