Representatives from various groups gathered on Wednesday to voice their continued opposition to the proposed Chicago Bears stadium project on the city’s lakefront.
Led by Friends of the Parks, these groups have raised concerns about several aspects of the proposed project, including its location, financing, and potential impact on Soldier Field.
Interim executive director of Friends of the Parks, Gin Kilgore, emphasized the importance of keeping the shores of Lake Michigan “forever open, clear and free,” a vision shared by the late Aaron Montgomery Ward, a renowned business magnate.
“While we would love for the Chicago Bears to stay in the city, we object to the chosen location and the overall cost to our city and residents,” Kilgore stated. She also stressed that preserving the lakefront is not the responsibility of one group, but a collective effort.
Kilgore also expressed skepticism about the expected economic growth from the stadium, calling it a “leap of faith” and one that would divert much-needed funds from critical components of city safety and infrastructure.
Friends of the Parks has not ruled out taking legal action against the Bears if they move forward with the project. “Starting with a lawsuit is not our first choice, but we will not take it off the table either,” Kilgore said.
Other groups pointed to studies that show publicly financed stadium projects often do not provide the promised returns on investment, labeling them as a waste of taxpayer money.
Landmarks Illinois also spoke out against the plan, arguing that the proposed demolition of parts of Soldier Field, with the exception of its iconic colonnades and veteran memorials, would cause irreparable damage to a historic landmark in the city.
In response, the team issued a statement defending their plans. “The Chicago Bears have been an integral part of the city for over 100 years, and we are excited to continue this legacy by investing $2 billion in a state-of-the-art, enclosed stadium. This project will create over 43,000 construction jobs and more than 4,000 permanent jobs, while also increasing green and open space and providing year-round access to the lakefront,” the team stated.
The Bears have been seeking millions of dollars in taxpayer funding for the project, as well as additional funds to address public infrastructure concerns around the development.
However, state lawmakers have expressed hesitation about approving such funding, with Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker and top leaders in both the House and Senate raising concerns about the proposal.
The controversy surrounding the stadium project began when the Bears purchased the site of the former Arlington International Racecourse for nearly $200 million in early 2023. The focus then shifted back to the city over property tax issues, with plans for a new lakefront stadium unveiled in April 2024.
According to Bears COO Karen Murphy, the entire project could cost $4.7 billion, with $3.2 billion allocated for the stadium, $300 million for infrastructure, and an additional $1.2 billion for two other phases of the project.
The team has requested $900 million for the stadium construction from taxpayers, with the remaining $2.3 billion to be covered by the team’s own funds and a $300 million loan from the NFL.
The Illinois Sports Facilities Authority would be responsible for providing the $900 million through a 2% hotel tax currently being used to pay off the Chicago White Sox’s home stadium, Guaranteed Rate Field.
The team has also stated that they will require additional funds for infrastructure around the stadium, potentially bringing the total public financing to $2.4 billion. It is possible that the city of Chicago may also contribute to this infrastructure financing.
Limited discussions were held during the last legislative session in Springfield, with Bears officials hoping for further talks with lawmakers in the coming months.
The controversy surrounding the proposed Chicago Bears stadium project continues to garner attention and spark debate among the community and city officials. As the discussions and negotiations continue, it is essential to keep in mind the importance of preserving the city’s historic landmarks and ensuring responsible use of taxpayer funds. Only time will tell what the future holds for the Bears and their stadium plans, but it is clear that the voices of concerned citizens and community groups will not be silenced.
