2 Illinois lawmakers offer new proposals to keep Chicago Bears from moving to Indiana

Two Illinois lawmakers are pushing new efforts to keep the Chicago Bears from leaving for Indiana, as the mayor of Hammond says the exact site for a new Bears stadium in the Hoosier state is still in flux.

Illinois state Rep. Dan Ugaste (R-St. Charles) on Tuesday unveiled his plan for so-called "PILOT legislation," which he plans to file in the Illinois General Assembly by next week.

Ugaste's proposal largely follows the megaproject bill model passed by the House in April with more restrictions on the types of projects that would qualify. 

His plan would maintain provisions for local governments to negotiate a payment in lieu of taxes, or PILOT, with a developer. However, it would raise the threshold for minimum private investments for a megaproject to $500 million, rather than $100 million under the original House-passed plan. That threshold would have little impact on the Bears, which plan to invest $2 billion for a stadium. The projects must also be for commercial use and, like the original bill, would exclude data centers.

Ugaste's plan also prevents a project from qualifying as a megaproject if it includes residential development. He said it would prevent school districts from incurring more costs from new residents and help them keep their tax levies down. The Bears' proposal in Arlington Heights does envision some form of housing being built on the 326-acre Arlington Park site.

"If you include residential development, then you're allowing a resident to move in, take full advantage of all services and not have to pay the same as everybody else," Ugaste said.

Ugaste stressed his legislation is not limited to the Bears, nor to Arlington Heights.

"It would be statewide, and would allow any community to compete for this project going forward," he said.

Belief that Chicago could still mount a competitive bid for a new stadium helped sink prospects for a Bears bill in the Illinois General Assembly at the end of May.

The megaproject framework wasn't popular in the Senate, Sen. Bill Cunningham (D-Chicago), the lead negotiator of Bears-related legislation in the chamber, told reporters at the end of May.

"Why would anyone oppose economic development in any of our communities?" Ugaste said. "It's a benefit to everybody. But mine will also have actual property tax relief for all taxpayers in Illinois."

Ugaste said he has not presented his proposal to the Bears or legislative Democrats while some details are still being worked out, including how developments could use Sales Tax and Revenue, or STAR, bonds. Those are bonds that can be used by local governments to finance large tourism or entertainment projects.

He also proposed additional requirements such as mandating new referendums for renewing bonds and only holding property tax levy referendums during November general elections.

Fellow Republican pitches Arlington Heights-only plan

Illinois state Rep Martin McLaughlin (R-Lake Barrington), announced a separate proposal designed only for the Bears and only Arlington Heights.

McLaughlin's plan calls for allowing the Bears to spend up to $2.5 billion to build a stadium that the team would own and the state to spend $1.2 billion on infrastructure. Lawmakers had generally been considering about $800 million in infrastructure for Arlington Heights had legislation moved forward.

McLaughlin's bill would not include the PILOT and instead would set a value for the property that would increase by 2.5% each year over a 30-year deal. McLaughlin told Capitol News Illinois it would also include an oversight committee to ensure local governments don't shift additional taxes toward other residents and businesses.

"Certainty is what the Bears need, what any business needs, and that certainty needs to come in the form of a value set on the land that they purchased, with a 2.5% annual increase," he told CBS News Chicago. "It's been done in other places, successfully."

McLaughlin said his bill would only apply to Arlington Park, calling it the only viable site for a new stadium in Illinois. He said the municipality demonstrated its ability to host large events when the former horse racing track occupied the site.

"It really answers a lot of the uncertainty questions that the Bears had and I'm hoping that it incentivizes the Bears to maybe rethink Illinois because I think we made the deal too complex," he said.

Gov. Pritzker keeps door open for special session to take up Bears legislation

But, for any legislation aimed at keeping the Bears in Illinois to move forward with any kind of speed, lawmakers would have to return to Springfield for a special session before their regular veto session in November and December.

Gov. JB Pritzker said Tuesday he'd be willing to call a special session of the Illinois General Assembly this summer if the Bears and state lawmakers can reach an agreement on legislation to keep the team in Illinois.

"If the legislature can get together on one piece of legislation, we absolutely could do that, but I think that there's some time," he said. "I'm not suggesting that we want to wait, I'm just saying they've got to figure out how they can get the legislature – both sides – around the same bill, and I'd be happy to call a special session. By the way, so too can the leaders of the legislature call a special session."

The governor said that he's been watching the Bears stadium saga very closely, and he's been talking with the team regularly. He said the Bears would like to see something happen and that they are regrouping. Pritzker insisted that he's worked hard to keep the Bears in Illinois, but stressed that they need to "make sure that they know what it is they want, and stick to the message."

"Apparently, there was some discussion with the city of Chicago after they told everybody that they wanted to be in Arlington Heights, and you can imagine for Chicago legislators, and for everybody, considering the bill that was put forward, it's confusing. Which one do you want?" the governor said.

Meantime, Hammond Mayor Thomas McDermott Jr. remained bullish on the Bears moving to Indiana, after the team announced last week it was moving forward with plans to build a new stadium there, although a specific site has not yet been chosen.

"Theres only one site. That's Hammond Indiana, site to be selected, which means there's more than one site in Hammond the Bears are looking at, and they're going to decide among those sites which one they want to build on," McDermott said on his "Left of Center" podcast.

While the Bears have said their focus is now on Hammond, they have left the door open to continue negotiating with Illinois lawmakers to stay in Illinois.

State Rep. Kam Buckner (D-Chicago) and state Sen. Bill Cunningham (D-Chicago) both said Bears President and CEO Kevin Warren spoke with them on Friday and said he was open to continuing discussions on legislation supporting a new stadium in Illinois.

The two-state tango continues, with Illinois' next step unclear, while Indiana lawmakers have approved legislation to pave the way for a Bears move to Hammond. The proposal would commit up to $1 billion in public funding towards a stadium, and create a Northwest Indiana Stadium Authority with the power to issue bonds, acquire land, and finance construction.

While Indiana has agreed to help finance a Bears stadium, the team plans to commit $2 billion towards the construction of the facility. Indiana officials have yet to lay out how they plan to help fund the project, or what taxes would be needed to pay for it.

In April, the Illinois House voted to pass a so-called "megaprojects bill" that would have allowed the Bears or other developers investing at least $100 million in a project to negotiate property tax breaks with local governments. The Illinois Senate never voted on that legislation, instead passing a bill on Monday that would have allowed local municipalities in Cook County with a population of more than 70,000 to set up their own stadium authorities. Arlington Heights and Chicago both meet that threshold.

Under that plan, the Bears would have put up the cash to build the stadium but the local government would officially own it and the Bears would lease it from them — thus avoiding property taxes altogether. However, the Illinois House adjourned for the summer without taking up that proposal.

Capitol News Illinois contributed to this report