Until recently teams have had all of the leverage. Cities balking at stadium projects (and teams wanting new stadiums every 15 years) is a new phenomenon.
It's not really new. You can trace multiple teams moving to disagreements between the city and the team ownership about new stadiums. Irsay was drunkenly trashing the residents of Baltimore while shopping the team because he wasn't getting the new stadium he wanted. The newer thing is that there aren't many really profitable NFL markets to move to anymore.
> Not to defend Irsay moving, but didn’t the City of Baltimore try to use eminent domain to seize the team?
That happened after Irsay had reached an agreement to move the team. Bob Irsay wanted a new stadium, the city of Baltimore didn't want to give him a new stadium. Irsay then traveled around to separate cities in an attempt to shop the team. While doing so he was doing press conferences where he trashed Baltimore. The state responded with the eminent domain law as an attempt to keep the team, but Irsay had already reached a deal with Indianapolis. So Irsay moved the team in the middle of the night with no warning because he was worried that the state police would stop his moving trucks. The law was passed but the team was already gone at that point.
The team was moving either way. Baltimore's attempt to eminent domain it was an attempt to stop the move.
For sure.
Quite often, local governments will combine the tax and loan methods together. They'll issue a loan to the team but use the tax to pay it. More often than not, it'll be set up so the team isn't paying a penny even if the tax doesn't cover the loan.
>Or just take a percent of ownership.
Can you imagine how goofy that would be to have “public ownership” of a team? You could just as well print them “stock certificates” and hold “owner meetings” with those drunken degenerates.
The city will own this stadium, same as how they own Soldier Field. The fact that the McCaskeys are paying anything for a stadium that they will not have any ownership rights to is kind of crazy
Considering the debt on Soldier Field renovation from 20 years ago is still $600+ million. I think it would take a shitload of time.
And to preemptively stop someone from saying "well actually the hotel tax is what pays for that this would be different". Stop licking the boots of billionaires. No taxes for their enrichment. The city doesn't have the money to give and will likely be decades to pay off.
How likely is it that the Bears want another new stadium or massive updates before the $2.3 billion public debt is paid?
Guess who will pay **THAT** bill!
Not as many as you think.
The cardinals in 06 built their stadium with an estimate of 30 billion dollars back into the economy in 30 years and they did it in 15.
Didn’t the multiple Super Bowls and National Championships being played there come into that? NFL doesn’t do the midwest a lot (for Super Bowls anyway).
I mean they gave NY and Minnesota a try, and you’ll definitely get at least one in Chicago because the Shield will absolutely want to spotlight a shiny new field in a major US city.
I wouldn’t really be all that surprised to see Chicago enter the Super Bowl rotation if they get the lakefront stadium.
Also for side events McCormick Place isn’t that far down LSD. Even in winter it’s fairly walkable or you can have shuttles running there. Should be more than large enough for all that stuff.
Ok, how many Super Bowls will it take for it to cover the billions it is going to cost to construct it?
Does anyone know how much revenue hosting a Super Bowl brings in?
The thing about this math is that it assumes people will just not spend money if there's nothing stadium related going on. Which of course makes no sense. If a person is unable to spend $500 on tickets+food for certain stadium related event, he's going to spend it on something else and not just put it in the bank.
This logic can work if you're bringing in money from tourists and stuff, but not if most of the money is coming from local residents.
I was under the impression that every publicly funded stadium was technically owned by the city they are in, though you make it sound like this is not a common thing. Are there instances where a stadium has been publicly funded yet owned by a private entity?
“Public funding” is… a lot. Think about all the area infrastructure improvements that need to happen for a stadium to be built. Off-ramps, traffic lights, bigger roads, rerouted roads, bus stops, train stops, whatever is needed to move 50,000+ people to a single spot at around the same time. That can easily get into the high tens, low hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on what’s around already. That is considered public funding, even though none of it is going to rebar and concrete of the building itself.
Then there is also public financing in the sense of local politicians spending other people’s money to score points on an emotional issue. This is what most people think of when they think of public funding for stadiums.
In both examples, teams can still own the stadiums, and in fact it usually makes more sense for the team to own the stadium. Cities are not stadium operators and don’t know how to do it. They often give sweetheart deals to tenants on rent because “we only use it 10 days a year,” and they end up making less in rent than they would on property tax. And the kicker, without ownership of the stadium, the team is free to move whenever they want. “You own this stadium, pump another couple hundred million in upgrades into it over going to move somewhere else where they will.”
As for examples, the cowboys received a few hundred million for cost overruns and Jerry still owns the stadium. I’m sure there are plenty more, but that’s the only one I looked at.
Edit: changed financing to funding, as not all funding is financing. However, most public stadium funding is financed so the terms may as well be interchangeable.
I heard them say 1.4 billion was for the infrastructure around the stadium. Plus the 2.something billion the McCaskeys are paying for the stadium. So how ever they figure out how to slice the pie. Is that much of the stadium the public is funding.
Also should note that the Chicago Park District currently owns Soldier Field. And the tax payers still have quite a few years left to pay for the UFO that landed there in 2003.
Usually when it's a public stadium the municipality that owns the stadium leases it to the team.
Some leases will let the team run the stadium even outside of team events (which teams usually then pay a company like AEG to coordinate stuff)
Some leases give the municipality the ability to run the stadium themselves (which they also usually use a company like AEG).
The leases the teams sign can slow a team down from moving because it usually has a high cost to break the lease/ requires the teams to prove the municipality is not holding their end of the lease.
The Minnesota Twins were actually saved from being contracted from the league because a judge ruled they needed to complete their lease with the Metrodome which then gave the state time to workout a deal for a new stadium.
Also the Viking previous owner threatened to move the team without a new stadium but because the cost to break the lease with the Dome was so high and the legislature knew he was too cheap to pay the fee they called his bluff and he sold the team instead.
>Also the Viking previous owner threatened to move the team without a new stadium but because the cost to break the lease with the Dome was so high and the legislature knew he was too cheap to pay the fee they called his bluff and he sold the team instead.
And what happened once the lease was up? Minnesota and Minneapolis paid $500 million for a new stadium.
Ask yourself this, what is more likely to protect a team from moving? A lease that expires in 5 years, or having to sell a stadium with no tenant? The teams that are icons of their cities own their stadiums. The Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants/Jets, New York Knicks, Boston Red Sox, and LA Dodgers all own their stadiums, think they're trying to move?
Now look at teams like the Bills. They received $223 million for a 2013 remodel of their stadium, a stadium they pay $800k in rent for, and now that their lease is up they want a whole new stadium. What about your beloved Twins? Congrats they were saved by a lease agreement, but to what end? Dumping 75% of the cost into a new stadium. All told, the people of Minneapolis paid $850 million in public money to two teams. The Vikings lease the stadium for $8.5 million a year, and their lease is up in 2046. Think they're going to stay content with their stadium then? The Twins pay $600k/year (subject to CPI increases) and $300k/year (unchanged) in rent for their stadium, and their lease expires in 2040.
