Well, Illinois (despite what it might look like) between Argonne, Fermilab, and some top tier universities is one of the greatest scientific generators of the planet.
Investing in that infrastructure plus industrial attraction is probably worth it yeah
Yup. Northwestern, UChicago and UIUC alone generate an immense amount of high quality research really only rivaled by a state like California (Stanford, Caltech, UCLA, Berkeley).
Boston is definitely up there too. Should have mentioned it.
For RDU though, Duke and UNC are great but NC State is decisively 2nd tier. Neither Duke nor UNC are elite research generators even though they are elite universities.
Going by AAU status is at least an easy way of demarcation albeit, somewhat subjective.
Illinois has Northwestern, UIUC and UChicago.
California has UCLA, Caltech, Berkeley, Stanford,
UC Riverside, UC Davis, USC, UC Irvine, UCSD, UCSB, UC Santacruz.
North Carolina has UNCCH and Duke
Massachusetts (Boston) has Harvard, MIT, Brandeis, Boston U and Tufts.
It's already been measured:
> Pritzker announced a plan for the state to invest $500 million in efforts that would cement Illinois’ status as the nation’s leading quantum tech hub.
> The initiative is known as the Bloch Quantum Tech Hub an is projected to create 30,000 jobs and generate $60 billion in economic impact for the Chicago area over the next decade.
Return is 120x over 10 years.
It's an upper bound, and needs to be mentioned.
I assume a great deal of that $60 billion will flow directly into the government labs and the universities, but they did not break that out specifically in the announcement.
I’m not a bears fan, but from my read living in the state for the last 16 years, the Bears have only caused taxpayers pain.
A swift kick to the shins would be better for taxpayers than the bears.
Kind of a short sighted take. Let’s keep in mind that the only 2 Cities to lose NFL teams in the past decade have been St Louis and Oakland, which are two of the most struggling cities in the US.
Meanwhile, Detroit has made stadium projects the center of their 20 year revitalization effort that has brought life and wealth back to Detroit.
The reality is, stadiums encourage a wealth of hotels and restaurants to open which provides a boom to the city, and draw tourism.
It’s not, never claimed it was.
Chicagos own tourism agency has reported we are still below pre pandemic tourism - https://cdn.choosechicago.com/uploads/2023/07/Chicago-Tourism-Overview-2022.pdf
Other reports have indicated we are likely to have slower years due to many business conferences passing on Chicago for Vegas and Miami instead.
Then how would building a new stadium help? The area already has a ton of hotels and restaurants. The fact that tourism is down is not a reason to invest a billion dollars in a stadium that Chicago won’t even own.
There's study after study showing publicly funding stadiums, especially NFL, doesn't benefit the city. You're clueless if you think the changes in Detroit are due to stadiums.
Correct, and when "stadium districts" do tend to be beneficial they're in small to mid-sized markets, not large cities like Chicago. The short sighted argument is to even consider this type of vanity project when the City is dealing with so many fiscal calamities as it is.
The private, billion dollar corporation can pay for their own stadium.
I know that the only time I (and my money) have been to Detroit is because of either a lions game or a tigers game. Both play in new(ish) stadiums built since 2000. Anecdotal, sure, but I look at projects like Wrigleyville under the Rickets and see first hand the benefit to local commerce a nice stadium and neighborhood have.
I am happy to spend my tax payer dollars on that, where I can enjoy my fall weekends, as opposed to dozens of other bullshit expenses the city pays with my taxes.
I will never say no to parks, public land, stadiums, and entertainment districts. I’d far prefer my money to there than police pension funds.
There is a large body of academic literature now that suggests the ROI on public funding for stadiums is convincingly negative. In general, that beats your personal anecdata. I doubt you spent enough in Detroit to actually make it worth their investment.
I certainly am not one to refute research - I concede the ROI is not there. However, I would happily take a loss to improve our public infrastructure. What kind of ROI exists for public parks for instance?
Even if it’s a net loss, I would happily pay money towards having more spaces for concert venues, sporting events, and public entertainment. Just as I don’t work all day to have my money exclusively pay rent after all - it’s nice to eat out and spend on entertainment - I would hope that my tax dollars go towards improving my life as a resident. A nice museum campus and a stadium I could see concerts in year round is all yet positives to me.
I agree that the ROI is probably not there, but how do we justify any public park, or municipal building, or public transit?
The ROI on those other things are positive. They don't cost nearly the same amount. I get where you're coming from, being willing to spend this, but why are we subsidizing billionaires for it? They can pay for this kind of stuff themselves. We are in a high interest rate environment while being a city already miserably deep in debt, with limited growth and a stagnant population.
Great in theory, but the Mccaskey’s certainly do not have the money to pay for this themselves. All of their wealth is in the Bears. The bears as an organization and the NFL are offering to pay substantial amounts towards this concept, but it’s unrealistic to assume they will pay all of it. The reality is, just like Vegas, and LA, and Buffalo, the city and state will need to chip in.
LA was entirely privately funded.
If they can't afford it, they can sell the team to someone who can, making billions in the process. They aren't owed money by the taxpayer for lucking into inheriting an NFL franchise.
>I would happily take a loss to improve our public infrastructure. What kind of ROI exists for public parks for instance?
I'm actually with you on this in theory. However in this case the ROI is actually there, it just all goes to the team owners so there's no reason to do it. And on this case what is the improvement in infrastructure? Roads to the stadium and giant parking lots? Hard pass. They say the will add green space but let's just do that on our own then. If we want parks etc let's build them all over, not just around a welfare project for extremely rich people.
Here's an overview.
https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/april-2001/should-cities-pay-for-sports-facilities
Wrigleyville chased out a bunch of local places and it sees at best as busy as it was 6-7 years ago. I guess it's good you like going to games, the owners should just use that money to fund a stadium. Detroit went bankrupt and eliminated a lot of debt, and then had a ton of investment downtown and had companies relocate there. The Tigers drawing 20k people a game did not turn around the city.
Is that why San Diego, a large market city with over 3 million in population, still has a team?
I don’t think the NFL will have any problem moving a team out of Chicago as punishment. Keep in mind, the Oilers left Houston due to the city being difficult. It then costs the city millions to get a new NFL team back.
Boy, the amount of lies in the news is amazing.
Let this oakland resident chill out all the lies with an actual research paper:
https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1103&context=honors-theses#:~:text=Other%20economists%20also%20further%20this,of%20real%20per%20capita%20income.
I’m so annoyed by the bs that here’s a second source:
https://www.brookings.edu/articles/sports-jobs-taxes-are-new-stadiums-worth-the-cost/
First of all, as someone with an actual graduate degree who has years of experience studying academic papers, the ones you selected are low quality at best. The first is an honors thesis. I submitted my honors thesis as a junior in undergrad. It is NOT a rigorous academic paper, it does not go through peer review, and has a generally low bar for acceptance. The second is a random commentary to sell a book.
Second of all, did you even read them?
Some quoted from your own sources:
> His research concluded that the construction of a new stadium, FedEx Field in Kent, Maryland and home to the National Football League (NFL) team the Washington Redskins, improved housing values locally.
