Bears still face financial, political obstacles before stadium deal is finalized

The Bears yesterday may have formally unveiled plans for their new $3.2B enclosed lakefront stadium , but the organization “left unanswered how the city would pay for expensive infrastructure improvements,” according to a front-page piece by McCoppin, Gorner, Kubzansky & Sheridan of the CHICAGO TRIBUNE. The Bears presented a stadium featuring a “translucent roof and a glass wall with a view of downtown” that would be a "focal point for great city gatherings, not just football.” Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, who was on stage with Bears President Kevin Warren, "gushed that the project would be the 'crown jewel' to reinvigorate the city." The Bears are proposing putting $2B into funding the stadium, with another $300M coming from the NFL and $900M "to be borrowed by the state and paid back with the city’s existing 2% hotel tax." Johnson did not specify how the city would pay for $325M in "initial infrastructure costs to open the stadium" or $1.5B for an "optional full build-out including a hotel." One big question is whether the hotel tax could pay the debt, since it “has not been enough to pay current stadium construction debt.” Another question is where the city would get money “for transportation and lakefront improvements.” The proposal would “bail the city out of fast-approaching ballooning annual payments” to pay off $429M in principal owed from past renovations of Soldier Field and Guaranteed Rate Field. That money would be “refinanced and paid off over 40 years,” rather than the traditional 30-year repayment. Illinois Senate President Don Harmon previously told the teams to “work together on a joint proposal for funding,” but the Bears' proposal “appears to leave little money” for the White Sox ( CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 4/24 ).

SPRINGFIELD NOT ON BOARD YET: In Illinois, Patrick Keck noted Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker has been “skeptical of whether publicly funded stadiums are a responsible use of taxpayer dollars,” and he “maintained that position” yesterday. Pritzker during an unrelated press conference said, “It's very important to me with all that the state needs to accomplish that we think about what the priorities are.” He added, “There are a lot of priorities that the state has and I'm not sure that is among the highest priorities for taxpayers.” Illinois state Senate President Don Harmon also "sides with the governor," while state House Speaker Emanuel "Chris" Welch "also does not expect enough votes in his chamber for the proposal to advance." Welch: "There's an obvious substantial gap remaining, and I echo the governor's skepticism." Keck noted state Reps. Kam Buckner and Curtis Tarver were present at the Bears' presentation (SPRINGFIELD STATE JOURNAL-REGISTER, 4/24). In Chicago, Petrella, Olander & Quig in a front-page piece reported the Bears are “seeking quick state approval” on the plan, but Pritzker has “yet to even meet with the team about its plans." That is a key sign of the "uphill battle team officials face in trying to push the proposal through the General Assembly before lawmakers are scheduled to adjourn May 24.” The Bears are depending in part on "help from Johnson and his administration in selling the plan in Springfield.” That could be a "gamble given the at-times tense relationship between City Hall and the governor’s office" (CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 4/24).

WARREN, BEARS MAKE AGGRESSIVE MOVE: In Chicago, Spielman, Armentrout & Sfondeles in a front-page piece noted Warren was “not intimidated by the early legislative opposition.” Warren: “We feel that the time is now. Every year that we wait, it’s $150 (million) to $250 million of increased costs that ultimately we’ll have to figure out. But we don’t think that’s prudent. The time is now. Our expectation is in this session.” He added, “Even if we’re approved in a fall veto session, we wouldn’t be able to get in the ground because of the weather. It would push it back a year” (CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, 4/24). Also in Chicago, Lee Bey wrote the Bears instead of city officials "are running the offense here, and that’s troubling.” Team execs “acted like city-paid planners and transit experts as they outlined the additional roadways and infrastructure needs that would have to happen to get the project off the ground.” Meanwhile, City Hall "stood by as a private entity took the lead and told how the public’s lakefront would be redeveloped.” The public and elected officials, “not the Bears, should be the ones deciding what remedies are needed” (CHICAGO SUN-TIMES, 4/24).

THINGS ARE JUST GETTING STARTED : The CHICAGO TRIBUNE Editorial Board stated it was "amazed" that Warren and Johnson hosted "so audacious a public display without having first briefed” Pritzker on its details. Nothing in the plan "will happen without the backing of the General Assembly and the governor,” as they “hold the purse strings.” The editorial stated it was “unsettling” to see Johnson “appear to be fully on board with a plan not yet fully fleshed out.” The Editorial Board: "We agree ... with the mayor that the Chicago Bears belong in Chicago. No question. We were glad to hear Warren tell us that he now was comfortable saying definitively that the Bears want to stay in Chicago, land holdings in Arlington Heights notwithstanding. But, wow, the hurdles to getting this stadium over the finish line are steep" ( CHICAGO TRIBUNE, 4/24 ).