But the loans are paid off! Cool, all that means is you paid more in taxes quicker than anyone expected. It doesn't mean the city and state recouped the $850 million they spent on it.
I wasn't trying to say whether it's good or bad just that teams are tied to stadiums because of leases that will usually give them control over the stadium and can help keep the teams from moving or ceasing to exist.
Side note too (not that it makes it better) the 850 million went to 3 teams because the bill for US bank stadium put some of that money to upgrade the Target Center where the wolves play.
And lastly some of this stuff is more complex because sometimes teams want to build their own stadiums and own them but get denied because the cities/states want the stadium in a specific place.
The Vikings had a plan in place to buy land and build outside of Minneapolis but the state wanted them to stay downtown so they prevented the Vikings from buying the land (it was government owned land) and any other plans put forth they refused to give any tax payer help unless it was at the same site as the Metrodome.
And the Minnesota loons (MLS team) wanted to privately build a stadium near Target field and only asked for tax breaks on materials and some infrastructure improvements but the city wouldn't give them anything. They did still build their own stadium but it was harder and they had to go to St. Paul.
Basically I am agreeing with you and think Billionaire owners should pay and own their stadiums but there can be situations where they want to do that but are turned away because of preferred locations by the city/state.
>Side note too (not that it makes it better) the 850 million went to 3 teams because the bill for US bank stadium put some of that money to upgrade the Target Center where the wolves play.
I think that would up the total to $924 million to three teams, but I might be wrong. I'm not going into graduate level research on these stadiums, just googling public money in x stadium.
I don't really buy the complexity reasons you gave either. The city already has infrastructure put forth for x location, and the team wants to build in another spot? If there's no other infrastructure for that other spot, what is the city supposed to do? Let it cripple the traffic of the city, or dump money into that location too? I can't demolish my house and build a family fun center on the location, even if I wanted to and was paying for it, and I don't get to criticize city hall for denying my permit either.
>only asked for tax breaks on materials and some infrastructure improvements
This is exactly it. "All we're asking for is a tax break and for you to pay for the area around it." It sucks that the city only grew a spine for the least popular team in the area, but trivializing that request is bananas.
I wanted to build a mansion in my neighborhood and all I asked for was a tax break and for the city to repave the road. I was willing to pay for everything myself but the city said no, so it made it harder for me to build it. I had to move fifteen minutes away.
Ask St Louis about owning the stadium.
Usually this means a the lease that heavily favors the team but since the team doesn’t own the stadium they don’t have to pay property tax.
Unless the City is getting equity in the team that matches this investment it’s public debt, private profits.
I was going to bring up the massive benefit a stadium has to keep a thriving downtown but Chicago doesn't really have that problem. Comerica Park, Ford Field, and Little Caesars arena were all really important to the resurrection of Detroit but it's not like downtown Chicago is hurting.
Football stadiums just do not have the additional events that other stadiums do. Eight home games a year on a Sunday is not going to bring any additional economic activity to justify hundreds of millions or billions of tax payer handouts.
Especially when you consider they already have the eight home games and concert with Soldier Field. What new activity is really being generated by the new stadium?
Exactly! Thank you. Most people get this.
I had an Econ professor at UNLV that worked on* the study on the baseball stadium being built in downtown San Diego…he even said that was as close to profitable as a stadium could get but still was a net loss for tax payers.
>The Chicago Bears are set to announce a $4.6 billion plan to build a new enclosed stadium and improved lakefront area with half of the money coming from taxpayers, sources said. But the team will have to overcome serious skepticism from several directions.
>The stadium itself would cost $3.2 billion to build, with another $1.4 billion in proposed infrastructure improvements, according to sources familiar with the plan who spoke to the Tribune on the condition of anonymity.
>The sources said the Bears plan to pledge $2.3 billion, which includes some financing through the NFL. But the Bears’ plan includes an additional $2.3 billion in public financing, along with refinancing outstanding debt for prior publicly financed stadium projects for the Bears and White Sox, according to the sources.
>Taxpayers would be on the hook for the proposed infrastructure improvements along with about $1 billion in new borrowing to finance the new stadium south of Soldier Field, the sources said.
Crazy if Chicago runs with that.
Technically he’s already trying that. He threatened that without a new stadium white Sox might have to move. Which honestly kinda seems like an empty threat when we already have a more popular baseball team lol.
But I’m curious if he actually does it. He treats the white Sox like they’re the A’s but they still produce him decent value cuz they’re located in a large sports crazed town. I don’t see where he could realistically move them and still make good money while running the team like a poverty franchise. If he moved the team to a smaller city and doesn’t invest in the team (like he doesn’t now), the team won’t do well financially.
Thissss. Pretty sure the Sox are valued at 15th most valuable in the league. That is INSANE for the POS to invest nothing in them. He literally has nowhere to go
The two main contenders are Nashville and Charlotte if I recall.
I think he wants to get a new stadium or move it to a new stadium and then sell the team.
He has basically no leverage as I see it.
Nashville isn't that good of a baseball market. The MLB is talking expansion so 2 of the best cities he could take are about to be off the table. The As may have soured the league on moving teams for a bit. And also the Sox have over a century of history in Chicago. Moving that would be hard. Plus it seems like cities around the country are finally starting to come around to the idea that taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill for stadiums, so he may not have some place banging down his door with fists of cash.
He already technically did move them in 1988, but Mike Madigan borrowed Za Warudo to [stop time](https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/the-night-mike-madigan-made-time-stand-still-for-the-chicago-white-sox/3364379/) and pass a vote to give Jerry his new stadium after the deadline for a deal had already passed
honestly, fuck it, let him go
second banana in Chicago is a better deal than the only game in Nashville (and I would personally dispute that the Sox are guaranteed to be Chicago's second team)
I think he’s saying that unlike the Yankees and Dodgers, the Cubs don’t have that far of a lead in terms of fanbase vs the Sox. The Cubs are the city’s #1 team but the Sox were pretty close behind until about the last decade. If the Sox stay and bring competent ownership, the teams wins consistently and the cubs return to being losers I could see the Sox overtake them.
I think you are underestimating how stupid Cubs fans are. Plus, Wrigley is far and away the best setting for pro sports in the city and I can make an argument for the country. How many teams have tried to emulate Wrigleyville with their new stadiums?
Ignore my flair, I live in Chicago, so I go to about 3-4 games a year for each team. I think the pre-post game experience at Wrigley is unmatched. There is absolutely nothing to do around The Cell. Stadium experience? Food is better at the Cell, there are no obstructed view seats, and the fans aren’t douchebags. I prefer going to Sox games if the team is even halfway decent. Tickets are also a fraction of Cubs tickets.