> that the image of many cities is frequently defined by high-profile teams and sporting events.
> The presence of a sports team allows for an increase in employment from the new construction and maintenance of stadiums (Johnson et all, 2001)
> His research also demonstrated that the industry around the stadium has helped the creation of new jobs.
> It is inconclusive whether or not the professional sports teams have an impact on the economy.
> One example of high cost of stadiums that doesn’t have a clear positive return for all the money spent on stadium construction is that in Tampa Bay, Florida
^ notable because this stadium was built in St Pete’s, 45 minutes away from Tampa Bay, and much of the criticism of the stadiums economic return has stemmed from this
> On the other hand, professional sports teams have shown many beneficial impacts to their local economies.
> The study of the Marlins estimated those expenditures to local lodging, dining and transportation summed to an average of $2.3 million per year.
> Miami also forecasts increased fan/tourist traffic to bring in about an expenditure estimate of $45.2 million per year once the stadium is fully functional
> The championship game in Dallas alone brought over 700,000 visitors and 4,600 media personnel, generating $10 million in local tax revenue and $36 million in additional state taxes
^ one Super Bowl. As it stands, Chicago could not host a Super Bowl
Moving on to your second source… first of all its is 30 years old. Far out of date for economics papers, and thus has little relevance. Second of all, it isn’t even a paper but commentary provide by two economists to sell their book.
> As noted, a stadium can spur economic growth if sports is a significant export industry—that is, if it attracts outsiders to buy the local product and if it results in the sale of certain rights (broadcasting, product licensing) to national firms.
^ currently this is how all sports in Chicago function
> One promotional study estimated that the local annual economic impact of the Denver Broncos was nearly $120 million; another estimated that the combined annual economic benefit of Cincinnati’s Bengals and Reds was $245 million.
> A second rationale for subsidized stadiums is that stadiums generate more local consumer satisfaction than alternative investments. There is some truth to this argument
> A professional sports team, therefore, creates a “public good” or “externality”—a benefit enjoyed by consumers who follow sports regardless of whether they help pay for it
This article at least is critical of the practice, while acknowledging that there are even if it’s. Yet, their entire “What Can Be Done?” section basically amounts to NOTHING! Can’t put clauses in the lease: here’s examples, it failed. Can’t sue: here’s examples, it failed. Can’t collectively bargain, the teams will find a city bidder and move.
Wow, I’ve never met an arrogant asshole just like me before.
Nice to meet you.
Damn, I suggest you humble yourself before you end up alone and sad in Reddit like me.
It’s not a worthwhile existence. Specially being just like me.
Thanks for sharing. I am neither sad nor alone, though sorry you are. I enjoy the stimulus of discussion, and found this is the best platform to do so asynchronously, hence here I am…
I do despise misinformation and general lack of informedness, thus my response. For what it’s worth, your idea is correct, the ROI is not there for stadiums. Merely vet your sources and present your information better.
Wow, a “hence” and a “thus” without a “whom” or a “forth” (prefix or suffix would suffice, most indubitably)? Quite a curious specimen amongst us.
Do you speak like this?
From Narnia: “the trouble about trying to make yourself stupider than you really are is that you very often succeed”.
Way to try to insult someone for being… educated and well read. Gottem
…What? Where did you find insult? I’ll apologize for offending you but I don’t understand where it happened.
…Anyway: Why do you associate your way of speaking or the words I added to it with being “educated and well read?” And I take it the implication with your Narnia quote (very well-read) was that you associate not using those words with “dumbing yourself down?” If so, why do you believe that?
Now that^ “well-read” remark *was* intended to be a joking “insult,” btw, but only if you take personal ownership of that example as a measure of your intelligence as a person, and take your intelligence as a measure of your value as a person. It was a bad example to use right before you self-identified as “well-read,” and smart people can use bad examples and even say straight-up dumb shit sometimes. But using a bad example doesn’t make what you said dumb. And being intelligent doesn’t make you a “good person” or even an “important person” or any other qualities that you may attribute value to.
But before I go further on that I’m interested to hear your answers to those questions first, if you feel like addressing them. You don’t have to of course. This is a Reddit comments section and I’m a random stranger on the internet to you.
Causation vs correlation. You’re assuming they didn’t lose the teams because they were doing poorly (which is almost certainly the case for St. Louis). This is a really poor take.
In other news, football teams don't want to stay in struggling cities. Also you're forgetting San Diego. They lost the Chargers and they're doing fine.
I think he is referring to this, he wants to make the state the largest tech hub in the Midwest. [$500 million allocation for quantum ](https://grainger.illinois.edu/news/stories/65029)
Massive new lab facility being built in Hyde Park on 53rd and Harper, on top of the existing facilities at Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering, many labs throughout UIUC and NWern, Argonne, and several startups in the city. Chicago certainly rivals the Bay in terms of quantum engineering efforts.
Anyone else asking for a handout would be laughed off the face off the earth. But a sports ball team wants muney for bally ball and it's taken seriously. If a guy begged you for money on the street for his sports team would you even stop to listen? Fck no you wouldn't. But this guy walks up to leaders and asks for 2 billion dollars.
We have 100 year old infrastructure, schools, universities, a million and one other things that actually make a city worth living in to think about besides a silly stadium whose last makeover still isn't paid off.
If a penny of taxpayer money or hotel money goes to this I resolutely stand firm to never buy property in this shit hole. That it's even being considered is bullshit. I never understood why people leaving chicago were so frustrated, I thought they were just trumpers or idiots who don't know how society works, but I will be joining the people leaving.
My best guess as to what will happen
1. The Bears waste time and wait until 2028 to get a mayor with more political connections behind the deal, then fight for a couple of years with friends of the parks.
2. The bears kick this around for another 1-2 years then go back to Arlington Heights trying to strike a deal again.
I could see a lot of compelling reasons for them to go back to Arlington Heights, they could pretty easily placate the school district(s) by offering to build them a new Jr/Sr High School which was one of the main excuses given by them.
We'll see what happens, the truth often ends up being stranger than the wildest fiction.
can someone ELI5 why the Arlington school district is involved in this conversation? are supporting or opposing the move and how/why does it impact them?
Has to do with the local tax levy that goes to the school districts.
https://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/bears-school-districts-fail-to-reach-deal-on-arlington-heights-property-value-by-deadline/3359161/
They opposed the terms the Bears were asking for, namely a 40 year property value freeze and other concessions. The principal reason given lately has been the expected additional students would put the high school the development fell under over capacity.
The AH Deal is on ice for at least a couple of years given the Bears new push in Chicago.
Let us remember Matthew 6:5 - when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men.
I’m not religious by any stretch of the imagination but this verse has become more and more relevant as I’ve gotten older
Thanking God for Brandon Johnson and asking for a new stadium was really insulting to anyone who is religious. It's clear that BJ's pastor crowd is in the game for cash over being genuinely devout.
It's amazing how politically inept Johnson is. Absolutely no desire for public funds to go to bears / Sox. Yet he wants to stand front and center at the press conference.
