Chicago’s lakefront is too important to just hand-off for a new Bears stadium

We already thought it took nerve for the Chicago White Sox, a $2 billion franchise, to come hat in hand looking for public subsidies to build a brand-new billion-dollar stadium at The 78.

Well, hold our overpriced Miller Lite, say the Chicago Bears, who have come forward with a scheme of their own to spend $2 billion to build a big new domed stadium on the lakefront.

Normally, a pro sports team shelling out its own dough to build a stadium would be a good thing. But here’s where the Bears bid runs out of bounds: They want to construct the facility, plus what the team says will be additional park space, on the protected, publicly owned lakefront land that is now parking lots just south of Soldier Field.

Even after kicking in the $2 billion, the Bears likely have their hands out for public money. This week, the team is waving around the results of a poll that claims to show public support for a taxpayer-funded stadium that would keep the team in the city.

So the franchise wants to build itself a huge stadium on public lakefront land — an idea that is bad enough on its own — then at some point seems to likely want the public to chip in for the privilege?

The Bears say the new stadium will be publicly owned, but that comes across as a dodge to get around hard-fought ordinances designed to keep privately funded and owned development off the lake.

Make no mistake: This would be a Bears stadium in every sense of the word. And the answer to whether it should be built there, based on what we’ve seen so far, should be a resounding no.

More questions than answers

In a statement issued Monday, Bears President Kevin Warren said the new stadium and accompanying park space “will bring a transformative opportunity to our region — boosting the economy, creating jobs and generating millions in tax revenue.”

But for us, the proposal brings torrents of unanswered questions and concerns. How much will this stadium wind up costing the public? Are the Bears looking to somehow recoup their $2 billion through the public financing mechanism they are currently eyeballing?

And what happens to Soldier Field? As the Sun-Times’ Fran Spielman reported this week, much of the current stadium, except the historic colonnades and war memorial, could be wrecked to create the new park space now being promised by the Bears.

That could turn Soldier Field into nothing more than a frightfully expensive garden ornament. Don’t forget: Almost $590 million in bond debt is still owed from the 2003 Soldier Field rehab.

The city’s powerful open space advocates are bound to put up their dukes over this, and rightly so.

“Discussions about a project that will require significant public investment that could profoundly affect the literal and figurative landscape of Chicago and our neighborhoods should not be rushed like this,” Friends of the Parks said in a statement this week. “It is a curious contrast to how long it takes to approve and plan a new neighborhood park.”

Time for the mayor to play quarterback

What’s being proposed is a Bears-drafted, Bears-led, and Bears-funded redevelopment plan, which makes us uneasy.

This is the team that in 2023 paid $200 million for Arlington Park, one of the most beautiful racecourses in America, then wrecked it to build a domed stadium, hotels, restaurants and the like — and are now apparently pulling a “never mind” and walking away, after school district officials balked at the team’s effort to keep down its property taxes, which mean money for schools.

Now the team pulls out of its helmet a $2 billion plan to redevelop a critical section of Chicago’s proud lakefront? The team promises to build parkland to increase the Museum Campus by 20%, but we’d like to first see renderings of locations of the new greenspace.

And what about those stadium-adjacent, team-owned restaurants and hotels that were so important to the Arlington Heights deal, and to the Bears wanting to high-tail it out of Chicago in the first place?

Have they vanished from the team’s plans, or are the Bears waiting to add them to the Chicago bid? The public absolutely must know.

This is yet another issue on which solid leadership from City Hall, particularly the mayor’s office, is sorely needed.

But in a statement this week, Mayor Brandon Johnson said “meaningful private investment and a strong emphasis on public benefit are my requirements for public-private partnerships in our city. The Chicago Bears’ plans are a welcome step in that direction and a testament to Chicago’s economic vitality.”

That sounds more like a Bears fan than a chief executive who has to cast a critical but fair eye on any deal that involves public land.

Johnson should steer the Bears away from the lakefront toward other locations in Chicago.

If not, at least let Chicagoans know that he’s asking hard questions about this proposal. To do neither is a disservice to the public and the lakefront.

The Sun-Times welcomes letters to the editor and op-eds. See our guidelines.