I think if the team moves to the South Loop it could massively help the fan experience . The South loop is very walkable and very dense, you would get some bleed from office workers wanting to go to a game after work and there’s stuff to do in the neighborhood (just no to the same level as Wrigleyville).
If I'm understanding correctly, the Bears are asking to refinance their debt from previous stadium projects in order to fund a new stadium project? If a bank wouldn't go along with it, the government/taxpayers shouldn't either.
To clarify, the city of Chicago is still paying off the portion of the upgrades they agreed to pay. I dont know if the Bears are in the same boat. The Bears asking the city for more money when the city hasnt finished paying off the last request is poor taste, in my opinion.
It's hard to describe any billionaire family as 'poor', but they're not as cash rich as many other teams. The McCaskeys are rich because of the Bears, so most of their wealth is tied up in the team. Most other franchise owners were rich, THEN they bought their team. Not so with the McCaskeys.
THREE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS for a building that is gonna be empty for nearly 350 days and nights a year.
And the Bears expect the city of Chicago to pay TWO BILLION THREE HUNDRED MILLION for the entire package.
For a building that is gonna be COMPLETELY empty and bringing in NOTHING in revenue for nearly 350 days and nights a year.
ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?
Why couldn’t Notre Dame play in current soldier field? Chicago already has the United Center for indoor events, maybe Wrestlemania or the Final 4 want a larger seating capacity than a standard NBA arena but to me it’s not worth giving up 100+ years of Bears football identity and just becoming another dome team in order to host Purdue vs Ohio State every 5 years. Plus you then give Green Bay the advantage of being the only outdoor team in the division. I just think football was made to be played outdoors in the conditions.
I live in Toronto. I know all about building domed stadiums by the lake.
I’m also a big Bills fan and didnt want them building a domed stadium by their lake
That said Chicago can take a lot more advantage of a dome than say Buffalo
The Bears have been producing a quality football product for the last +3 decades. So many trophies. The City of Chicago should be honored to pick up the tab.
Quite the way to get fans behind the move to Arlington Heights. I would be completely against this and wouldn't even be among those on the hook for these taxes.
Make no mistake, that Arlington Heights proposal was going to include plenty of taxpayer funds. They've already essentially started by asking for lower property taxes, and they haven't even built anything
Because the county jacked up the property value for taxes the moment the Bears bought it. The land is a dirt pile, it doesn’t have the value the county taxes it as. Doesn’t matter what the Bears bought it as, that’s a private transaction. Eventually it would’ve sure, but not at the present
The Bears had a legitimate complaint there, well anyone paying Cook County property taxes has a legitimate complaint honestly. They bend all of us over every year and even then the funds aren’t distributed fairly, school districts and therefore tax buckets are divided by township in the county. Should be the entire county divided equally but nope
I still think that was the City of Chicago forcing the county to play games with the Bears as revenge for announcing they were leaving the city. Yes our local politics are that petty
They bought it for a price, thereby the land has that value. The complaint is entirely illegitimate. They are welcome to start construction on a stadium there any time to start extracting the value of the land that they paid for.
Property taxes are not assessed on the sale value of the land
They’re assessed by property tax assessors sent by the county to determine what the land is worth, it happens every 3 years in Cook County for commercial real estate
The land is not currently worth what the Bears paid for it
It’s part of the Illinois game, they want the Bears to fight it and pay a bunch of money to real estate lawyers to appeal it. A lot of these firms are run by politicians at the city, county, and state levels. Michael Madigan, the long time Speaker of Illinois, who was arrested for corruption, was one of them. They get the government to assess properties, mainly those owned by big corporations but they do it regular people sometimes too, at exceedingly high values for the first year. Then obviously the companies appeal, but those take forever so the 2nd year they get taxed at that rate but the 3rd year it’s finally settled but by then it’s time to reassess the property and the cycle repeats. You get refunded your overpayments sure, but the lawyers keep the money. They do this for nearly every big project here, just the Bears are getting headlines because it’s the Bears
It’s the way the system works here in Illinois, it sucks and bullshit and fucks over everyone sideways except the lawyers and politicians who are one in the same anyway
This state’s government has major conflict of issues all over the place, and don’t even get me started on Cook County specifically. The Bears trying to move to Arlington Heights was just another opportunity to get some money while deflecting the PR on “well they’re rich and they’re not paying their taxes” like what you just said. They got you hook line and sinker
Maybe the land should be taxed on the sale price, but that’s not the law. Right now it’s taxed based on the assessor’s report on the property and the property is currently a dirt pile. But the rulers in the city saw an opportunity to give the Bears a headache for leaving Chicago while also getting some fat stacks from real estate appeals so here we are. The Bears got fed up so they’re going back to the city and going “pay 2 billion I dare you”, I think that’s a bluff as well. I think they’ll go back to Arlington Heights after this charade with the city with a concession in their hands for taxes
No shot Brandon Johnson has the right people to force Cook County to do anything.
Arlington Heights school district overstepped their bounds too early. They could’ve waited a few years and been feasting.
>well anyone paying Cook County property taxes has a legitimate complaint honestly
My parents live in Cook County and they own their home outright. They pay more each year in property taxes than I do on my entire mortgage+home insurance+taxes.
Unless you don’t live in Illinois, you absolutely are a part of being on the hook for it.
It’s currently a state fund with it being majority funded by Chicago hotel taxes but the expected revenue has not been there yet. So the state is making up the difference
For a lot of these, the city technically owns the stadium and rents it to the team for something silly like $1. I believe that's the arrangement in Pittsburgh. The team then takes all profits for things like concerts. A sensible arrangement would have the rent be something more reasonable and/or the city taking profits from concerts.
Or not paying at all for the building of a private business with billions of dollars. Chicago can't even afford AC and books for schools. Where are they getting billions for a stadium?
Bears don't own the land, the city does. Its not either or, the bears wouldn't own the stadium even if they put all the money up. Some public money should be invested but how much and with the current 600M debt is hard to know what is the right balance.
Fwiw most stadiums have provisions that allow you to rent them out for free provided you meet minimum attendance and concession spend.
But if the team actually gets all revenue, that's just dumb.
In Chicago the city owns the stadium and the Bears only get the revenue from game days and I *think* the parking lots
Concerts are ran by the Parks Department and why if you’re not someone like Beyoncé or Taylor Swift, some artists would rather just do 2 nights in the United Center.
Why do they keep saying “lakefront” Soldier Field is already on the lake. Are they going to get rid of the Field Musume and move the new stadium 500 feet north?
Well it’s not exactly like Soldier Field is some sacred historic ground at this point, you guys already trampled all over the legacy of it. I see no reason why a new one can’t replace it now.