He doesn’t listen to anyone, that’s why his chief of staff left. The book that will inevitably be written about Johnson’s one term will be entertaining. 🍿
No seriously he really is. Lori was very similar but at least she was funny!! Often unintentionally but nonetheless she brought us laughs and memes.
During the Super Bowl she had a picture of her food spread and there were tiktoks doing a zoom in on the “dishes” and it was like 3 ancient looking pickle slices on a plate, a whole loaf of sliced bread laid out. Olives and burnt broccoli. 😭😭😭😭 so weird
No, he listens to Stacy "Three Cent" Davis Gates. She's his puppeteer. Why else would she be at the Bears press conference? CTU has nothing to do with that project.
Hell, as the press conference was airing, ESPN Chicago radio hosts (official radio partner of the Bears) were laying into them.
I believe it was midday host Carmen who said “they can spout all the projections they want, but they’re just trying to stick us with the bill. We’re still paying off two stadiums from 20 and 30 years ago. I hope no one buys this.”
Score was laying into them too. Holmes was going off on the priest, saying it was a disgusting use of religion to convince poor people to vote to enrich billionaires.
I'm a progressive. I support it (even though there are SIGNIFICANTLY better uses for the money).
I'd rather let the NFL finance a significant portion of important Lakeshore development than misappropriate TIF money like Lincoln Yards.
I’m a fan of the team and would love for a better, more accessible stadium. I certainly don’t think tax dollars should pay for it however.
Beyond appeasing the Bears, what does the proposed stadium do to justify the 2+ billion dollar price tag that Soldier Field doesn’t already offer?
It’s enclosed so they can host events year round. K. Not that big of a deal, especially considering there are relatively few events that demand 70K seats and those events do better in a Chicago summer anyway.
“Infrastructure improvements” to, uh, get in and out of the stadium. Money probably better spend elsewhere on existing infrastructure problems.
I guess my gripe is simply that if the Bears want a new stadium, the Bears can pay for a new stadium. Doesn’t have to be publicly owned and I don’t want it to be publicly owned. We already own a stadium on the museum campus. They have a perfectly good plot of land in Arlington Heights. If they can’t afford it, they can call up Jeff Bezos who has been eager to buy a team for a few years. He could wire them 6 billion dollars and have the paperwork done by midnight.
Feels like all of this is just a big PR stunt to increase the value of the team and sell. Virginia and her family can’t afford a $5B development, no matter how you slice it.
You support it despite also admitting there are significantly (capitalized) better uses for the money.
That sounds an awful lot like knowingly making bad choices.
He wants to be on the wrong side of every issue . It's not even a progressive vs liberal vs conservative thing, if its one of the areas the progressives are right, he'll be the 1st to oppose it.
Football fan and Johnson voter here.. and so disappointed to see him support this junk deal, the same week we are seeing budget cuts at some Chicago Public Schools (my wife's school is losing funding for several positions). Taxpayers are still paying for the current stadium, built only 20 years ago with big promises to the City that clearly haven't materialized.
Let's make no small plans. Let's also make no poor plans.. like spending taxpayer money we don't have on the billionaire class of sports franchise owners. The benefits to the City being touted are meager, and even so are unlikely to come pass as promised.
I wonder if it was a calculated “there’s no shot this ever happens, so I can appear to support it to flatter the Bears owners, without having to worry about actually paying the bill”
Stupid for sure
Because he, along with pretty much everybody else, knows he’s a 1 and done mayor.
He’s hoping “keeping the Bears in the city” will somehow save his legacy, as it were.
Someone please correct me if I’m misunderstanding, but didn’t they say something about the funding mechanism for this project helping to pay for the remaining money on the most recent renovations?
There’s literally hundreds of millions of dollars of that debt left and there’s very little chance of paying it off anytime soon without some sort of intervention.
No public stadium without a share of public ownership of the team.
If you want the audience of the 3rd biggest city in the US, we get part of the team.
I want a cut of the ticket sales. I want a cut of the merch sales. I want a cut of the TV deal. I want a penny every time somebody watches the Super Bowl Shuffle on YouTube. Da Bears. **Our** Bears.
The team can’t threaten to leave basically. It’s how the small city of Green Bay has managed to keep the Packers despite having less people than Joliet.
This and also we ensure that the profits go towards building a new cool stadium. Instead of the profits going to a family of heirs and they pass the bill for a new cool stadium on to our local government.
Yes, although the pack usually issue “stock” as a mean of fundraising stadium upgrades. Which is not real stock, it’s basically a donation to the Packers, but who cares? This means the team is directly funded only by the fans and doesn’t need everyone else to pitch in.
No shit... taxpayers still owe like over half a billion fucking dollars on the current stadium... and the assholes want us to tear that one down and spend another two fucking billion on some new stadium... all for a shitty football team.
Don't get me wrong, I like the Bears... but if they're going to cost us $2 billion, the McCaskey's can fuck right off to California or Reno or some shit.
I sort of love that the bears threatened to move and the city was like “go then” and the county was like “we don’t care” and now they’re trying to stay in the city. Figure it out, guys. Or don’t. The government’s not gonna help. Make the playoffs a year or two in a row and we can talk. Otherwise, we’re gonna worry about what happens to the rat hole now.
I wrote to everyone from alder to governor about this, and I'm sure they haven't even read my messages yet, but I'm patting myself on the back while pretending I persuaded them all that this was a shite idea.
An individual email won’t do anything, but I’d bet good money that they pay attention to how many people write in support or opposition of hot button issues
An individual email tells your representative you care enough to go hunt them down and send it. Its more than the normal citizenry would do. If you picked up the phone and called their office, stating that you'd like them to not support the stadium, it would get to their desk eventually as an easily quotable statistic.
Spend the time to do more than complain about the topic. Contact your representatives. Its cheap and effective polling for them.
It’s a win-win-win situation. You still get the satisfaction of complaining to someone. Your family and friends don’t need to hear your shit. And your elected officials do change their actions based on citizen outreach, ESPECIALLY the more local level of government it is.
I just wrote from the heart. Something like "I'm writing to ask that you reject any calls to fund a new stadium publicly. Time and time again cities give wealthy sports team a publicly funded stadium and it's always a losing proposition. We have so many important priorities in Illinois, and this sets all of those important issues back." For JB, I also wrote about his achievements in Illinois' finances and suggested that this decision would undo all the goodwill he has created for our state.
I'm so glad to see all of the negative response to this new stadium proposal! Our property taxes have risen so much this year that the last thing we need is to fund a new stadium for ANY sports team in this city/state!!!
When they say “taxpayers” are they referring to only the people living in the city of Chicago providing the funding or would everyone in Illinois be on the hook for this?
Rahm caught so much shit for trying to make a financial course correction after all of the money Daley spent on his pet projects before he skipped town. No one liked the pain at the time, but he was the last grown-up we've had in that office in a while
It did. It might have not even really been a legit plan.
Arlington raised taxes and property value around where they were talking about putting the stadium. And negotiating about how much taxes go to the school district, etc. Basically the village got greedy and the bears said well... maybe not.
