The future location of the Chicago Bears’ stadium remains uncertain after the Illinois legislature failed to pass a bill before the end of its session Monday that would have paved the way for the Bears to build their next stadium in Illinois, rather than taking the project across state lines to Indiana.
While the Illinois Senate passed the bill in the final hours of the spring session, the Municipal Stadium Authority Act stalled inside the House of Representatives, leaving the Bears without legislation to launch their stadium project in Illinois.
Rather than vote on that bill, which legislators crafted late Sunday to allow for certain Cook County municipalities to create a stadium authority governing body, the House adjourned shortly before 5 a.m. Monday morning. Barring a summer special session in Springfield, the state legislature won’t return to session until November.
House Speaker Chris Welch told reporters early Monday that a special session wouldn’t happen, but that the Bears’ needs could still be addressed.
“Our caucus is used to processes,” Welch said. “Our caucus is used to taking our time and getting it right. And it’s proven over the last five years, five-and-a-half years now, that those processes work. So we’ll get it right. We’ll get it done.”
Bears leaders now face serious deliberations on what to do next after both chairman George McCaskey and president and CEO Kevin Warren asserted in March that their goal was to have a stadium site selected by late spring or early summer.
“We will finalize our evaluation of both Arlington Heights and Hammond, and remain on the late spring/early summer timeline that we have previously communicated,” the team said early Monday morning after the legislative session closed in Springfield. “We will provide an update when we have a decision to share.”
Rep. Kam Buckner, who has been the Illinois House’s point man on the negotiations, was still hopeful on Monday morning that a deal can eventually be reached.
“We all share the same goal: finding a solution that works for the Bears, works for taxpayers, and earns the confidence of the General Assembly,” Buckner posted on X. “This morning was the end of the session. It was not the end of the conversation.
Buckner emphasized that Monday morning’s adjournment came with a realization that the votes for the newly-created Municipal Stadium Authority Act “simply weren’t there.”
“That’s nobody’s fault,” he added. “It’s just the reality of trying to move something of this size, complexity and consequence in the final hours of the session.
“The truth is that proposals of this magnitude take time. Members need time to review details, ask questions, hear from stakeholders and understand the long-term implications of what they’re being asked to support.”
If ultimately passed, Illinois’ stadium authority plan would mirror what Indiana approved, giving the Bears full control over a stadium that they wouldn’t technically own for decades, allowing them to collect revenue and avoid property taxes. It also provided a way for the team to get government help to fund the “mixed-use development” it wants to build outside the stadium.
The Bears’ quest to build a new stadium has been a bumpy journey for nearly five years. Under former team president and CEO Ted Phillips, the team first made its bid in 2021 to purchase land at Arlington Park, the former home of the horse racing track. The Bears paid $197.2 million for the land and closed on the property in February 2023, between the hiring of Phillips’ successor, Kevin Warren, and Warren’s official start in April of that year.
One of the team’s major missteps at the time was entering into that purchase agreement without clarity on all the funding obstacles and governmental hurdles it would encounter in launching the project, particularly the property’s tax situation.
Asked about the rush of that bid in March at the NFL owners’ meetings, Bears chairman George McCaskey said: “Well, we didn’t control the timing of the acquisition of Arlington Park. Churchill Downs was in a position where they were ready to sell. So they largely determined the timing.”
Monday morning’s frantic activity in Springfield, with new legislation introduced, reviewed and voted on by the Senate, and then stalling in the House at the last minute, followed the collapse over the weekend of a megaprojects bill the Bears championed, hoping it could pass during this legislative session.
That P.I.L.O.T. (Payment in lieu of Taxes) legislation would have allowed the Bears to freeze their property tax rate on the stadium for up to 40 years while negotiating with local officials on an annual P.I.L.O.T. payment that would have helped with, among other things, property tax relief for community homeowners, plus appropriate tax flow for school funding and other municipality needs.
While the alternative bill proposed would free the Bears from paying property taxes altogether, with political strain between the Senate and House and the late hour, the clock ran out on the bill.
Illinois’ legislative veto session takes place in the fall. Still, during that period, which ends in November, new legislation needs a super-majority vote to pass, rather than a simple majority like during the regular session. Illinois’ Democrats have super-majorities in both chambers, but there is obvious dissension among their ranks on this issue, as some Chicago-based lawmakers have continued fighting to keep the Bears in the city — even at the potential expense of pushing the team to Indiana instead.
The Bears have had a vision for building a new stadium and a multi-use development on the 326-acre property in Arlington Heights, which they pounced on when it first came up for sale, but finding the most financially beneficial means of launching the project has been problematic, with a legislative obstacle course prompting multiple detours.
The team spent time and resources exploring a possible stadium site near Soldier Field on the museum campus in downtown Chicago and later introduced Indiana — and a site near Wolf Lake in Hammond — as a serious contender. Lawmakers in that state ultimately approved a bill that would significantly subsidize a new stadium with bonds backed by locally generated tax revenue.
The Bears have vowed to pledge $2 billion of private funding toward the construction of their new stadium.
“Well,” McCaskey said, “I have George Halas’ blood coursing through my veins. So the family is risk-averse, debt-averse. But we feel this is a necessary step to secure the Bears’ future.”
Bears leaders have been consistent this year in emphasizing that Arlington Heights and Hammond are the only two potential sites currently on their radar, despite continued assertions from Chicago officials that the Bears staying in the city remains a viable option. In recent weeks, NFL officials and Illinois Governor J.B. Pritzker have further emphasized Arlington Heights as the only Illinois option in play for the Bears.
Bears leaders feel like state lawmakers haven’t shown more urgency in aiding their push for a new stadium in Illinois or in addressing their concerns with getting that project going. The latest developments in Springfield aren’t likely to ease the tensions.
There is no immediate need to move. The Bears’ current lease at Soldier Field, where the team has played its home games since 1971, runs through 2033, with the team facing a significant but doable penalty payment for leaving early.
In March, Warren, who has predicted shovels would be in the ground every year since 2024, expressed the urgency the Bears have in finding a resolution to their stadium situation.
“We have to get this right,” he said. “As George has mentioned, this will impact our franchise for decades to come. So this is not ‘Where do you move training camp to?’ This is a decision that will have ramifications for 30, 40, 50 years. So you want to make sure you get it right.”
