Skip to main content
Bear Digest

Bears Stadium in Illinois Given Unrealistic '50-50' Shot by Legislator

A guess by one legislator about the state's chance to keep the Bears carries little weight with the entire project hanging in limbo.
Gene Chamberlain|
The Bears have plenty of stadium renditions but they're not much good without actual plans moving ahead to build.
The Bears have plenty of stadium renditions but they're not much good without actual plans moving ahead to build. | Rendering: Manica

In this story:

Chicago Bears

Flip a coin. This is what it has come down to for the Bears stadium chances in the state of Illinois.

At least this is the view of one Illinois state senator and she isn't even a Bears fan. After all of the debate and consideration of two separate plans for funding an Illinois stadium, along with the Indiana plans the Bears are more aggressively pursuing, Illinois State Sen. Sue Rezin of the 38th District on Tuesday told Shaw Newspapers it's even money on the in-state plan succeeding.

“I would give it a 50-50 chance to have the Bears stay in Illinois,” Rezin said.

Her assessment of an Illinois plan definitely didn't break new ground and the whole project remains shrouded in uncertainty, even for Indiana.

“I think if they do stay in Illinois, they more than likely will be in the suburbs just because they purchased a couple hundred acres there and it’s easier to build out the transportation and the logistics for the Bears stadium as well,” Rezin told Shaw.

Rezin, a Republican who admitted to being a Packers fan, also said the solution to the Bears' plans is in the works still. It's all behind-the-scenes discussion at the moment because the next legislative session isn't until mid-November but there remains a possibility a special session could be called at some point to address this issue.

This comes while the Bears have tested soil at a new Hammond area site known as Wolf Lake Terminal, just a stone's throw from the Illinois-Wisconsin border and down the road from the site near Lost Marsh Golf Course where plans originally had been focused. In all, three are three sites the Bears are considering near Hammond according to an NBC Chicago's interview with Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott Jr. Indiana's plan has had some kickback that doesn't appear to matter much, but the fact nothing more has happened yet in Hammond is at least a sign there is hope for Illinois.

Where it all actually stands

Plans behind the scenes to get another vote in Springfield depend on whether the Bears get their exact needs specified to legislators for the formation of a bill and then the same old roadblock must be addressed. That would be getting Chicago legislators on board with supporting a plan which could allow public money to be spent on infrastructure for a stadium not in the Chicago city limits.

When the last bill went down to defeat, Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson hardly sounded like he was going to let the Bears go quietly to Arlington Heights, where they would spend $2 billion of their own money to build the stadium.

"Without a final site selection, until we see shovels in the ground in Hammond, the City of Chicago will continue to engage in discussions grounded in the interests of our residents," Johnson told reporters.

Whether the ideas of Barrington-area State Rep. Martin McLaughlin are used for a bill allowing for an Arlington Heights public-private project or some variation, the northwest suburbs still appear the wisest location for a facility. McLaughlin again talked about his plan on Wednesday on Chicago's AM-560 and it sounds more realistic than about anything else proposed.

Placing it in Indiana might benefit the Bears more initially, but in the long term a dome built in state and not far from a major airport could more easily support the surrounding business area the Bears had planned in the project. Using a domed facility for the NCAA Final Four or a Super Bowl or Big Ten football championship, or even for concerts, would work better for all involved at a place located closer to the airport and also away from a major body of water.

This fascination with building a stadium near a lake that the Bears seem to have is disturbing. It shows a lack of logic.

The biggest problem with Soldier Field besides being the smallest stadium in the NFL is the traffic and lack of public transportation directly to the facility. So the Bears want to build another stadium next to a lake in Hammond, where traffic can depart and arrive at limited points? A land-locked facility is much better as traffic can exit in all directions, not 180 degrees.

The latest Hammond site would even require fans coming from Illinois to go over a part of the lake on a long bridge by access off Interstate 90. This would be a worse fiasco than Soldier Field, before or after games.

There is no point in building an indoor facility near a lake. The fans are going indoors for the game. They're not sticking around outside to admire the scenery.

Wherever the Bears wind up, whether it's a 50-50 shot or something no one has heard about, they need to build the stadium in a place people can get to and leave with as few problems as possible. That's why Arlington Heights still makes the most sense.

A few major roads come into play, and fans coming from Chicago can get there on an actual Metra stopping at the Arlington Heights stadium. They don't need to hoof it after getting off a train, like most must while coming to Soldier Field now.

Dead period

At this point, nothing tangible is happening.

The fact Rezin made news for this comment is a total joke and an example of how starved the public and media are for any sort of real news on the topic.

Rezin's comment provided no real insight into where anything stands. That 50-50 number was like something used by Indiana lawmakers back in February. She was making a public appearance at the birthday of centenarian at a seniors home, a fellow Packers fan. It was just a couple sentences said off the top of her head about the subject when a reporter asked a question about it.

She might as well have been asked about the war in Iran. What was said about the stadium was mainly a complete guess, and anyone can do that, even an Illinois state legislator.

Brenden Moore of Capitol News Illinois had cited middle-to-late August as the best time to expect a special legislative session in Illinois if one is called.

It's well past time for Illinois and the Bears to be done with the guessing game and get the issue solved with a concrete plan to keep them in Illinois and move them to Arlington Heights.

Sign Up For the Bears Daily Digest - OnSI’s Free Chicago Bears Newsletter

Add us as a preferred source on Google

Loading recommendations... Please wait while we load personalized content recommendations

Published
Gene Chamberlain
GENE CHAMBERLAIN

Gene Chamberlain has covered the Chicago Bears full time as a beat writer since 1994 and prior to this on a part-time basis for 10 years. He covered the Bears as a beat writer for Suburban Chicago Newspapers, the Daily Southtown, Copley News Service and has been a contributor for the Daily Herald, the Associated Press, Bear Report, CBS Sports.com and The Sporting News. He also has worked a prep sports writer for Tribune Newspapers and Sun-Times newspapers.

Home/News