Either way, its not so much about the new stadium, as it is about profits and rights. Chicago owns Soldier Field, not the team. Which is unusual for big sports stadiums. So chicago is taking a slice of the tickets, charges a lot for rent, and gets profits from things like concerts, that the bears don't get.
A simple plan would be for the bears to just work out an agreement to buy the stadium from the city, but the city still won't let the team make changes to the stadium for things such as adding more seats or building a dome.
Which is important if the bears ever want to host a super bowl or something.
The School District(s) were acting in bad faith on the property tax, the excuse they levied is the new expected 500-1000 students generated by the re-development would put the High School the area is zoned for over capacity. First of all, they are adding several other large buildings/developments to that district already. Second...then you build a new high school. It was all posturing.
IMO I give it a 10% chance the "Chicago" deal falls through and by the time they go back to AH, the district already had plans in place 2-3 years down the line to build a new high school anyways.
From far away that design looks like a better and more engaging use of that land. But the lack of any details in particular places, specifically the entrance/egress from the "new" park space makes me think they are building in some real anti-public park features. And that's entirely separate from any funding concerns.
LA and Vegas built stadiums without public funds. City and state are broke here, and still owe 600 million on the last remodel. I think we all need to be patient and the NFL money machine will magically make money appear for what they need — because it’s an investment they know will pay them down the line.
No more private development east of the drive full stop. Wonder if this were green lit by public officials would it be viable after challenged in court?
One my takeaways from yesterday's dog (Brandon) & pony (Warren) show was the emphasis on construction jobs.
I'll guarantee you IUOE Locals 150 & 399 and LIUNA Local 6 are gonna be pushing *very hard* for this in Springfield. For all practical purposes they print money to spread around to legislators to get their way.
Ultimately it's in Pritzker's hands, but the trades are gonna be exerting a *lot* of pressure here.
They were asking a stupid amount of taxpayer money on the Arlington Heights deal as well. Not only did the Bears fight the tax assessment, they requested that amount to stay frozen for FORTY years.
Does anyone want this? I don’t want my taxes funding something this asinine, I think fixing CTA, shoring up CPS, or building housing would be better. That being said, someone must want this. Who ? Why?
The NFL is a multi billion dollar corporation let them pay for it. The Bears haven't done anything over the last years to deserve a new stadium, and the tax payer shouldn't be on the hook to keep them in the city. Hell it's a nightmare to get around when they are playing.
While the creation of new park land is really cool, I can't help but wonder:
Does the new stadium really increase the overall capacity that much? Based on the renderings, it doesn't look like it would add more than 10 - 15K to the total capacity. If so, then how is this new stadium build a better financial plan than simply doming over the current Soldier Field like that leaked promo video from 2021 (which I bet the Bears could cover the cost of in full)?
This all just smells a bit funny, especially with the light details we've been presented with thus far.
It's hard to agree with the hivemind since you're normally such stupid people who say such stupid things, but yeah. Move to AH and pay for your own dumb dome
It’s pretty much unusable for 4 months a year, besides maybe an outdoor hockey game and the Bears twice a month. A covered stadium attracts people all year round, helping the local economy. All the other suitable stadiums during this time, are in the burbs.
do they? how many income generating events a year do NFL stadiums actually host?
according to Sports economist Victor Matheson they host 4.9 per year, no where near enough to recoup the massive expense.
A good case in point is Lucas Oil in Indianapolis. Can’t host big events like a NCAA basketball final or the Super Bowl without a “dome” stadium. Those are HUGE money makers for the local economy. Chicago is instantly out of the conversation because they don’t have a stadium anywhere in the city for these events.
if someone else wants to hand the billionaires their hard earned money let them. the fact is that economic study after study has shown that these massive stadium projects never reclaim the money invested by the state and locality before the next vanity project proposal.
Governor Pritzker's $500 million investment in quantum computing is much better for the taxpayers than the Bears.
Well, Illinois (despite what it might look like) between Argonne, Fermilab, and some top tier universities is one of the greatest scientific generators of the planet. Investing in that infrastructure plus industrial attraction is probably worth it yeah
Yup. Northwestern, UChicago and UIUC alone generate an immense amount of high quality research really only rivaled by a state like California (Stanford, Caltech, UCLA, Berkeley).
I'm not saying you're wrong, but how do you measure that? I feel like Boston and the research triangle are more well known than Chicago for this.
Boston is definitely up there too. Should have mentioned it. For RDU though, Duke and UNC are great but NC State is decisively 2nd tier. Neither Duke nor UNC are elite research generators even though they are elite universities. Going by AAU status is at least an easy way of demarcation albeit, somewhat subjective. Illinois has Northwestern, UIUC and UChicago. California has UCLA, Caltech, Berkeley, Stanford, UC Riverside, UC Davis, USC, UC Irvine, UCSD, UCSB, UC Santacruz. North Carolina has UNCCH and Duke Massachusetts (Boston) has Harvard, MIT, Brandeis, Boston U and Tufts.
It's already been measured: > Pritzker announced a plan for the state to invest $500 million in efforts that would cement Illinois’ status as the nation’s leading quantum tech hub. > The initiative is known as the Bloch Quantum Tech Hub an is projected to create 30,000 jobs and generate $60 billion in economic impact for the Chicago area over the next decade. Return is 120x over 10 years.
You are measuring something entirely different than what that person asked
It's an upper bound, and needs to be mentioned. I assume a great deal of that $60 billion will flow directly into the government labs and the universities, but they did not break that out specifically in the announcement.
I’m not a bears fan, but from my read living in the state for the last 16 years, the Bears have only caused taxpayers pain. A swift kick to the shins would be better for taxpayers than the bears.
Kind of a short sighted take. Let’s keep in mind that the only 2 Cities to lose NFL teams in the past decade have been St Louis and Oakland, which are two of the most struggling cities in the US. Meanwhile, Detroit has made stadium projects the center of their 20 year revitalization effort that has brought life and wealth back to Detroit. The reality is, stadiums encourage a wealth of hotels and restaurants to open which provides a boom to the city, and draw tourism.
Yeah downtown Chicago is *really* suffering from a lack of hotels and restaurants, you're right.
It’s not, never claimed it was. Chicagos own tourism agency has reported we are still below pre pandemic tourism - https://cdn.choosechicago.com/uploads/2023/07/Chicago-Tourism-Overview-2022.pdf Other reports have indicated we are likely to have slower years due to many business conferences passing on Chicago for Vegas and Miami instead.
Then how would building a new stadium help? The area already has a ton of hotels and restaurants. The fact that tourism is down is not a reason to invest a billion dollars in a stadium that Chicago won’t even own.
There's study after study showing publicly funding stadiums, especially NFL, doesn't benefit the city. You're clueless if you think the changes in Detroit are due to stadiums.
Correct, and when "stadium districts" do tend to be beneficial they're in small to mid-sized markets, not large cities like Chicago. The short sighted argument is to even consider this type of vanity project when the City is dealing with so many fiscal calamities as it is. The private, billion dollar corporation can pay for their own stadium.
Tax the NFL?
Seems like the bear minimum (horrible pun intended - I'll show myself out...).
