Illinois Lawmakers Scramble to Keep Chicago Bears in the State

On the last day of their spring session, Illinois lawmakers grappled with a stalled tax relief plan designed to keep the Chicago Bears in Arlington Heights, Illinois. With talks in jeopardy, they sought a new strategy to convince the team to remain in the state.

The Chicago Bears, one of the NFL’s founding franchises, have played for over a century in locations ranging from Decatur’s Staley Field to Chicago’s Wrigley Field and Soldier Field. Although the Bears are currently in their offseason, decisions made now could significantly impact the team’s future.

Complicating the situation is an offer from Indiana encouraging the Bears to relocate to Hammond. This includes plans for a taxpayer-financed stadium and entertainment district just 20 miles southeast of Chicago.

Issues during the spring session affected multiple pieces of legislation, including those concerning the Bears. The Illinois House and Senate’s alternating weekly schedule created separate silos, making effective communication challenging and stalling legislative progress.

State Rep. Kam Buckner succeeded in getting the House to pass a measure offering the Bears the property tax certainty they seek for Arlington Heights. His bill proposed freezing property tax assessments for 25 to 45 years. In exchange, the team would make payments in lieu of taxes (PILOT) to local taxing bodies.

However, upon reaching the Senate, the bill faced opposition. State Sen. Bill Cunningham announced the proposal lacked sufficient votes for approval. Senators were concerned about granting tax breaks to a multi-billion-dollar professional sports franchise.

Chicago Democrats opposed the team’s move to a suburban location and preferred a city stadium site, posing an additional hurdle. Cunningham acknowledged the difficulty in getting legislators to support tax incentives encouraging Chicago-based businesses to leave the city.

Cunningham stressed the importance of protecting taxpayers and ensuring any plan benefits constituents, regardless of the Bears’ support.

Cunningham revealed ongoing negotiations centered on a public ownership model for a stadium. This plan would entail municipalities creating their own stadium finance authorities. The Bears would privately finance the stadium while partnering with a public municipality, avoiding property taxes.

Currently, Soldier Field’s use of publicly owned land reflects a common model among NFL stadiums, which are mostly publicly owned. This setup exempts the Bears from property taxes.

A municipal stadium in Arlington Heights or Chicago would allow revenue-sharing negotiations with the Bears. The Illinois Sports Facilities Authority (ISFA) already operates similarly, managing Rate Field and Soldier Field’s renovation.

Despite these developments, no formal legislation had emerged by the Sunday night deadline. Critical questions remain about the plan’s viability and potential acceptance by the Bears.

Bears spokesman Scott Hagel did not respond to requests for comment. The Bears are also requesting $855 million in infrastructure funding linked to the Arlington Heights location.

Buckner noted a lack of information about Cunningham’s plan, expressing anticipation for further details. Emphasizing the importance of specifics, he highlighted how essential the language within any proposal would be.

The absence of concrete information leaves numerous uncertainties about implementing the plan and whether it would secure necessary support from both the House and Senate.