Daily Herald opinion: Despite encouraging recent comments, movement on Bears project doesn’t feel promising

Pocketbook-conscious taxpayers can take heart in Gov. JB Pritzker’s observation Monday in Wheeling that as a business, the Chicago Bears “seem to be doing OK for themselves” and ought not need taxpayers to “prop up” their new stadium project.

At the same time, residents throughout the suburban region can take some encouragement in the observation last Friday by Bears executives that regular meetings between representatives of the franchise and Arlington Heights are proceeding well, while contacts with the city have dwindled to next to nothing. Perhaps at last we’re seeing signs that the team’s nearly four-year, on-again-off-again flirtation with the suburbs is stabilizing to a point at which productive agreements can be possible.

On the pocketbook question, the governor’s statement - consistent with statements on the question from lawmakers in both parties - needs just one caveat. That is that the state’s policy against or for “propping up” a Bears development needs to be consistent regardless of where the franchise decides to build. As long as leaders make it clear that such consistency will drive state policy, local leaders and the team can have a foundation of certainty on which to build their discussions.

Of course, Bears officials also are seeking another type of certainty, and on that point, it is hard to parse the statements of Chairman George McCaskey - “It’s on us to convince the governor and the state legislators that this is a good idea for the people of Illinois, and we need to do a better job at that.” - and of Warren - “This is not a grant, this is not a gift. This is not any transfer of money from the state of Illinois to the Chicago Bears or other businesses. This just says we’re going to allow you to negotiate the property taxes, which is critically important.”

If that indeed is what the Bears “need to do a better job at” persuading political leaders of, perhaps their best approach is to provide some certainty of their own.

The team argues that it needs the flexibility that would be provided by a complex Payments in Lieu of Taxes proposal that didn’t get General Assembly attention in the busy waning hours of the spring session. Among a variety of provisions, the bill would freeze property taxes on the 326-acre Arlington Heights site for a period of time, during which the Bears would make agreed payments to schools, municipalities and other public bodies affected by the development.

A major concern with the so-called PILOT legislation is that it may not accommodate unpredicted or unpredictable demands, tilting the burden of the stadium’s cost and impact away from the franchise and onto the shoulders of local agencies and taxpayers. The team, or business, gets certainty at the outset. Other parties, not so much.

It is that uncertainty the Bears must overcome if they are to assure local interests that they will net the promised benefits of the $5 billion business and entertainment complex team officials have in mind and, then, to persuade lawmakers to give them the property tax certainty they crave.

If they can do all that in the coming fall veto session, Warren said shovels could go in the ground before the year is out. That, ultimately, would be a welcome step forward in this long-stagnant economic drama. Yet, as encouraging as the signals from the state and the team were over the last few days, it feels far from likely we’re going to get to that point.