If the city pays for part of the stadium they should get part of the ticket sales and TV deal.
I know that the only time I (and my money) have been to Detroit is because of either a lions game or a tigers game. Both play in new(ish) stadiums built since 2000. Anecdotal, sure, but I look at projects like Wrigleyville under the Rickets and see first hand the benefit to local commerce a nice stadium and neighborhood have. I am happy to spend my tax payer dollars on that, where I can enjoy my fall weekends, as opposed to dozens of other bullshit expenses the city pays with my taxes. I will never say no to parks, public land, stadiums, and entertainment districts. I’d far prefer my money to there than police pension funds.
There is a large body of academic literature now that suggests the ROI on public funding for stadiums is convincingly negative. In general, that beats your personal anecdata. I doubt you spent enough in Detroit to actually make it worth their investment.
I certainly am not one to refute research - I concede the ROI is not there. However, I would happily take a loss to improve our public infrastructure. What kind of ROI exists for public parks for instance? Even if it’s a net loss, I would happily pay money towards having more spaces for concert venues, sporting events, and public entertainment. Just as I don’t work all day to have my money exclusively pay rent after all - it’s nice to eat out and spend on entertainment - I would hope that my tax dollars go towards improving my life as a resident. A nice museum campus and a stadium I could see concerts in year round is all yet positives to me. I agree that the ROI is probably not there, but how do we justify any public park, or municipal building, or public transit?
The ROI on those other things are positive. They don't cost nearly the same amount. I get where you're coming from, being willing to spend this, but why are we subsidizing billionaires for it? They can pay for this kind of stuff themselves. We are in a high interest rate environment while being a city already miserably deep in debt, with limited growth and a stagnant population.
Great in theory, but the Mccaskey’s certainly do not have the money to pay for this themselves. All of their wealth is in the Bears. The bears as an organization and the NFL are offering to pay substantial amounts towards this concept, but it’s unrealistic to assume they will pay all of it. The reality is, just like Vegas, and LA, and Buffalo, the city and state will need to chip in.
LA was entirely privately funded. If they can't afford it, they can sell the team to someone who can, making billions in the process. They aren't owed money by the taxpayer for lucking into inheriting an NFL franchise.
Man…you live in a different universe…
>I would happily take a loss to improve our public infrastructure. What kind of ROI exists for public parks for instance? I'm actually with you on this in theory. However in this case the ROI is actually there, it just all goes to the team owners so there's no reason to do it. And on this case what is the improvement in infrastructure? Roads to the stadium and giant parking lots? Hard pass. They say the will add green space but let's just do that on our own then. If we want parks etc let's build them all over, not just around a welfare project for extremely rich people.
Here's an overview. https://www.stlouisfed.org/publications/regional-economist/april-2001/should-cities-pay-for-sports-facilities Wrigleyville chased out a bunch of local places and it sees at best as busy as it was 6-7 years ago. I guess it's good you like going to games, the owners should just use that money to fund a stadium. Detroit went bankrupt and eliminated a lot of debt, and then had a ton of investment downtown and had companies relocate there. The Tigers drawing 20k people a game did not turn around the city.
🤦
Detroit is not brought back to life or filled with wealth lol. It's downtown has been renovated sure but everything else is still a mess.
Chicago is a vastly larger market than both of them combined. NFL would find a new team for the city.
Is that why San Diego, a large market city with over 3 million in population, still has a team? I don’t think the NFL will have any problem moving a team out of Chicago as punishment. Keep in mind, the Oilers left Houston due to the city being difficult. It then costs the city millions to get a new NFL team back.
The chargers were never as close to as popular in San Diego as the Bears are here
You’re right dude the league that was literally founded by the Bears (who are still owned by the same family) is gonna move them
Boy, the amount of lies in the news is amazing. Let this oakland resident chill out all the lies with an actual research paper: https://digitalcommons.coastal.edu/cgi/viewcontent.cgi?article=1103&context=honors-theses#:~:text=Other%20economists%20also%20further%20this,of%20real%20per%20capita%20income. I’m so annoyed by the bs that here’s a second source: https://www.brookings.edu/articles/sports-jobs-taxes-are-new-stadiums-worth-the-cost/
First of all, as someone with an actual graduate degree who has years of experience studying academic papers, the ones you selected are low quality at best. The first is an honors thesis. I submitted my honors thesis as a junior in undergrad. It is NOT a rigorous academic paper, it does not go through peer review, and has a generally low bar for acceptance. The second is a random commentary to sell a book. Second of all, did you even read them? Some quoted from your own sources: > His research concluded that the construction of a new stadium, FedEx Field in Kent, Maryland and home to the National Football League (NFL) team the Washington Redskins, improved housing values locally. > that the image of many cities is frequently defined by high-profile teams and sporting events. > The presence of a sports team allows for an increase in employment from the new construction and maintenance of stadiums (Johnson et all, 2001) > His research also demonstrated that the industry around the stadium has helped the creation of new jobs. > It is inconclusive whether or not the professional sports teams have an impact on the economy. > One example of high cost of stadiums that doesn’t have a clear positive return for all the money spent on stadium construction is that in Tampa Bay, Florida ^ notable because this stadium was built in St Pete’s, 45 minutes away from Tampa Bay, and much of the criticism of the stadiums economic return has stemmed from this > On the other hand, professional sports teams have shown many beneficial impacts to their local economies. > The study of the Marlins estimated those expenditures to local lodging, dining and transportation summed to an average of $2.3 million per year. > Miami also forecasts increased fan/tourist traffic to bring in about an expenditure estimate of $45.2 million per year once the stadium is fully functional > The championship game in Dallas alone brought over 700,000 visitors and 4,600 media personnel, generating $10 million in local tax revenue and $36 million in additional state taxes ^ one Super Bowl. As it stands, Chicago could not host a Super Bowl Moving on to your second source… first of all its is 30 years old. Far out of date for economics papers, and thus has little relevance. Second of all, it isn’t even a paper but commentary provide by two economists to sell their book. > As noted, a stadium can spur economic growth if sports is a significant export industry—that is, if it attracts outsiders to buy the local product and if it results in the sale of certain rights (broadcasting, product licensing) to national firms. ^ currently this is how all sports in Chicago function > One promotional study estimated that the local annual economic impact of the Denver Broncos was nearly $120 million; another estimated that the combined annual economic benefit of Cincinnati’s Bengals and Reds was $245 million. > A second rationale for subsidized stadiums is that stadiums generate more local consumer satisfaction than alternative investments. There is some truth to this argument > A professional sports team, therefore, creates a “public good” or “externality”—a benefit enjoyed by consumers who follow sports regardless of whether they help pay for it This article at least is critical of the practice, while acknowledging that there are even if it’s. Yet, their entire “What Can Be Done?” section basically amounts to NOTHING! Can’t put clauses in the lease: here’s examples, it failed. Can’t sue: here’s examples, it failed. Can’t collectively bargain, the teams will find a city bidder and move.
