Chicago Bears Look to Build New Stadium With Taxpayer Dollars Amid Illinois Financial Struggles, Windy City Crime

A view from Soldier Field looking toward Lake Michigan in Chicago, Ill., on Dec. 18, 2016. (Kena Krutsinger/Getty Images)

The Chicago Bears fight song calls the storied NFL team “the pride and joy of Illinois.”

But will that fanfare extend to the 104-year-old team’s aspirations to build a new stadium amid the state’s financial struggles and the rising crime statistics in the Windy City?

The Bears are looking to move from Soldier Field, their current home, and build an estimated $4.7 billion stadium complex across the parking lot at their Lakefront location.

The team released a video in April presenting a vision of “reimagining a historic site.”

The project has a diversity, equity, and inclusion aspect that “includes the Bears formalizing partnerships with key experts and organizations, beginning with city and state governments and community-based entities representing women as well as Black and Hispanic people,” the organization said.

The Bears have committed to covering more than 70 percent of the cost, or more than $2 billion, of the stadium price tag, and say that the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority, a state entity, would contribute the remaining funds through bonds, thanks to an existing 2 percent hotel tax.

However, Joe Tabor, director of policy research at the Illinois Policy Institute, a free-market think tank, said that is wishful thinking.

“Hotel tax revenues are still below pre-COVID numbers, and bonds need to be paid for somehow, usually with more taxes,” Tabor told The Epoch Times.

The five-year plan would bring in $8 billion to the area, according to the Bears.

Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson, speaking at the April event, said, “My administration insisted that any new project—especially one on public land—must deliver strong public benefit and public use for the City of Chicago, and I am pleased today that this plan does exactly that.”

But that prediction may be overly optimistic, according to Juan González, a progressive and a senior research fellow at the Great Cities Institute at the University of Illinois–Chicago.

“The projections are always very bright, and they rarely take into account the worst-case scenarios,” he told The Epoch Times. “And if the worst-case scenario happens, we’re responsible for ultimately paying the bonds.”

Opposed to Proposal

Friends of the Parks is a local group that aims to “[mobilize] a diverse Chicago to ensure an equitable park system for a healthy Chicago,” according to its website. The group is opposed to the Lakefront proposal.

“We are all being asked to trust the process. ... Yet, Chicago has a long history of, closed-door planning and rushed decision-making that does not end well for taxpayers,” the group said in a statement.

Friends of the Parks, which was influential in thwarting a Lakefront museum dedicated to the career of famed Chicago filmmaker George Lucas, is not the only group opposed to the stadium plan in that area, which boasts the Field Museum of Natural History and the Shedd Aquarium.

Illinois political leaders have rejected the idea of using taxpayer funding for the project, with Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker saying on April 24 that he wasn’t sure it was a high priority for taxpayers.

Illinois House Speaker Emanuel Welch agreed, saying, “If we were to put this issue on the board for a vote right now, it would fail, and it would fail miserably. ... There is no environment for something like this today.”

Illinois Senate President Don Harmon said: “At first glance, more than $2 billion in private funding is better than zero and a more credible opening offer. But there’s an obvious, substantial gap remaining, and I echo the governor’s skepticism.”

The state is projected to have an $891 million deficit in the 2025 fiscal year.

The Prairie State ranks last when it comes to the number of days of rainy-day funds, according to the National Association of State Budget Officers.

Teresa Córdova, a former chair of the Chicago Plan Commission, said that any proposal to use taxpayer funding for a new stadium for the “Monsters of the Midway” should undergo a cost-benefit analysis.

“When the government provides any kind of tax incentives, there really should be a full analysis that shows if they invest this much, this is what we’re going to get back,” she told The Epoch Times. “And a lot of times people make assumptions about what the cost or benefits will be, but don’t do the analysis for it.”

An Investment, or Subsidizing Profits?

After all, she said, taxpayer support has to be about whether the City of Chicago is “making an investment” or “subsidizing somebody’s corporate profits.”