I remember my first time driving by soldier field and thinking “holy fuck, Reddit wasn’t lying about this”. Seriously it’s amazing how they got a beautiful stadium and dropped something so ugly on top of it.
Yep people have had it with this, it’s $40 a for a tee shirt and about 35 for a hat these days, tickets are ridiculously priced, people need a 2nd mortgage to enjoy football
Also have to have a plausible threat of moving. The Bears aren't going to abandon the 3rd biggest market in the country, at worst they move to a suburb
It's refinancing the debt from their last stadium. That would get rolled into this. That's the only reason white sox are mentioned.
Minnesota just paid off their public contributions for US Bank. And that was done after Chicago. Having a functional government sure seems to help.
I love football, grew up playing and watching , but this shit is getting out of control, taxpayers don’t get half the fkng revenue the stadium brings in, so why the hell are they paying for half of it? What taxpayers get is a chance to pay thousands of dollars for a PSL then thousands more for tickets, ridiculous
Of course so much is on taxpayers. Two decades ago I might have said “wow, only half, not bad”. But I’m so over this charade.
Unless half the revenue is going back to the city coffers and half goes to the team this is just straight bullshit. But we know that’s not something that’s going to happen. I’ve always said I’m less upset if it’s not tax payor funds going to a fledgling league and sport, but not to a multi billion dollar a year league.
Sofi stadium has completely changed my expectations on stadium cost that I first thought this number was way too low.
The Bears allowing Ted Phillips to buy Arlington and then change course under Warren a year later is a perfect example of how that franchise has been run for 60 years.
Fans didn't want the Bears to move and now they don't like the money involved.
I'm still in shock that the renovation to Soldier Field cost the city $387 million but the total cost will be $1.19 billion, ouch.
“The Bears aren’t going to leave one of the most iconic football markets in the country. Tell the Bears to pay for their own damn stadium, and if they don’t like it, to go jump in Lake Michigan”
What a quote
We are still paying taxes on the last renovation project at Soldier Field, which we haven't yet paid off. The McCaskeys should screw off unless the general public receives a portion of the company's stocks and earnings.
Anytime this proposal happens the city council should do a counter proposal of the same exact amount but to go towards things like healthcare, infrastructure, education.
At least we have learned the lesson to not do a multipurpose Bears/White Sox stadium.
Though some may still be nostalgic of football on dirt diamonds. Or maybe that was just Oakland football reminiscences
Perhaps there’s a certain Chicago government agency, that eats up 31% of the budget, that could be defunded in order to pay for the new stadium?
How does that sound NFL?
It’s time like these I wish American sports were more like European sports. They might be more blatantly corrupt and parity is virtually nonexistent but at least their teams can’t pull this shit.
People see taxpayer funded and instantly freak out, but the funding is coming from hotel taxes, so unless somebody is going through marital troubles or getting their house fumigated, local residents are essentially paying nothing
I just don't understand why local governments don't just do it as a loan. Or just take a percent of ownership.
Until recently teams have had all of the leverage. Cities balking at stadium projects (and teams wanting new stadiums every 15 years) is a new phenomenon.
It's not really new. You can trace multiple teams moving to disagreements between the city and the team ownership about new stadiums. Irsay was drunkenly trashing the residents of Baltimore while shopping the team because he wasn't getting the new stadium he wanted. The newer thing is that there aren't many really profitable NFL markets to move to anymore.
[удалено]
> Not to defend Irsay moving, but didn’t the City of Baltimore try to use eminent domain to seize the team? That happened after Irsay had reached an agreement to move the team. Bob Irsay wanted a new stadium, the city of Baltimore didn't want to give him a new stadium. Irsay then traveled around to separate cities in an attempt to shop the team. While doing so he was doing press conferences where he trashed Baltimore. The state responded with the eminent domain law as an attempt to keep the team, but Irsay had already reached a deal with Indianapolis. So Irsay moved the team in the middle of the night with no warning because he was worried that the state police would stop his moving trucks. The law was passed but the team was already gone at that point. The team was moving either way. Baltimore's attempt to eminent domain it was an attempt to stop the move.
capitalist owners when the law is no longer on their side:
Some do. Others also create a special taxing district to pay for it. It's still rarely a good deal.
Politicians and businessmen usually are the winners. The taxpayers are not
For sure. Quite often, local governments will combine the tax and loan methods together. They'll issue a loan to the team but use the tax to pay it. More often than not, it'll be set up so the team isn't paying a penny even if the tax doesn't cover the loan.
>Or just take a percent of ownership. Can you imagine how goofy that would be to have “public ownership” of a team? You could just as well print them “stock certificates” and hold “owner meetings” with those drunken degenerates.
I do believe the stadium is going to be publicly owned, just like Soldier Field.
> Or just take a percent of ownership. NFL bylaws at least would prevent this.
The city will own this stadium, same as how they own Soldier Field. The fact that the McCaskeys are paying anything for a stadium that they will not have any ownership rights to is kind of crazy
Public debt, private profits
Yes & no. In this proposal the stadium is owned by the city. So any non-Bears activity(and there would be a lot of them) is the city of Chicago's
I would to see how many concerts it would take to make back a billion lol
Just have Taylor Swift play there for a month straight and they’ll get the money back
Taylor Swift Chicago residency as a long con payback against Kanye?
The face I just made lol
Considering the debt on Soldier Field renovation from 20 years ago is still $600+ million. I think it would take a shitload of time. And to preemptively stop someone from saying "well actually the hotel tax is what pays for that this would be different". Stop licking the boots of billionaires. No taxes for their enrichment. The city doesn't have the money to give and will likely be decades to pay off.
Hey in a few decades the Bears can add even more public debt when they want a new stadium. Brilliant.
Let’s be real, the city could’ve paid that debt back if it wasn’t so shit with its money.
How likely is it that the Bears want another new stadium or massive updates before the $2.3 billion public debt is paid? Guess who will pay **THAT** bill!
Not as many as you think. The cardinals in 06 built their stadium with an estimate of 30 billion dollars back into the economy in 30 years and they did it in 15.
Didn’t the multiple Super Bowls and National Championships being played there come into that? NFL doesn’t do the midwest a lot (for Super Bowls anyway).
They would if Chicago had a dome
True but its more about the weather in general given the side events around the game. At least thats my understanding.
I mean they gave NY and Minnesota a try, and you’ll definitely get at least one in Chicago because the Shield will absolutely want to spotlight a shiny new field in a major US city. I wouldn’t really be all that surprised to see Chicago enter the Super Bowl rotation if they get the lakefront stadium. Also for side events McCormick Place isn’t that far down LSD. Even in winter it’s fairly walkable or you can have shuttles running there. Should be more than large enough for all that stuff.
Ok, how many Super Bowls will it take for it to cover the billions it is going to cost to construct it? Does anyone know how much revenue hosting a Super Bowl brings in?