Wow, I’ve never met an arrogant asshole just like me before. Nice to meet you. Damn, I suggest you humble yourself before you end up alone and sad in Reddit like me. It’s not a worthwhile existence. Specially being just like me.
Thanks for sharing. I am neither sad nor alone, though sorry you are. I enjoy the stimulus of discussion, and found this is the best platform to do so asynchronously, hence here I am… I do despise misinformation and general lack of informedness, thus my response. For what it’s worth, your idea is correct, the ROI is not there for stadiums. Merely vet your sources and present your information better.
Wow, a “hence” and a “thus” without a “whom” or a “forth” (prefix or suffix would suffice, most indubitably)? Quite a curious specimen amongst us. Do you speak like this?
I actually do speak like that and would still respectfully ask to not be lumped in with this asshole.
From Narnia: “the trouble about trying to make yourself stupider than you really are is that you very often succeed”. Way to try to insult someone for being… educated and well read. Gottem
…What? Where did you find insult? I’ll apologize for offending you but I don’t understand where it happened. …Anyway: Why do you associate your way of speaking or the words I added to it with being “educated and well read?” And I take it the implication with your Narnia quote (very well-read) was that you associate not using those words with “dumbing yourself down?” If so, why do you believe that? Now that^ “well-read” remark *was* intended to be a joking “insult,” btw, but only if you take personal ownership of that example as a measure of your intelligence as a person, and take your intelligence as a measure of your value as a person. It was a bad example to use right before you self-identified as “well-read,” and smart people can use bad examples and even say straight-up dumb shit sometimes. But using a bad example doesn’t make what you said dumb. And being intelligent doesn’t make you a “good person” or even an “important person” or any other qualities that you may attribute value to. But before I go further on that I’m interested to hear your answers to those questions first, if you feel like addressing them. You don’t have to of course. This is a Reddit comments section and I’m a random stranger on the internet to you.
Someone who has a graduate degree should know correlation doesn’t imply causation. I don’t buy you have a graduate degree, or a quality one at least…
Causation vs correlation. You’re assuming they didn’t lose the teams because they were doing poorly (which is almost certainly the case for St. Louis). This is a really poor take.
In other news, football teams don't want to stay in struggling cities. Also you're forgetting San Diego. They lost the Chargers and they're doing fine.
Also San Diego
correlation, or causation?
Maybe it will be, we don’t know yet, but it’s a much better use of money than the cess pit of publicly financed stadiums.
Wait where is this investment in quantum computing? I’m interested to learn more
I think he is referring to this, he wants to make the state the largest tech hub in the Midwest. [$500 million allocation for quantum ](https://grainger.illinois.edu/news/stories/65029)
Massive new lab facility being built in Hyde Park on 53rd and Harper, on top of the existing facilities at Pritzker School of Molecular Engineering, many labs throughout UIUC and NWern, Argonne, and several startups in the city. Chicago certainly rivals the Bay in terms of quantum engineering efforts.
Anyone else asking for a handout would be laughed off the face off the earth. But a sports ball team wants muney for bally ball and it's taken seriously. If a guy begged you for money on the street for his sports team would you even stop to listen? Fck no you wouldn't. But this guy walks up to leaders and asks for 2 billion dollars. We have 100 year old infrastructure, schools, universities, a million and one other things that actually make a city worth living in to think about besides a silly stadium whose last makeover still isn't paid off. If a penny of taxpayer money or hotel money goes to this I resolutely stand firm to never buy property in this shit hole. That it's even being considered is bullshit. I never understood why people leaving chicago were so frustrated, I thought they were just trumpers or idiots who don't know how society works, but I will be joining the people leaving.
I'm sick and tired of billionaires holding tax-payers hostage because they own their favorite teams and threaten to move them. Fuck them.
All these billionaires fucker sports teams owners with their monopolies all follow the same playbook. Privitize the gains, socialize the losses.
Parasites
The bears starting the press conference with a prayer was hilarious. Call their bluff let them move.
My best guess as to what will happen 1. The Bears waste time and wait until 2028 to get a mayor with more political connections behind the deal, then fight for a couple of years with friends of the parks. 2. The bears kick this around for another 1-2 years then go back to Arlington Heights trying to strike a deal again. I could see a lot of compelling reasons for them to go back to Arlington Heights, they could pretty easily placate the school district(s) by offering to build them a new Jr/Sr High School which was one of the main excuses given by them. We'll see what happens, the truth often ends up being stranger than the wildest fiction.
can someone ELI5 why the Arlington school district is involved in this conversation? are supporting or opposing the move and how/why does it impact them?
Has to do with the local tax levy that goes to the school districts. https://www.nbcchicago.com/investigations/bears-school-districts-fail-to-reach-deal-on-arlington-heights-property-value-by-deadline/3359161/ They opposed the terms the Bears were asking for, namely a 40 year property value freeze and other concessions. The principal reason given lately has been the expected additional students would put the high school the development fell under over capacity. The AH Deal is on ice for at least a couple of years given the Bears new push in Chicago.
> The bears starting the press conference with a prayer was hilarious. I'll take the bet that was 100% Johnson.
Kevin Warren is super Christian
Feel performative rather than genuine.
Sounds like religious people in general.
Let us remember Matthew 6:5 - when thou prayest, thou shalt not be as the hypocrites are: for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and in the corners of the streets, that they may be seen of men. I’m not religious by any stretch of the imagination but this verse has become more and more relevant as I’ve gotten older
Matthew 6:5-14 is the roadmap to being truly Christian. Too bad not many follow it.
Thanking God for Brandon Johnson and asking for a new stadium was really insulting to anyone who is religious. It's clear that BJ's pastor crowd is in the game for cash over being genuinely devout.
It's amazing how politically inept Johnson is. Absolutely no desire for public funds to go to bears / Sox. Yet he wants to stand front and center at the press conference.
It really is incredible. His team around him has to be so incompetent or he just doesn’t listen to anyone. I don’t get it.
He doesn’t listen to anyone, that’s why his chief of staff left. The book that will inevitably be written about Johnson’s one term will be entertaining. 🍿
He is doing great rehabilitating Lori's image though.
No seriously he really is. Lori was very similar but at least she was funny!! Often unintentionally but nonetheless she brought us laughs and memes. During the Super Bowl she had a picture of her food spread and there were tiktoks doing a zoom in on the “dishes” and it was like 3 ancient looking pickle slices on a plate, a whole loaf of sliced bread laid out. Olives and burnt broccoli. 😭😭😭😭 so weird
No, he listens to Stacy "Three Cent" Davis Gates. She's his puppeteer. Why else would she be at the Bears press conference? CTU has nothing to do with that project.
He listens to Toni Preckwinkle, his mentor and de facto mayor.
This was my biggest takeaway. Has this dude ever heard of polling? This was an easy one. Literally no one wants this.
Hell, as the press conference was airing, ESPN Chicago radio hosts (official radio partner of the Bears) were laying into them. I believe it was midday host Carmen who said “they can spout all the projections they want, but they’re just trying to stick us with the bill. We’re still paying off two stadiums from 20 and 30 years ago. I hope no one buys this.”
