Illinois Gov. JB Pritzker has weighed in on Chicago Bears execs’ demand for property tax breaks, and his response was yeah nope:
“I’d like the Bears to stay in the City of Chicago, if they could,” Pritzker said. “They’re a private business. They can choose to do what they like with their business. I do not think that the taxpayers of the State of Illinois should be propping up what now is an $8.5 billion-valued business. They seem to be doing OK for themselves.”
It’s not entirely clear if Pritzker is entirely opposed to the entire “megadevelopment” tax break bill or only to applying it to a Bears stadium; he said “we’re still evaluating the legislation” and “it’s something we’re considering.” If the legislature were to pass the bill but the state denied tax breaks to the Bears, team officials could always wait until Pritzker goes off to be president or something and then try their luck with a subsequent governor.
That still seems like a longshot: Though one supporter of the megadevelopment tax breaks, suburban Chicago-area Democratic Rep. Mary Beth Canty, said a bill was “super close and just ran out of time” in the spring, nothing was actually introduced that got close to a vote, and any passage this fall would require a three-fifths majority. It’s not an impossible route to stadium subsidies, though, so if the Bears owners can be patient, it might be their best bet to get taxpayer funding for a stadium project.
And taxpayer funding is clearly at the top of their mind, as described in the Axios article “Why the Bears’ dream stadium may be doomed without a tax break,” which has a funny way of defining “why”:
If it doesn’t happen, the Bears will have to decide if they want to move forward with a heavier tax burden or go back to the drawing board to find another location, possibly outside of Cook County.
Well, yeah, those are indeed the options. But Bears execs have been trying to find either tax money for a Chicago-area stadium or an option further afield for more than four years now and haven’t gotten anywhere beyond a lot of alarming renderings of giant bears. Clearly team president Kevin Warren and his bosses really don’t want to build a new stadium unless it comes with sacks of public cash; whether they couldn’t make it work without taxpayer help and would have to settle for staying put at Soldier Field, only they and their investment bankers know for sure.
How much of the Bears saga can be attributed to the “golden tomb” philosophy? They currently play in a stadium with a sweetheart lease. They control all parking and concession revenue, and have enough “luxury” seating to remain EXTREMELY profitable. Building a new stadium themselves will not generate enough new revenue to cover construction costs even factoring in concerts/other events.
I.e.; It’s not a matter of if they can afford it, but whether it makes any business sense.
Yes, Soldier Field is primitive by modern NFL standards, but the team makes money there. They could generate more money in a modern stadium, but not enough to pay for the modern stadium. So, if they could get someone else to pay for the stadium… then they’d make even more money. I won’t worry about the Bears future until they start bouncing checks.
After Washington got around $7 billion in public subsidies, I get why the Bears don’t want to give up on that pursuit. But right now the Bears have no leverage. No voters in the city wants to give them money (other than the Mayor, but he has no money to give.) A few publicity hungry suburban mayors have interest in the team, but no money. Suburban voters aren’t interested. And downstate voters are a big no. So it’s either pay for it themselves, like the Rams, or stay put and hope for a more gullible governor.
This is kinda where the Bears’ (and other Chicago teams’) big-market heritage actually hurts them. This isn’t a Jaguars or Bills-type situation where the owner can make the team’s comparatively tiny market/hometown believe that they can move the team somewhere else, even if there wasn’t actually anywhere for them to go. Hardly anyone would take the Bears brass seriously if they were to do a photo op in, like, Gary, Indiana — let alone somewhere like Austin.
Even if they moved to Gary- no one would really care. It’s part of the metro area, season ticket holders are only going there 8-9 times a year. It’s really no big deal.
As someone who has been through Gary, um… yes, I think season ticket holders would really mind going there.
But since the team isn’t likely to build anything there, it’s a moot point.
Ironically, this may be the best solution for the city of Chicago. Other than a couple of Casinos and breweries, the entertainment options in NW Indiana are limited. Tourist money would certainly stay in Illinois (minus a relatively minor amount of amusement tax money). Majority of the benefit with none of the cost.
Prickster is a hypocrite. He tore out 5 toilets from one of his mansions so that it would be deemed “uninhabitable “ and avoid $330,000 in taxes. When caught in his scam he repaid the $330,000, but as the old saying goes “If a bank robber repays his stolen money he’s still a bank robber “ Classic Marxist move.
Marxist? I must have missed the bit in Critique of the Gotha Programme about “to each according to their number of toilets.”