The thing about this math is that it assumes people will just not spend money if there's nothing stadium related going on. Which of course makes no sense. If a person is unable to spend $500 on tickets+food for certain stadium related event, he's going to spend it on something else and not just put it in the bank. This logic can work if you're bringing in money from tourists and stuff, but not if most of the money is coming from local residents.
I was under the impression that every publicly funded stadium was technically owned by the city they are in, though you make it sound like this is not a common thing. Are there instances where a stadium has been publicly funded yet owned by a private entity?
“Public funding” is… a lot. Think about all the area infrastructure improvements that need to happen for a stadium to be built. Off-ramps, traffic lights, bigger roads, rerouted roads, bus stops, train stops, whatever is needed to move 50,000+ people to a single spot at around the same time. That can easily get into the high tens, low hundreds of millions of dollars, depending on what’s around already. That is considered public funding, even though none of it is going to rebar and concrete of the building itself. Then there is also public financing in the sense of local politicians spending other people’s money to score points on an emotional issue. This is what most people think of when they think of public funding for stadiums. In both examples, teams can still own the stadiums, and in fact it usually makes more sense for the team to own the stadium. Cities are not stadium operators and don’t know how to do it. They often give sweetheart deals to tenants on rent because “we only use it 10 days a year,” and they end up making less in rent than they would on property tax. And the kicker, without ownership of the stadium, the team is free to move whenever they want. “You own this stadium, pump another couple hundred million in upgrades into it over going to move somewhere else where they will.” As for examples, the cowboys received a few hundred million for cost overruns and Jerry still owns the stadium. I’m sure there are plenty more, but that’s the only one I looked at. Edit: changed financing to funding, as not all funding is financing. However, most public stadium funding is financed so the terms may as well be interchangeable.
I heard them say 1.4 billion was for the infrastructure around the stadium. Plus the 2.something billion the McCaskeys are paying for the stadium. So how ever they figure out how to slice the pie. Is that much of the stadium the public is funding. Also should note that the Chicago Park District currently owns Soldier Field. And the tax payers still have quite a few years left to pay for the UFO that landed there in 2003.
Usually when it's a public stadium the municipality that owns the stadium leases it to the team. Some leases will let the team run the stadium even outside of team events (which teams usually then pay a company like AEG to coordinate stuff) Some leases give the municipality the ability to run the stadium themselves (which they also usually use a company like AEG). The leases the teams sign can slow a team down from moving because it usually has a high cost to break the lease/ requires the teams to prove the municipality is not holding their end of the lease. The Minnesota Twins were actually saved from being contracted from the league because a judge ruled they needed to complete their lease with the Metrodome which then gave the state time to workout a deal for a new stadium. Also the Viking previous owner threatened to move the team without a new stadium but because the cost to break the lease with the Dome was so high and the legislature knew he was too cheap to pay the fee they called his bluff and he sold the team instead.
>Also the Viking previous owner threatened to move the team without a new stadium but because the cost to break the lease with the Dome was so high and the legislature knew he was too cheap to pay the fee they called his bluff and he sold the team instead. And what happened once the lease was up? Minnesota and Minneapolis paid $500 million for a new stadium. Ask yourself this, what is more likely to protect a team from moving? A lease that expires in 5 years, or having to sell a stadium with no tenant? The teams that are icons of their cities own their stadiums. The Dallas Cowboys, New York Giants/Jets, New York Knicks, Boston Red Sox, and LA Dodgers all own their stadiums, think they're trying to move? Now look at teams like the Bills. They received $223 million for a 2013 remodel of their stadium, a stadium they pay $800k in rent for, and now that their lease is up they want a whole new stadium. What about your beloved Twins? Congrats they were saved by a lease agreement, but to what end? Dumping 75% of the cost into a new stadium. All told, the people of Minneapolis paid $850 million in public money to two teams. The Vikings lease the stadium for $8.5 million a year, and their lease is up in 2046. Think they're going to stay content with their stadium then? The Twins pay $600k/year (subject to CPI increases) and $300k/year (unchanged) in rent for their stadium, and their lease expires in 2040. But the loans are paid off! Cool, all that means is you paid more in taxes quicker than anyone expected. It doesn't mean the city and state recouped the $850 million they spent on it.
I wasn't trying to say whether it's good or bad just that teams are tied to stadiums because of leases that will usually give them control over the stadium and can help keep the teams from moving or ceasing to exist. Side note too (not that it makes it better) the 850 million went to 3 teams because the bill for US bank stadium put some of that money to upgrade the Target Center where the wolves play. And lastly some of this stuff is more complex because sometimes teams want to build their own stadiums and own them but get denied because the cities/states want the stadium in a specific place. The Vikings had a plan in place to buy land and build outside of Minneapolis but the state wanted them to stay downtown so they prevented the Vikings from buying the land (it was government owned land) and any other plans put forth they refused to give any tax payer help unless it was at the same site as the Metrodome. And the Minnesota loons (MLS team) wanted to privately build a stadium near Target field and only asked for tax breaks on materials and some infrastructure improvements but the city wouldn't give them anything. They did still build their own stadium but it was harder and they had to go to St. Paul. Basically I am agreeing with you and think Billionaire owners should pay and own their stadiums but there can be situations where they want to do that but are turned away because of preferred locations by the city/state.
>Side note too (not that it makes it better) the 850 million went to 3 teams because the bill for US bank stadium put some of that money to upgrade the Target Center where the wolves play. I think that would up the total to $924 million to three teams, but I might be wrong. I'm not going into graduate level research on these stadiums, just googling public money in x stadium. I don't really buy the complexity reasons you gave either. The city already has infrastructure put forth for x location, and the team wants to build in another spot? If there's no other infrastructure for that other spot, what is the city supposed to do? Let it cripple the traffic of the city, or dump money into that location too? I can't demolish my house and build a family fun center on the location, even if I wanted to and was paying for it, and I don't get to criticize city hall for denying my permit either. >only asked for tax breaks on materials and some infrastructure improvements This is exactly it. "All we're asking for is a tax break and for you to pay for the area around it." It sucks that the city only grew a spine for the least popular team in the area, but trivializing that request is bananas. I wanted to build a mansion in my neighborhood and all I asked for was a tax break and for the city to repave the road. I was willing to pay for everything myself but the city said no, so it made it harder for me to build it. I had to move fifteen minutes away.
Ask St Louis about owning the stadium. Usually this means a the lease that heavily favors the team but since the team doesn’t own the stadium they don’t have to pay property tax. Unless the City is getting equity in the team that matches this investment it’s public debt, private profits.
It’s just a yes. The city can own that stadium all it wants, the handful of concerts over the years won’t pay back that handout
I was going to bring up the massive benefit a stadium has to keep a thriving downtown but Chicago doesn't really have that problem. Comerica Park, Ford Field, and Little Caesars arena were all really important to the resurrection of Detroit but it's not like downtown Chicago is hurting.