In 2021, the Bears looked to build a stadium and multiuse district in Arlington Heights, a move that has all but been abandoned despite the mayor of the Chicago suburb saying it is still possible the team’s new home could be built where originally planned.

“I understand we’ve said all along for the last year that they have to do their due diligence and get the best deal for their football club,” Arlington Heights Mayor Tom Hayes told local outlet WGN-TV in April. “We look forward to them refocusing back in this direction if they get a ‘no’ on the lakefront.”

An all-purpose district would generate more than 48,000 jobs and $9.4 billion for the Chicagoland area, according to the Bears.

“From Day One, the Bears have told us they want to own their own stadium and want property around the stadium to build a multi-use development that can hold game day experiences,” Hayes said. “We’ve got 326 acres of prime real estate in the northwest suburbs in the heart of their fandom.”

After all, Tabor said, Arlington Heights, which is over an hour northwest of Chicago, could be a better destination.

“Financially, the Bears have an incentive to leave Soldier Field. A new year-round entertainment venue could collect more profits for the Bears as the city retains any Soldier Field concert revenue,” Tabor said, noting that Arlington Heights does not have an amusement tax, whereas Chicago does, which makes the suburb more attractive for traveling acts.

However, S.T. Karnick, a senior fellow at The Heartland Institute, a conservative think tank based in Arlington Heights, said that an Arlington Heights location would be detrimental to taxpayers.

“The proposed mixed-use area in Arlington Heights has the advantage of creating more value and thus tax revenue than a stadium used only a few times a year,” he said.

“Those tax revenues generally end up being less than expected anyway, however, and the Arlington Heights deal is, in fact, foundering on Cook County’s radical increase in the property’s assessed value and hence the taxes the Bears would have to pay.”

It is “a classic case of government greed and vanity versus big-business leverage” as “the businesses always end up finding some sucker to pay up, and the taxpayers always lose,” he said.

“However, there are unresolved issues related to new necessary infrastructure costs that local taxpayers don’t want to feel forced to pay.”

Karnick predicted that if the Windy City and the Land of Lincoln do not contribute, the Bears are likely to leave Chicago.

“If Chicago and the state do not pony up hundreds of millions of dollars of taxpayer money, the team will move to some place, probably nearby, where the local lawmakers are not so smart,” he said. “Few cities manage to resist this temptation, even though studies consistently show these deals end up as a net loss for the places that pay to keep their multibillion-dollar sports teams.”

Karnick called it “a foolish status competition.”

A major issue for the Bears is a dispute with an Arlington Heights school district regarding the value of the property, which was previously a horse racetrack. The team is seeking a lower number.

The stadium and mixed-use district would cost approximately $5 billion. In 2023, the Bears acquired the 326-acre property for $197 million.

Violent Crime on the Rise

Meanwhile, “violent crime rates are on the rise in Chicago,” Tabor said. “That may be a factor for any business looking to enter the city.”

While there have been 35 fewer murders in 2024 so far than there were last year, or a 9 percent drop, the number of aggravated batteries has risen by 11 percent and the number of burglaries by 4 percent, according to the Chicago Police Department.

However, according to Karnick, crime is not much of a problem on game day, as there is a notable law enforcement presence to discourage crime before and after big events.

“In addition, criminal activity is commonly confined to a very small number of locations in even the most crime-riddled cities,” he said.

But, Karnick said, that does not mean that Chicagoans should feel comfortable.

“Of course, protecting entertainment venues for relatively wealthy residents diverts police away from those crime hotspots,” he said.

He suggested that Chicago could require sports teams and other entertainment companies to augment security outside the stadium, with the city offering training for those security teams and granting them the authority to detain violators.

Chicago would have the advantage when it comes to public safety at Bears games, Tabor said.

“Soldier Field contracts its own security and coordinates with the Chicago Police Department to maintain it; the force in Arlington Heights may not be able to support the venue’s security needs, leaving the Bears with added security costs,” he said.

“Stadiums funded with public dollars have historically been bad for taxpayers.”

The Associated Press contributed to this report.