What Arlington Heights-area candidates have to say about Bears stadium proposals

Most — but not all — candidates for Illinois General Assembly seats in and around the Chicago Bears’ Arlington Park property support legislative efforts to entice the team’s move to the suburbs or keep them from leaving Illinois altogether.

The 326-acre former racetrack on the west side of Arlington Heights is wholly within the 54th District of House state Rep. Mary Beth Canty, an Arlington Heights Democrat who is among the sponsors of so-called megaproject legislation that would allow the Bears to negotiate its property taxes with local taxing bodies.

The bill advanced out of the House in April, but failed to gain support in the Senate, which instead passed a measure to allow municipalities like Arlington Heights and Chicago to create local public stadium authorities. Both chambers adjourned the spring session in the early morning hours of June 1 without taking formal action on the other chamber’s bill.

New or amended legislation to keep the NFL franchise in Illinois — amid the team’s exploration of stadium sites in Hammond, Indiana — is expected to be front and center when legislators return Nov. 17 for the fall veto session in Springfield.

Canty’s Republican opponent in the Nov. 3 election, Joseph Tracy of Palatine, expressed some support in concept for taxes that are “fair and equitable” as part of a Bears stadium deal.

State Rep. Nicolle Grasse, an Arlington Heights Democrat whose 53rd District borders the Arlington Park property to the south, was also a sponsor of the megaproject bill.

That legislative approach also is backed by Carina Santa Maria, an Arlington Heights Democrat who is seeking the state Senate seat in the 27th District, which overlays the two House districts. Santa Maria is a current Arlington Heights village trustee, and Grasse and Canty are former trustees.

But Grasse and Santa Maria’s Arlington Heights Republican opponents, Elizabeth Bauer and David Mathis, respectively, oppose the legislation.

Here is what each candidate had to say about the Bears stadium proposals, in questionnaires submitted to the Daily Herald and recent League of Women Voters forums at the Arlington Heights Memorial Library.

Canty: She said the House “did its job” by passing a framework that would have given the Bears and other large developers tax certainty while protecting local schools and taxpayers. But she said she’s disappointed the Senate never called the bill for vote and the Bears now say their focus is Hammond.

“Neither side negotiated with the urgency or transparency residents deserved,” Canty said. What could have been done differently, she added, is setting a clear statewide megaprojects policy early — before any team’s deadline — so the same rules apply to every project and no one could negotiate through threats. “The door should stay open to Arlington Heights on terms that protect taxpayers,” she said.

Tracy: He said he wants the Bears in Arlington Heights, but a deal should have the village, school districts, park district and library at the table from the start so that “every dollar they would give up is put in writing and made public before any vote.” He added that any tax treatment offered to the Bears has to be “explainable” to homeowners who are seeking relief on their own bills.

Tracy favors state support for infrastructure costs at Arlington Park, whether developed by the Bears or others. “We want Arlington Heights to work with the developer of that property so that way it’s beneficial to everybody, in addition to a stadium,” Tracy said. “But we want to have jobs and we want to have taxes for that that are fair and equitable.”

Grasse: She still supports the Payment in Lieu of Taxes financing mechanism outlined in the original House bill since she said it would bring all taxing bodies to the table to negotiate a fair property tax agreement, add new revenue, and protect the interests of communities and taxpayers. She characterized it as a statewide economic development tool with local control.

“We need to make sure that the state works in conjunction with the local communities to figure out what’s best for the communities,” Grasse said. “And that allows the people of the communities to have a say. Is this something they want in their area or not?”

Bauer: She called handling of Bears stadium negotiations by the General Assembly “flawed every step of the way,” where the House bill offered giveaways to interest groups and didn’t protect taxpayers, while the Senate version was “even worse.”

“Fundamentally, I don’t like the idea of using tax incentives or just simply government money to pick and choose winners and losers and to decide which businesses we think are going to be the way of the future rather than providing a sound business climate for businesses,” Bauer said. She supports infrastructure spending — for things like road widening — that match what the state provides for other developments, but without subsidies or special tax treatment.

Santa Maria: She says she is open to legislation providing long-term property tax certainty, provided that schools, local taxing bodies and residents are protected and the agreement produces meaningful benefits for the community. She also favors state participation for public infrastructure for roads, transit, utilities and public safety. But she called the process at the state Capitol to date “too fragmented and too slow.”

“As an Arlington Heights village trustee, I understand both the tremendous opportunity and the legitimate concerns surrounding this development,” Santa Maria said. “I would have pushed earlier for all stakeholders — the Bears, state, village, school districts, Cook County and surrounding communities — to be at the same table, with transparency, defined taxpayer protections, and a clear timeline for reaching an agreement.”

Mathis: He said the House legislation was “not a good bill,” though he left open the door for negotiations over tax breaks so that the more money the Bears make, the higher taxes they’d pay.

“What I would not support is an open-ended taxpayer subsidy, shifting the Bears’ costs onto local property taxpayers, or giving the team a special deal without knowing the full cost and return to taxpayers,” Mathis said. He said he wants the Bears in Arlington Heights for the jobs and investment the stadium project could bring, and supports public infrastructure improvements that can benefit the surrounding community, but also wants the team to contribute its “fair share” toward infrastructure.

cplacek@dailyherald.com