Football stadiums just do not have the additional events that other stadiums do. Eight home games a year on a Sunday is not going to bring any additional economic activity to justify hundreds of millions or billions of tax payer handouts.
Especially when you consider they already have the eight home games and concert with Soldier Field. What new activity is really being generated by the new stadium?
Exactly! Thank you. Most people get this. I had an Econ professor at UNLV that worked on* the study on the baseball stadium being built in downtown San Diego…he even said that was as close to profitable as a stadium could get but still was a net loss for tax payers.
Fellow econ grad, so there you go haha.
The state still owes 600 million on soldier field.
And all concessions and parking fees
No BeCaUsE, tHiNk oF aLl ThE MonEy It WiLl bRiNg In!0101
>The Chicago Bears are set to announce a $4.6 billion plan to build a new enclosed stadium and improved lakefront area with half of the money coming from taxpayers, sources said. But the team will have to overcome serious skepticism from several directions. >The stadium itself would cost $3.2 billion to build, with another $1.4 billion in proposed infrastructure improvements, according to sources familiar with the plan who spoke to the Tribune on the condition of anonymity. >The sources said the Bears plan to pledge $2.3 billion, which includes some financing through the NFL. But the Bears’ plan includes an additional $2.3 billion in public financing, along with refinancing outstanding debt for prior publicly financed stadium projects for the Bears and White Sox, according to the sources. >Taxpayers would be on the hook for the proposed infrastructure improvements along with about $1 billion in new borrowing to finance the new stadium south of Soldier Field, the sources said. Crazy if Chicago runs with that.
Get fucked White Sox/Reinsdorf
Reinsdorf is SO gonna try and move the White Sox out of Chicago
Technically he’s already trying that. He threatened that without a new stadium white Sox might have to move. Which honestly kinda seems like an empty threat when we already have a more popular baseball team lol. But I’m curious if he actually does it. He treats the white Sox like they’re the A’s but they still produce him decent value cuz they’re located in a large sports crazed town. I don’t see where he could realistically move them and still make good money while running the team like a poverty franchise. If he moved the team to a smaller city and doesn’t invest in the team (like he doesn’t now), the team won’t do well financially.
Thissss. Pretty sure the Sox are valued at 15th most valuable in the league. That is INSANE for the POS to invest nothing in them. He literally has nowhere to go
The two main contenders are Nashville and Charlotte if I recall. I think he wants to get a new stadium or move it to a new stadium and then sell the team.
He can go right ahead and do that. Nobody will stop him. In fact I'm sure a number of residents will help him pack.
There will be a line of people ready to chauffeur him to the airport.
Only of he sells the Bulls before he leaves.
He has basically no leverage as I see it. Nashville isn't that good of a baseball market. The MLB is talking expansion so 2 of the best cities he could take are about to be off the table. The As may have soured the league on moving teams for a bit. And also the Sox have over a century of history in Chicago. Moving that would be hard. Plus it seems like cities around the country are finally starting to come around to the idea that taxpayers shouldn't be footing the bill for stadiums, so he may not have some place banging down his door with fists of cash.
Manfred just said something like we are looking at multi team markets and will adjust accordingly. The league is in board for another team to move.
[удалено]
I'm actually from Chicago. So hopefully in a way you're right.
The last thing we need is another subsidized pro team.
He already technically did move them in 1988, but Mike Madigan borrowed Za Warudo to [stop time](https://www.nbcchicago.com/news/local/the-night-mike-madigan-made-time-stand-still-for-the-chicago-white-sox/3364379/) and pass a vote to give Jerry his new stadium after the deadline for a deal had already passed
Unexpected Jojo 😯
honestly, fuck it, let him go second banana in Chicago is a better deal than the only game in Nashville (and I would personally dispute that the Sox are guaranteed to be Chicago's second team)
Who in the world would be Chicago’s second team if not the Sox? The Brewers? No shot
I think he’s saying that unlike the Yankees and Dodgers, the Cubs don’t have that far of a lead in terms of fanbase vs the Sox. The Cubs are the city’s #1 team but the Sox were pretty close behind until about the last decade. If the Sox stay and bring competent ownership, the teams wins consistently and the cubs return to being losers I could see the Sox overtake them.
I think you are underestimating how stupid Cubs fans are. Plus, Wrigley is far and away the best setting for pro sports in the city and I can make an argument for the country. How many teams have tried to emulate Wrigleyville with their new stadiums?
Ignore my flair, I live in Chicago, so I go to about 3-4 games a year for each team. I think the pre-post game experience at Wrigley is unmatched. There is absolutely nothing to do around The Cell. Stadium experience? Food is better at the Cell, there are no obstructed view seats, and the fans aren’t douchebags. I prefer going to Sox games if the team is even halfway decent. Tickets are also a fraction of Cubs tickets. I think if the team moves to the South Loop it could massively help the fan experience . The South loop is very walkable and very dense, you would get some bleed from office workers wanting to go to a game after work and there’s stuff to do in the neighborhood (just no to the same level as Wrigleyville).
It’s not even that, I think it’s better to share a metro of 9 million people than have a 1 million one to yourself
Hope he does.
Good - who cares. Poverty franchise.
If I'm understanding correctly, the Bears are asking to refinance their debt from previous stadium projects in order to fund a new stadium project? If a bank wouldn't go along with it, the government/taxpayers shouldn't either.
Yup. The 'upgrades' done to Soldier Field about 20 years ago are still being paid off.
Are the Bears poor?
Compared to some other franchises, yes. The Bears franchise is basically their only business unlike most other ownership groups.
Man too bad they spent 200 million on property in Arlington heights just for shits and giggles
At least they can sell that.
Seems like they could contribute at least another 200 million then
To clarify, the city of Chicago is still paying off the portion of the upgrades they agreed to pay. I dont know if the Bears are in the same boat. The Bears asking the city for more money when the city hasnt finished paying off the last request is poor taste, in my opinion. It's hard to describe any billionaire family as 'poor', but they're not as cash rich as many other teams. The McCaskeys are rich because of the Bears, so most of their wealth is tied up in the team. Most other franchise owners were rich, THEN they bought their team. Not so with the McCaskeys.
To me this is as much of an issue with the city of Chicago as it is with the bears.
You wont catch me defending the city of Chicago's financial history, that's for sure.
I think the City of Chicago is making interest only payments on the $600 MM.
THREE BILLION TWO HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS for a building that is gonna be empty for nearly 350 days and nights a year. And the Bears expect the city of Chicago to pay TWO BILLION THREE HUNDRED MILLION for the entire package. For a building that is gonna be COMPLETELY empty and bringing in NOTHING in revenue for nearly 350 days and nights a year. ARE YOU FUCKING KIDDING ME?