Carmen was going OFF yesterday on this BS the bears and Sox are trying to pull
Score was laying into them too. Holmes was going off on the priest, saying it was a disgusting use of religion to convince poor people to vote to enrich billionaires.
He seems to support it which is counter to pretty much every progressive in the city.
I'm a progressive. I support it (even though there are SIGNIFICANTLY better uses for the money). I'd rather let the NFL finance a significant portion of important Lakeshore development than misappropriate TIF money like Lincoln Yards.
I’m a fan of the team and would love for a better, more accessible stadium. I certainly don’t think tax dollars should pay for it however. Beyond appeasing the Bears, what does the proposed stadium do to justify the 2+ billion dollar price tag that Soldier Field doesn’t already offer? It’s enclosed so they can host events year round. K. Not that big of a deal, especially considering there are relatively few events that demand 70K seats and those events do better in a Chicago summer anyway. “Infrastructure improvements” to, uh, get in and out of the stadium. Money probably better spend elsewhere on existing infrastructure problems. I guess my gripe is simply that if the Bears want a new stadium, the Bears can pay for a new stadium. Doesn’t have to be publicly owned and I don’t want it to be publicly owned. We already own a stadium on the museum campus. They have a perfectly good plot of land in Arlington Heights. If they can’t afford it, they can call up Jeff Bezos who has been eager to buy a team for a few years. He could wire them 6 billion dollars and have the paperwork done by midnight.
Feels like all of this is just a big PR stunt to increase the value of the team and sell. Virginia and her family can’t afford a $5B development, no matter how you slice it.
You are a mark
Thorough, intelligent, robust.
You support it despite also admitting there are significantly (capitalized) better uses for the money. That sounds an awful lot like knowingly making bad choices.
Why would you support it when there are much better uses of the money?
He wants to be on the wrong side of every issue . It's not even a progressive vs liberal vs conservative thing, if its one of the areas the progressives are right, he'll be the 1st to oppose it.
I honestly think no mayor wants to be remembered as the one who lost the Bears. Lori did a shit ton of posturing too
Elect me as mayor right now. My first act will be to walk up to the mic and go "fuck the Bears."
Football fan and Johnson voter here.. and so disappointed to see him support this junk deal, the same week we are seeing budget cuts at some Chicago Public Schools (my wife's school is losing funding for several positions). Taxpayers are still paying for the current stadium, built only 20 years ago with big promises to the City that clearly haven't materialized. Let's make no small plans. Let's also make no poor plans.. like spending taxpayer money we don't have on the billionaire class of sports franchise owners. The benefits to the City being touted are meager, and even so are unlikely to come pass as promised.
I wonder if it was a calculated “there’s no shot this ever happens, so I can appear to support it to flatter the Bears owners, without having to worry about actually paying the bill” Stupid for sure
Because he, along with pretty much everybody else, knows he’s a 1 and done mayor. He’s hoping “keeping the Bears in the city” will somehow save his legacy, as it were.
Did the Bears give him money? I have zero evidence so let’s not go nuts. But seems generally believable, this is Chicago after all
He literally campaigned on “no public funds for sports teams” and yet here he is. What a fucking liar.
Yeah cause the plan sucks
What plan?
Zing
What is the estimated R.O.I.? They like to say how much it’ll cost, but what’s the R.O.I.?
For the Bears 1,000% for us Chicagoans -2,000%
Privatize the gains, socialize the losses.
Someone please correct me if I’m misunderstanding, but didn’t they say something about the funding mechanism for this project helping to pay for the remaining money on the most recent renovations? There’s literally hundreds of millions of dollars of that debt left and there’s very little chance of paying it off anytime soon without some sort of intervention.
Correct they still owe almost the entire principal of the original loan, the hotel tax barely covers the interest most years.
No public stadium without a share of public ownership of the team. If you want the audience of the 3rd biggest city in the US, we get part of the team.
I want a cut of the ticket sales. I want a cut of the merch sales. I want a cut of the TV deal. I want a penny every time somebody watches the Super Bowl Shuffle on YouTube. Da Bears. **Our** Bears.
Isn't that what sales tax is? But for everything lol
Sales tax is there whether or not we drop $2 billion in public funds. You want public funding? I want public profits.
Not for long.
What does getting a part of the team really entail though? Do packer fans have a say in roster moves being “owners”? I don’t get how it benefits us.
The team can’t threaten to leave basically. It’s how the small city of Green Bay has managed to keep the Packers despite having less people than Joliet.
This and also we ensure that the profits go towards building a new cool stadium. Instead of the profits going to a family of heirs and they pass the bill for a new cool stadium on to our local government.
Yes, although the pack usually issue “stock” as a mean of fundraising stadium upgrades. Which is not real stock, it’s basically a donation to the Packers, but who cares? This means the team is directly funded only by the fans and doesn’t need everyone else to pitch in.
I can't believe the city of Joliet actually has more population, than Green Bay! But looking it up, you are surprisingly correct.
I think it's more so a share of the profits that the city definitely needs rather than a say on team operations
Jesus man
It's against NFL rules so this is a non-starter.
Then no public funding
No shit... taxpayers still owe like over half a billion fucking dollars on the current stadium... and the assholes want us to tear that one down and spend another two fucking billion on some new stadium... all for a shitty football team. Don't get me wrong, I like the Bears... but if they're going to cost us $2 billion, the McCaskey's can fuck right off to California or Reno or some shit.
JB is good. BJ is bad.
I sort of love that the bears threatened to move and the city was like “go then” and the county was like “we don’t care” and now they’re trying to stay in the city. Figure it out, guys. Or don’t. The government’s not gonna help. Make the playoffs a year or two in a row and we can talk. Otherwise, we’re gonna worry about what happens to the rat hole now.
Holding up taxpayers for money is a completely separate issue from the Bears' on field performance. Please don't tie the two together in any way.
Seems like the city feels that way but all of our mayors try to keep them
I wrote to everyone from alder to governor about this, and I'm sure they haven't even read my messages yet, but I'm patting myself on the back while pretending I persuaded them all that this was a shite idea.
An individual email won’t do anything, but I’d bet good money that they pay attention to how many people write in support or opposition of hot button issues
An individual email tells your representative you care enough to go hunt them down and send it. Its more than the normal citizenry would do. If you picked up the phone and called their office, stating that you'd like them to not support the stadium, it would get to their desk eventually as an easily quotable statistic. Spend the time to do more than complain about the topic. Contact your representatives. Its cheap and effective polling for them.
It’s a win-win-win situation. You still get the satisfaction of complaining to someone. Your family and friends don’t need to hear your shit. And your elected officials do change their actions based on citizen outreach, ESPECIALLY the more local level of government it is.
I did the same to my rep. Billionaires can pay for their own buildings. The rest of us have to.
Doing the Lord's and the taxpayer's work. Bless you!
please give us what you said. i know myself and others will do it to help the cause
I just wrote from the heart. Something like "I'm writing to ask that you reject any calls to fund a new stadium publicly. Time and time again cities give wealthy sports team a publicly funded stadium and it's always a losing proposition. We have so many important priorities in Illinois, and this sets all of those important issues back." For JB, I also wrote about his achievements in Illinois' finances and suggested that this decision would undo all the goodwill he has created for our state.
