Chicago Bears say they won’t pursue legislation on stadium development during fall session in Springfield
- Oops!Something went wrong.Please try again later.
The Chicago Bears said Wednesday they don’t plan to pursue legislation to help build a new stadium during the Illinois General Assembly’s fall session.
That means proposals drafted by legislators this spring to help the Bears create a “megadevelopment” in Arlington Heights, where they purchased the former Arlington International Racecourse site, will likely not be on the agenda in Springfield during the two-week veto session that begins in late October, slowing a potential move to the northwest suburb.
The Bears have left the door open to staying in Chicago while also indicating their willingness to listen to proposals from other suburbs.
In his statement, Bears President and CEO Kevin Warren said the team continues a “methodical and intentional” process “to find the best stadium solution for our franchise, our fans and the region.”
“Thanks to the leadership of Mayor Brandon Johnson and his team, we have recently engaged in positive and productive discussions with the city of Chicago,” Warren’s statement said. “We also continue to have dialogue with officials in Arlington Heights and other Chicagoland locations.”
With those discussions ongoing, the team “will not be pursuing legislative support for mega projective incentive legislation in the Illinois General Assembly’s fall veto session,” Warren said.
Over the last year, the Bears paid $197 million to buy the old racecourse with plans to build an indoor stadium there as part of a $5 billion entertainment and housing complex.
Various proposals from northwest suburban lawmakers during the spring legislative session in Springfield that were meant to aid the with the move by offering tax benefits and other incentives went nowhere this spring.
In February, Democratic state Sen. Ann Gillespie of Arlington Heights introduced a bill that would create a financing device to allow property tax assessments to be frozen for up to 40 years on major developments such as the one proposed by the Bears. The bill would’ve required the team to invest at least $500 million in converting the 326-acre former horse track site to a stadium and mixed-use development.
In April, Democratic state Rep. Marty Moylan, of Des Plaines, introduced a bill that would create a $3 admission tax to help pay off debt incurred to fund renovations of the new iteration of Soldier Field from when it opened in 2003. His plan called for pooling revenue generated on the Arlington Heights project site from a state sales tax, hotel tax and liquor taxes and a new 3% surcharge on sports betting revenue into a fund to help the northwest suburb and surrounding communities pay for infrastructure improvements.
The plan was subsequently tweaked, but Moylan on Wednesday said that “obviously, our bill wasn’t ready yet and they want to explore other options.
“And good for them. And I say, ‘Let’s go Bears.’”
State Rep. Mary Beth Canty, an Arlington Heights Democrat who worked with Moylan on the legislation, emphasized that “megadevelopment” projects should benefit local governments and not just the team and its stadium. She said Wednesday’s announcement was “not a terrible position for the Bears to take.”
“I didn’t see much interest in Bears-specific legislation in Springfield in the spring and it seems unlikely that support for Bears-specific legislation would grow over time,” Canty said. “So, I think that’s right for them to stay focused on what they’re trying to do, what they’re trying to accomplish and what they can control.”
The team has met with officials in Naperville, while officials in suburbs including Aurora, Waukegan and Richton Park also expressed interest in hosting the Bears.
The team’s lease on Soldier Field runs through 2033, but for an $84 million fee, the Bears could leave in about three years. Last year, then-Mayor Lori Lightfoot, who had season tickets for Bears games, proposed the city spend $2 billion to put a roof on Soldier Field to try to get the Bears to stay put.
The team rejected the idea at the time, saying it was only interested in Arlington Park. A new stadium would give the Bears control of lucrative naming rights, the sale of new seat licenses, parking, concessions, advertising and more.
While team officials have been in discussions with Mayor Johnson, it’s not clear what it would take to keep the Bears in Chicago. A spokesman for the mayor declined to comment on Warren’s latest announcement.
Two Democratic legislators whose South Side districts include Soldier Field and who have opposed state funding for a new stadium, state Sen. Robert Peters and state Rep. Kam Buckner, both said they were glad to hear the team isn’t pursuing the project in the legislature this fall.
“I think Kevin Warren’s statement and the status of the Chicago Bears in regards to veto session is good news and signals a reset of conversations between the city and the Bears organization,” Buckner said in a text message.
Chicago Tribune’s Dan Petrella contributed from Chicago.