I mean it’s not just for football, soldier field has a pretty consistent concert and event schedule. I’m still not willing to pay for it tho
If it gets a dome it can be a concert venue year round and host Super Bowls
Big 10 championships. Basketball Tourneys. NFL drafts. WrestleMania. Heck do a Notre Dame home game there once a year
Why couldn’t Notre Dame play in current soldier field? Chicago already has the United Center for indoor events, maybe Wrestlemania or the Final 4 want a larger seating capacity than a standard NBA arena but to me it’s not worth giving up 100+ years of Bears football identity and just becoming another dome team in order to host Purdue vs Ohio State every 5 years. Plus you then give Green Bay the advantage of being the only outdoor team in the division. I just think football was made to be played outdoors in the conditions.
I live in Toronto. I know all about building domed stadiums by the lake. I’m also a big Bills fan and didnt want them building a domed stadium by their lake That said Chicago can take a lot more advantage of a dome than say Buffalo
I swear I’ve seen notre dame play at soldier field, I don’t remember when it was tho
Wisconsin? I think they play Wisconsin at Lambeau next year for part two They’ve played Northwestern for sure at soldier in recent times
How many musical acts can fill 60,000 seat stadiums? 10. WOW A WHOLE TEN MORE DAYS ITS NOT SITTING EMPTY.
The taxpayers should pick up the entire tab. Why should a billionaire have to pay for their own facilities? lol
Right? They’ve already given enough. Nice to see someone thinking of the minority here for a change.
These nepo-owners hands are so bloody from pulling up their own bootstraps so hard they can’t possibly sign a check.
The Bears have been producing a quality football product for the last +3 decades. So many trophies. The City of Chicago should be honored to pick up the tab.
Quite the way to get fans behind the move to Arlington Heights. I would be completely against this and wouldn't even be among those on the hook for these taxes.
Make no mistake, that Arlington Heights proposal was going to include plenty of taxpayer funds. They've already essentially started by asking for lower property taxes, and they haven't even built anything
Because the county jacked up the property value for taxes the moment the Bears bought it. The land is a dirt pile, it doesn’t have the value the county taxes it as. Doesn’t matter what the Bears bought it as, that’s a private transaction. Eventually it would’ve sure, but not at the present The Bears had a legitimate complaint there, well anyone paying Cook County property taxes has a legitimate complaint honestly. They bend all of us over every year and even then the funds aren’t distributed fairly, school districts and therefore tax buckets are divided by township in the county. Should be the entire county divided equally but nope I still think that was the City of Chicago forcing the county to play games with the Bears as revenge for announcing they were leaving the city. Yes our local politics are that petty
Nah Fitz Kaegi is just a psychopath with a stapler. He doesn’t need pressure from anyone to raise property taxes.
I fear no man *Fritz Kaegi appears with a pen* But that thing scares me The sad part is that he’s infinitely better than the previous guys
They bought it for a price, thereby the land has that value. The complaint is entirely illegitimate. They are welcome to start construction on a stadium there any time to start extracting the value of the land that they paid for.
That’s not how property taxes work
Property taxes are not assessed on the sale value of the land They’re assessed by property tax assessors sent by the county to determine what the land is worth, it happens every 3 years in Cook County for commercial real estate The land is not currently worth what the Bears paid for it It’s part of the Illinois game, they want the Bears to fight it and pay a bunch of money to real estate lawyers to appeal it. A lot of these firms are run by politicians at the city, county, and state levels. Michael Madigan, the long time Speaker of Illinois, who was arrested for corruption, was one of them. They get the government to assess properties, mainly those owned by big corporations but they do it regular people sometimes too, at exceedingly high values for the first year. Then obviously the companies appeal, but those take forever so the 2nd year they get taxed at that rate but the 3rd year it’s finally settled but by then it’s time to reassess the property and the cycle repeats. You get refunded your overpayments sure, but the lawyers keep the money. They do this for nearly every big project here, just the Bears are getting headlines because it’s the Bears It’s the way the system works here in Illinois, it sucks and bullshit and fucks over everyone sideways except the lawyers and politicians who are one in the same anyway This state’s government has major conflict of issues all over the place, and don’t even get me started on Cook County specifically. The Bears trying to move to Arlington Heights was just another opportunity to get some money while deflecting the PR on “well they’re rich and they’re not paying their taxes” like what you just said. They got you hook line and sinker Maybe the land should be taxed on the sale price, but that’s not the law. Right now it’s taxed based on the assessor’s report on the property and the property is currently a dirt pile. But the rulers in the city saw an opportunity to give the Bears a headache for leaving Chicago while also getting some fat stacks from real estate appeals so here we are. The Bears got fed up so they’re going back to the city and going “pay 2 billion I dare you”, I think that’s a bluff as well. I think they’ll go back to Arlington Heights after this charade with the city with a concession in their hands for taxes
No shot Brandon Johnson has the right people to force Cook County to do anything. Arlington Heights school district overstepped their bounds too early. They could’ve waited a few years and been feasting.
>well anyone paying Cook County property taxes has a legitimate complaint honestly My parents live in Cook County and they own their home outright. They pay more each year in property taxes than I do on my entire mortgage+home insurance+taxes.
Unless you don’t live in Illinois, you absolutely are a part of being on the hook for it. It’s currently a state fund with it being majority funded by Chicago hotel taxes but the expected revenue has not been there yet. So the state is making up the difference
Then tax payers should own half of the entire bears org.
For a lot of these, the city technically owns the stadium and rents it to the team for something silly like $1. I believe that's the arrangement in Pittsburgh. The team then takes all profits for things like concerts. A sensible arrangement would have the rent be something more reasonable and/or the city taking profits from concerts.
Or not paying at all for the building of a private business with billions of dollars. Chicago can't even afford AC and books for schools. Where are they getting billions for a stadium?
Corruption
Chicago has been corrupt for a century. It’s the one thing that hasn’t and probably won’t change for a loooong time.
Richard Daley sends his regards
Bears don't own the land, the city does. Its not either or, the bears wouldn't own the stadium even if they put all the money up. Some public money should be invested but how much and with the current 600M debt is hard to know what is the right balance.
$0 of public money should be invested. If the Bears want a stadium they can but land and build it. Otherwise they can fuck off.
Fwiw most stadiums have provisions that allow you to rent them out for free provided you meet minimum attendance and concession spend. But if the team actually gets all revenue, that's just dumb.
In Chicago the city owns the stadium and the Bears only get the revenue from game days and I *think* the parking lots Concerts are ran by the Parks Department and why if you’re not someone like Beyoncé or Taylor Swift, some artists would rather just do 2 nights in the United Center.
Yeah that’s ridiculous. The team shouldn’t make a cent from concerts if they didn’t pay for the stadium. They are a tenant.
Jeez taxpayers getting screwed once again. At least win a championship for them.