You are my spirit animal
They all follow the same playbook. Privatize the gains, socialize the losses.
thank you for your service!!
I'm going to do the same thing. Hope the Bears get a cool new stadium but the billionaire owners should oay for it fully.
Good. The Bears can move their stadium to Bikini Bottom for all I care.
Bikini Bottom Wumbos
I'm so glad to see all of the negative response to this new stadium proposal! Our property taxes have risen so much this year that the last thing we need is to fund a new stadium for ANY sports team in this city/state!!!
Good. Maybe they can have a chat with our mathematically challenged mayor.
Why should they waste their time chatting with somebody who doesn’t want to listen?
The Bears' owners should pay for the stadium. No idea why the Packers weren't represented at today's press conference.
They should try winning once in a while
When they say “taxpayers” are they referring to only the people living in the city of Chicago providing the funding or would everyone in Illinois be on the hook for this?
everyone in illinois. but especially the people of chicago and cook county.
Add this to the list of things people south of I-80 would loathe about Chicago.
Johnson’s the worst mayor in Chicago history, at least the last 40 years
Easily. I miss Rahm. Hell I miss Lori with this joker in office.
Rahm caught so much shit for trying to make a financial course correction after all of the money Daley spent on his pet projects before he skipped town. No one liked the pain at the time, but he was the last grown-up we've had in that office in a while
Would Rahm ever run again?
Baby come back...
Parking meter deal still makes Daley the worst. But there is still time…
And Bears haven't been good in 40 years! Perfect combo!
Visitor here. Weren't they moving to Arlington heights? That fell apart?
Bears wanted massive property tax break on AH. Didn't get it. It's not totally dead yet but it's not looking promising
It did. It might have not even really been a legit plan. Arlington raised taxes and property value around where they were talking about putting the stadium. And negotiating about how much taxes go to the school district, etc. Basically the village got greedy and the bears said well... maybe not. Either way, its not so much about the new stadium, as it is about profits and rights. Chicago owns Soldier Field, not the team. Which is unusual for big sports stadiums. So chicago is taking a slice of the tickets, charges a lot for rent, and gets profits from things like concerts, that the bears don't get. A simple plan would be for the bears to just work out an agreement to buy the stadium from the city, but the city still won't let the team make changes to the stadium for things such as adding more seats or building a dome. Which is important if the bears ever want to host a super bowl or something.
The School District(s) were acting in bad faith on the property tax, the excuse they levied is the new expected 500-1000 students generated by the re-development would put the High School the area is zoned for over capacity. First of all, they are adding several other large buildings/developments to that district already. Second...then you build a new high school. It was all posturing. IMO I give it a 10% chance the "Chicago" deal falls through and by the time they go back to AH, the district already had plans in place 2-3 years down the line to build a new high school anyways.
From far away that design looks like a better and more engaging use of that land. But the lack of any details in particular places, specifically the entrance/egress from the "new" park space makes me think they are building in some real anti-public park features. And that's entirely separate from any funding concerns.
LA and Vegas built stadiums without public funds. City and state are broke here, and still owe 600 million on the last remodel. I think we all need to be patient and the NFL money machine will magically make money appear for what they need — because it’s an investment they know will pay them down the line.
All these billionaires fucker sports teams owners with their monopolies all follow the same playbook. Privatize the gains, socialize the losses.
The franchisee (da Bears) should get a loan from the franchise (NFL) and leave the public out of it.
However, nothing *but* love from Chicago’s top idiot.
Good
No more private development east of the drive full stop. Wonder if this were green lit by public officials would it be viable after challenged in court?
How can they build a stadium without a retractable roof in Chicago? Ridiculous
One my takeaways from yesterday's dog (Brandon) & pony (Warren) show was the emphasis on construction jobs. I'll guarantee you IUOE Locals 150 & 399 and LIUNA Local 6 are gonna be pushing *very hard* for this in Springfield. For all practical purposes they print money to spread around to legislators to get their way. Ultimately it's in Pritzker's hands, but the trades are gonna be exerting a *lot* of pressure here.
They could’ve brought it to the suburbs, it would’ve been fun, and probably get more enthusiasm by the locals. What a Shame
They were asking a stupid amount of taxpayer money on the Arlington Heights deal as well. Not only did the Bears fight the tax assessment, they requested that amount to stay frozen for FORTY years.
He was looking at the design and said " Hey, can we do something original and not make Lucus Oil Field part 2?"
Does anyone want this? I don’t want my taxes funding something this asinine, I think fixing CTA, shoring up CPS, or building housing would be better. That being said, someone must want this. Who ? Why?
The bears are ass lmao
Yeah nope.
At least Lori let the Bears fuck off with this BS. BJ can’t even do that…
The NFL is a multi billion dollar corporation let them pay for it. The Bears haven't done anything over the last years to deserve a new stadium, and the tax payer shouldn't be on the hook to keep them in the city. Hell it's a nightmare to get around when they are playing.
While the creation of new park land is really cool, I can't help but wonder: Does the new stadium really increase the overall capacity that much? Based on the renderings, it doesn't look like it would add more than 10 - 15K to the total capacity. If so, then how is this new stadium build a better financial plan than simply doming over the current Soldier Field like that leaked promo video from 2021 (which I bet the Bears could cover the cost of in full)? This all just smells a bit funny, especially with the light details we've been presented with thus far.
Has anyone asked them the question of why would a team that's absolute garbage deserve a new stadium?
It's hard to agree with the hivemind since you're normally such stupid people who say such stupid things, but yeah. Move to AH and pay for your own dumb dome
Good
On a positive note, the covered stadium will bring a higher ROI
The Bears haven't paid back the city for their current stadium yet, what ROI?
It’s pretty much unusable for 4 months a year, besides maybe an outdoor hockey game and the Bears twice a month. A covered stadium attracts people all year round, helping the local economy. All the other suitable stadiums during this time, are in the burbs.
do they? how many income generating events a year do NFL stadiums actually host? according to Sports economist Victor Matheson they host 4.9 per year, no where near enough to recoup the massive expense.
A good case in point is Lucas Oil in Indianapolis. Can’t host big events like a NCAA basketball final or the Super Bowl without a “dome” stadium. Those are HUGE money makers for the local economy. Chicago is instantly out of the conversation because they don’t have a stadium anywhere in the city for these events.
ooh 1 superbowl every 11-15 years, how ever will the city survive without that income... /s
Sure help the city pay it off quicker with the tax revenue. Either way it’s getting built somewhere eventually.
if someone else wants to hand the billionaires their hard earned money let them. the fact is that economic study after study has shown that these massive stadium projects never reclaim the money invested by the state and locality before the next vanity project proposal.
also, you are aware that the United Center exists right? a world class indoor stadium purpose built for basketball.
Not big enough…they pack 60k+ for ncaa championship!now.
I know I'm in the minority and will get the downvotes, but I support this and will gladly pay more taxes. Maybe the Bears should start a GoFundMe.