RE: Indiana takes a page from Kansas, looking to steal Bears?
I could write a whole book on my thoughts here, but here’s how it’s broken down:
(1) For anyone looking at this from the outside, staying in Soldier Field is “not an option”. I put that in quotes because by normal free market business standards, of course the Bears don’t *need* to leave Soldier Field. However, the Bears are looking at the universe of other NFL business standards and particularly those located in large markets and they are at a huge disadvantage in terms of stadium revenue, which in turn impacts the value of the franchise. A new stadium likely makes the Bears into the most valuable sports team in the *world* (not just the NFL) besides the Cowboys, but their value has been limited with the Soldier Field deal (where they don’t have control over concerts or other non-NFL events there or any land surrounding the stadium as that’s public park land protected by law).
It sucks because those aerial shots of the Chicago skyline and Lake Michigan behind Solider Field are stunning, but it’s also weirdly like a Las Vegas Strip casino where it looks way closer when trying to walk to it from downtown than it actually is (e.g. it’s over a mile from the nearest El station because of the convoluted path that you need to take to get to the stadium) and effectively on an island with only one way in and one way out (as the East side of the stadium is Lake Michigan).
(2) Arlington Heights, a Northwest suburb on the Illinois side, is where the Bears have owned land for a new stadium and mixed used development district for several years. It used to be the site of the Arlington Park horse racing track (which was a beautiful facility). This is large enough that they can effectively build a “Bears City” there. (You can fit all 4 pro sports Chicago stadiums and their parking lots on this site. It is HUGE.) There is actually a Metra station located on the site and multiple interstates are close to the location, so as far as the suburbs go in terms of size and location, it’s as good as it will ever get. This is also a really good location for any affluent suburban ticketholders that predominantly live in the North, Northwest, and West suburbs. The intended model is to have what the Braves have with Truist Park and the Battery district on steroids.
The Bears will spend the money to build the stadium itself on their own. They’re not asking the State of Illinois to build the stadium per se, but they are looking to secure infrastructure funding (e.g. roads, utilities, etc.) required for the stadium and property tax “certainty” where the state will allow a deal that the Bears and the City of Arlington Heights and other applicable governmental units (most notably the public school district, which have totally different boundary lines than towns and counties in Illinois).
The infrastructure costs aren’t the issue - the State is fine with those as that area needs road improvements, anyway. Instead, it’s the property tax issue. The Bears claim that not having such certainly would cause them to have a $200 million per year property tax bill. As a comparison, the current highest property tax bill for an NFL stadium is SoFi Stadium in LA County with around $7 million per year. Once again, the Bears and local government entities have a property tax deal, but it can’t go into effect without the State allowing for it, so that is where the tension is. Needless to say, the Bears won’t be staying in Illinois if they have a $200 million annual property tax bill.
(3) Hammond is directly adjacent to the southeastern edge of Chicago across the state line in Indiana. I know a lot of people might think Indiana is an entire universe away from Chicago, but similar to how Jersey City and Hoboken in New Jersey are actually closer to Manhattan than most of the Bronx or Queens or even many parts of Brooklyn, this part of Indiana is closer to downtown Chicago than Arlington Heights or frankly most suburbs on the Illinois side. What Hammond doesn’t have is the affluent ticket holder base or realistic ability to make a true mixed use site because the demographics of the area simply aren’t as favorable for other businesses. The trade-off, though, is that Indiana is effectively offering a free stadium to the Bears, and regardless of what the financials look like in Arlington Heights, nothing beats free.
My understanding is that the Illinois talks are still going and the headlines this morning are being alarmist. I personally think the property tax issue will get resolved, but who knows with some of the egos involved. (I think it’s less about the Governor and more of the stonewalling of the legislators from the Chicago city limits that seem to rather lose the Bears entirely from the State if they aren’t in the city going forward.)
Also, any new stadium will 100% be a dome. They want Super Bowls, Final Fours, CFP games and other high profile events as additional revenue generators. It’s one thing to see high profile events go to LA, but it’s another thing to see Indianapolis really clean our clocks on that front as a smaller Midwestern market.
|
/
Indiana takes a page from Kansas, looking to steal Chicago Bears?