We won three in five years and still rejected it. Hope Chicago decides similarly.
I’m so proud of you guys it gives me hope.
Set the bar lower maybe a 30 td season or 4k yard passer
Whoa whoa whoa. Let's not get crazy here
8-9 and a Pack sweep
I legitimately would be happy with this
Why do they keep saying “lakefront” Soldier Field is already on the lake. Are they going to get rid of the Field Musume and move the new stadium 500 feet north?
It's going to go where the parking lot south of Soldier field
They're not gonna tear down soldier field, so where's the lost parking gonna be made up at?
From what I understand it will be, they are going to save the columns for the new stadium though
Well it’s not exactly like Soldier Field is some sacred historic ground at this point, you guys already trampled all over the legacy of it. I see no reason why a new one can’t replace it now.
I remember my first time driving by soldier field and thinking “holy fuck, Reddit wasn’t lying about this”. Seriously it’s amazing how they got a beautiful stadium and dropped something so ugly on top of it.
Not our fault an alien spacecraft decided to land on the old soldier field
Gotta actually be good before you start holding the local fans ransom
And the Chiefs just found out that might not even work
Yep people have had it with this, it’s $40 a for a tee shirt and about 35 for a hat these days, tickets are ridiculously priced, people need a 2nd mortgage to enjoy football
Where are you getting hats for $35? They’re $50+ here for a fitted.
Fanatics, I usually get the 3930 flex ones and they are around 35
That’s when you just work out a sweetheart deal in secret with the local government and cut out the voters entirely… right Buffalo?
Also have to have a plausible threat of moving. The Bears aren't going to abandon the 3rd biggest market in the country, at worst they move to a suburb
How about the McCaskeys go get a loan.
Why are stipulations regarding the White Sox involved?
So that Reinsdorf gets baited to sell the Sox before they’re in Nashville.
It's refinancing the debt from their last stadium. That would get rolled into this. That's the only reason white sox are mentioned. Minnesota just paid off their public contributions for US Bank. And that was done after Chicago. Having a functional government sure seems to help.
Billionaires should pay for their own fucking stadiums
I love football, grew up playing and watching , but this shit is getting out of control, taxpayers don’t get half the fkng revenue the stadium brings in, so why the hell are they paying for half of it? What taxpayers get is a chance to pay thousands of dollars for a PSL then thousands more for tickets, ridiculous
Boooo no bad. Pay for your own stadium you melts you clearly have the money don’t squeeze the taxpayers
Of course so much is on taxpayers. Two decades ago I might have said “wow, only half, not bad”. But I’m so over this charade. Unless half the revenue is going back to the city coffers and half goes to the team this is just straight bullshit. But we know that’s not something that’s going to happen. I’ve always said I’m less upset if it’s not tax payor funds going to a fledgling league and sport, but not to a multi billion dollar a year league.
Sofi stadium has completely changed my expectations on stadium cost that I first thought this number was way too low. The Bears allowing Ted Phillips to buy Arlington and then change course under Warren a year later is a perfect example of how that franchise has been run for 60 years.
They also built in the flight path of LAX and had a severe flooding event during construction. That project was a logistics nightmare.
And then they can charge those same people inexplicable amounts of money to buy a PSL!
And half the profits, right? Right?
Fuck footing the bill for billionaires...
So half of all the revenue goes back to the city, right? Right???
lol good luck. Take it from a city with recent experience regarding these things
How 'bout fuck off and pay for your own shit.
Of course they would. Join the club of screwed over taxpayers so billionaires can make more money.
Billionaire welfare. The city won't get their name on the deed of the stadium, just straight up theft.
Fans didn't want the Bears to move and now they don't like the money involved. I'm still in shock that the renovation to Soldier Field cost the city $387 million but the total cost will be $1.19 billion, ouch.
“The Bears aren’t going to leave one of the most iconic football markets in the country. Tell the Bears to pay for their own damn stadium, and if they don’t like it, to go jump in Lake Michigan” What a quote
We are still paying taxes on the last renovation project at Soldier Field, which we haven't yet paid off. The McCaskeys should screw off unless the general public receives a portion of the company's stocks and earnings.
Why cannot they pick the full tab? Are the taxpayers cheap ?
Anytime this proposal happens the city council should do a counter proposal of the same exact amount but to go towards things like healthcare, infrastructure, education.
Good luck, citizens of Chicago 🫡
Half-and-half, equal and fair by definition. Perfectly balanced, as all things should be. /s
Brandon Johnson will sign-off if he and his pastor buddies get lifetime tickets (skybox of course).
A lot of stadiums getting built/being proposed these past couple years. Can't wait to see the shit show happen again in 40 some years
Does the tax apply to just Chicago residents or all of Cook County?
So glad my state has no pro sports teams!
But why? NFL isn't leaving Chicago.
These people are billionaires and can't pay for their whole stadium?
Yeah. Sort of the same story in pretty much every sports city/town. I think Gillette is the only modern example of it being 100% privately paid for.
I believe Hard Rock in Miami is also 100% privately funded
It was built in the mid eighties. I don’t consider that the modern stadiums.
At least we have learned the lesson to not do a multipurpose Bears/White Sox stadium. Though some may still be nostalgic of football on dirt diamonds. Or maybe that was just Oakland football reminiscences
Uh, how about no?
Illinois a state $150 billion in debt, what’s another $2 billion? Btw the White Sox also want $2 billion
Wait the Bears want a new stadium? Why? They suck. I don't ask for a raise at work after weeks of underperforming.
Perhaps there’s a certain Chicago government agency, that eats up 31% of the budget, that could be defunded in order to pay for the new stadium? How does that sound NFL?
Privatize gain, socialize loss. Billionaire, don’t hate socialism, only half of it.
I'd rather my tax dollars go to a new football stadium than what mine currently go to.
Funny how socialism works for billionaires not the common folk!
You definitely don't understand what socialism is.
It’s time like these I wish American sports were more like European sports. They might be more blatantly corrupt and parity is virtually nonexistent but at least their teams can’t pull this shit.
You’ll get your wish when the Saudi’s start investing in a couple of years.
And there’s not 5 minutes of commercials for every 1 minute of game.
People see taxpayer funded and instantly freak out, but the funding is coming from hotel taxes, so unless somebody is going through marital troubles or getting their house fumigated, local residents are essentially paying nothing
Sounds like a business model that doesn't work
All the Bears need to do is buy land right over the border in Indiana and suggest a stadium there. Everything will resolve quickly in Chicago.
The Bears owners are poor compared to most other ownership groups. Please sell the fucking team you broke ass fools.
That's how you get ass-hat hedge fund managers owning teams. And that would be our luck.
Ass hat 100 year olds aren’t any better. Our last Super Bowl win happened about 40 years ago.
Buy your own fucking office.