Bears property tax break bill sacked, but legislators scrambling to craft alternate plan

SPRINGFIELD — The property tax break legislation backed by the Bears to build a stadium in Arlington Heights doesn’t have the votes to pass in Springfield, a key lawmaker said late Saturday.

But legislators were working overnight to craft an alternative proposal to keep the NFL franchise in Illinois — maybe even still in Chicago — and prevent the team from bolting to Indiana.

“We’re focused on trying to construct a bill that will ensure that the Bears stay in Illinois,” said Sen. Bill Cunningham, the Chicago Democrat leading Bears stadium negotiations in the Senate. “Exactly what that looks like we haven’t landed on yet. We do know that the current proposal on the table — it just does not have the votes to pass. But we have not given up, and we’re hopeful that we’ll have a plan moving forward.”

A property tax deal that would have paved the way to the Bears’ suburban relocation was ultimately too bitter of a pill for members of the Chicago delegation to swallow, Cunningham confirmed.

New legislation being devised would provide incentives for the team to build in Arlington Heights, Chicago, or even other municipalities, putting them all on an “equal footing” to compete for a stadium, Cunningham said.

Although Bears brass have publicly said they are only considering two locations for a new stadium — Arlington Heights and Hammond, Indiana — they’ve met privately with Chicago city officials “repeatedly” for months, he added.

“From day one, there has always been a Chicago problem with the Bears proposal,” he told reporters. “The Bears have had a proposal on the table for a couple of years that asks Chicago members of the legislature to vote for a tax credit that would encourage a business to leave Chicago. Legislators generally don’t do that. That’s always been an obstacle to passing this bill.”

The revelations by one of the upper chamber’s top leaders followed a two-hour closed door caucus meeting of Senate Democrats where the stadium saga was discussed. Cunningham spoke to reporters just after 10 p.m., before heading into a late night committee meeting.

He said members of his caucus have “a couple ideas in the works” and are hopeful a better plan will “crystallize” by Sunday morning.

He added that he had a constructive meeting with Gov. JB Pritzker to discuss those ideas.

Lawmakers are starring down a midnight deadline Sunday night to pass Bears legislation and a state budget, among other matters.

“We’re going to make every effort to take care of this before the end of the day tomorrow,” Cunningham vowed.

State senators have been considering the so-called megaproject legislation since the House passed a 376-page version on a 78-32 vote on April 22. There was talk at the Capitol in recent days that the bill could be pared down — from an economic development tool that could benefit any project worth more than $100 million in the state, to one that just focused on the Bears’ proposed $5 billion redevelopment of the former Arlington Park racetrack and other projects in Cook County.

Under the Payments in Lieu of Taxes financing mechanism outlined in the bill, the team would have been able to negotiate tax payments directly with school districts and other local governments for up to 40 years.

But in private caucus meetings among supermajority Senate Democrats, it became apparent there was no appetite to support such a long-term tax reduction.

“There are concerns about the property tax break, and caucus members just aren’t really comfortable with it, so we’re trying to find out an alternative,” Cunningham said.

The Bears have been lobbying for the special tax break for at least three years, and Pritzker has been supportive of the concept as a statewide economic development tool, arguing similar programs are in place in other states.

But property tax relief for homeowners and affordability are on lawmakers’ minds this legislative session.

Part of what helped get the megaproject legislation out of the House was a property tax relief sweetener — inserted after months of little movement on the bill — that would have deposited half the Bears’ annual payments to Arlington Heights-area taxing bodies into a locally held property tax relief fund.

Of that amount, 60% was intended for rebates for residential homeowners in the megaproject area, and 40% would have gone to the state’s property tax relief fund.

Despite best efforts in the House, Cunningham said, that provision made things even more problematic for many lawmakers.

“The problem is it’s just very complicated,” he said. “It’s based on a method where we’re not really sure how many tax dollars that proposal would generate, so we don’t know what we would be able to refund to the taxpayers.”

It’s unclear what would replace the proposed mechanism the Bears have long-sought to lower tax bill at the 326-acre former racetrack, or if lawmakers are crafting something that would directly address the team’s tax bill at all.

“We are cognizant of what the Bears are looking for,” Cunningham said. “They’ve said that they will build a stadium with their own money, but they’re worried about their property tax exposure. We’re trying to find a way to address that, other than what is currently on the table.”