Today, I’m taking a brief break from writing about local high school athletics. Instead, I’m going to use this Tate’s Take column to write about the stadium situations of two of Chicago’s professional sports franchises.
Let’s begin with the National Football League’s Chicago Bears. It’s important to note that I am a passionate Bears fan, growing up watching Walter Payton dominate at running back and the team winning Super Bowl XX in January 1986, thanks to an overpowering defense. Since then, with the exception of the special 2006 season, which ended in Super Bowl XLI (that Devin Hester kickoff return for a touchdown to start the game was — and still is — one of my favorite sports moments; just wish the Bears had won), things have been largely mediocre at best.
Make no mistake, the Bears need a new stadium. Soldier Field turns 100 this year, and it was renovated after the 2001 season. But the way it was done was pitiful to say the least. The structure looks like a spaceship jammed into historical colonnades, and it’s just not a good place to watch a game.
That said, I wasn’t thrilled with the plan Bears President Kevin Warren unveiled last week. The new stadium would be built just south of Soldier Field and would be domed, with the intention of attracting both a Super Bowl and an NCAA men’s basketball Final Four. The proposed cost is $4.7 billion, with the Bears contributing $2 billion.
The problem I have is that there’s a funding gap of $900 million, which would have to be covered by the taxpayers. What could $900 million do for Chicagoland and the entire state of Illinois? It could create early childhood education programs, job development programs, and many other educational opportunities — all of which are sorely needed.
You mean to tell me the NFL, an entity whose yearly revenues are more than healthy, can’t chip in more than $300 million to help the Bears? Why should taxpayers, many of whom are under financial pressure thanks to the recent COVID-19 pandemic, be asked to dig deeper into our pockets to subsidize a sports stadium for billionaires’ benefit?
Especially when there are more urgent issues facing us: Our public transportation systems need help and we need more job creation that ultimately helps reduce crime in the Chicago area. That’s what I would rather spend $900 million on.
The same goes for the Chicago White Sox of Major League Baseball, who are also looking for a new stadium. Is Guaranteed Rate Field perfect? No, but it is only 33 years old and has already been renovated. Plus, they want the new stadium to be in the South Loop, not far from Soldier Field. Such a move would bid farewell to the South Side, the Sox’s ancestral home.
I have seen reports that Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf wants the cost to be $1 billion. He did offer last week to contribute, but it’s unclear how much. Moreover, taxpayers would have to subsidize the majority of the remaining costs.
I am opposed to taxpayers supporting private entities in their efforts to build new sports venues. Pro sports is big business these days, and surely the owners of these teams can afford to build such facilities out of their own pockets. But the city of Chicago and state of Illinois simply cannot afford to subsidize them, not when there are more pressing needs facing citizens.
It’s all about priorities, and using public money to build sports venues — instead of schools, early childhood facilities, educational centers, and affordable housing — should not be a priority. If these greedy owners want new venues, let them pay for it themselves. Or better yet, sell the teams to someone who will build their own arenas and stadiums.
