The Arlington … Bears?
Mark Siedentopf 
• Bookmarks: 33
While the Bears continue to garner headlines within Chicago, it is most certainly not due to their stellar play. If you’re not a football fan in Chicago, then perhaps the only news you hear about the Bears is on Monday mornings following another one of their losses. Yet, the more impactful drama surrounding this team concerns where they will play their home games in the future – a drama you should pay attention to if you are a taxpayer in either Arlington Heights or Chicago.
NFL franchises that wish to relocate take center stage in the local media in their prospective new locale. The excitement is both athletic – a new home team to support! – and economic, as teams draw fans who stay in hotels, eat in restaurants, and buy souvenirs. But if the prospective team – cue the Bears – requires a new stadium, those economic expectations should be tempered.
You might remember deals in the past where a Chicago suburb put up money to help fund a stadium. Does NOW Arena in Hoffman Estates ring any bells? What about SeatGeek Stadium in Bridgeview? These stadium deals were made with the intention of persuading professional sports teams to move to the suburbs, in arenas that could also host concerts and other public events. Both initiatives have turned sour: NOW Arena was unable to attract any professional teams to play their games at the arena, while soccer’s Chicago Fire only called Bridgeview’s stadium their home for about 16 years. Today, both deals now take up a primary portion of each villages’ budgets, with much of the burden being placed on taxpayers. And you don’t even have to look to the suburbs. Chicago’s refurbishment of Soldier Field back in 2003, with an eye to keeping the Bears on the lakeshore, itself remains a financial albatross.
Presumably Arlington Heights will heed the historical warnings. So far, Arlington Heights has not agreed to give any money to the Bears for a potential stadium at the site of the previous Arlington International Racetrack. Bears chairman George McCaskey, however, has stated that if the team were to relocate and build a privately-owned stadium in Arlington Heights, the village will have to provide some funding for ‘critical infrastructure.’ Nobody can blame Arlington Heights officials for wanting to attract the Bears, especially in light of predictions that the Bears’ residence would bring $10 billion into the village. But how much should Arlington Heights be willing to spend to support the Bears’ relocation without placing a heavy burden on taxpayers who may not even want the stadium in the first place?
Advocacy groups in Arlington Heights proposed an ordinance which would prevent the local government from providing incentives to private businesses for relocating to the village. Not surprisingly, the proposal was unanimously rejected – a rare Bears victory – as board members fear it would hurt the village attracting businesses in the long-run. Though this was positive news for the Bears, it shows some are already skeptical of a move that seems all but certain to happen.
Civic pride is hard to put a price tag on, but can the Bears long run of mediocrity – the Super Bowl shuffle was 38 years ago – engender much pride? Can Arlington Heights take at face value the claims of huge economic returns – only available if they pony up sufficient public funds – in light of other suburban stadium deals turned sour? Economists are not known for providing consensus, but most economists agree that it is typically a poor investment to publicly subsidize sports stadiums.
While the Bears essentially have one foot out the door when it comes to Soldier Field, Arlington Heights should not be so quick to invite them in. Neither should the city of Chicago go to whatever lengths possible to please the Bears. Even if it means there won’t be an NFL team in the third largest market in the US, that deprivation will be better than going even further in debt via yet another stadium deal that will provide little or nothing in return. The Bears lease Soldier Field, but in Arlington Heights, for the first time in their history, they could own their own stadium. The move makes sense for them but could once again prove detrimental to another Chicago suburb’s budget. Let’s hope that the threat (or promise) of their move does not cause Chicago or Arlington Heights to do something that doesn’t make sense. The move will have lasting impacts. History tells us that if either staying or moving is motivated by large public outlays, those impacts will largely be negative – maybe not for the Bears, who might even turn around their on-field fortunes, but for the taxpayers.
The Public Policy Studies major at the University of Chicago attracts scores of excellent undergraduate students. All of these students take part in a capstone experience in their senior year. A new option for the capstone experience is the Policy Project Seminar, a one-quarter course devoted to honing policy analysis and communication skills. The theme adopted for the inaugural Autumn 2022 Project Seminar was “Chicago Through a Policy Lens.” The Chicago Policy Review is pleased to present this op-ed as part of our “Outside Voices” series.
