Latest Post | Last 10 Posts | Archives
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: Lawsuit filed over law forbidding post-primary legislative slating
Posted in:
* From the May 10th Fran Spielman Show, with special guest Mayor Brandon Johnson…
Tessa Weinberg: Mayor, the CTU is also beginning contract negotiations with a demand for 9% raises or the rate of inflation, whichever is higher. At the same time, the district faces a budget deficit of at least $391 million, which is only likely to grow. Is that request realistic? Where will that money come from?
Mayor Johnson: You know, again, the state of Illinois owes the city of Chicago $1.1 billion. And, you know, we cannot lose sight of that. There has been a real concerted effort over the course of decades now to disrupt public education in this city. And without, you know, full cooperation from the state of Illinois, you’re going to leave one of the largest school districts in the entire country woefully underfunded. And I’m going to continue to advocate to make sure the people of Chicago receive their just due.
Please pardon any transcription errors.
…Adding… Click here to read the CPS funding background memo sent by the governor’s office last week.
* Bears…
Mayor Johnson: You know, as far as making critical investments to build a better, stronger, safer Chicago, of course, there will be ongoing debates and conversations about that. Here’s the problem. We have a 100-year-old building that has owed hundreds of millions of dollars in debt. That’s the problem.
Fran Spielman: It’s a 100-year-old building that’s been rebuilt. It was rebuilt totally in 2003. It was totally rebuilt, that stadium.
Mayor Johnson: So stay with me then. I’m glad you brought that up, because not only is it a 100-year-old building that there’s no, with no dome, so no public benefit for it. We’re talking about hundreds of millions of dollars in debt.
When it was, quote-unquote, rebuilt in 2003, 67% of the dollars that were used were public dollars to build a stadium where there’s no public benefit in which we still owe debt to. I’m saying is, I have put forth, so stay with me, I have put forth a solution to the problem. What is that solution?
That the Bears are willing to put $2 billion into the stadium, so their own money, billionaires putting their own money in it, while visitors, the hotel tax, pays for the rest. So we’re talking 72%, almost 75% of the building being paid for by the billionaires. And then there’s another 28% that comes from ISFA, which is designed to build stadiums.
The only function of ISFA is to build stadiums. And so I have this problem, the city of Chicago has this problem, and Illinois has this problem, that you have a 100-year-old building that has hundreds of millions of dollars in debt, and we can’t even use it beyond the 10 or 12 games. So if someone else has another solution that addresses this problem, then they should put that on the table.
Now, the Bears, of course, have a responsibility to continue to make their case, but the bottom line is this, I’ve said from the very beginning, whatever we do, we have to invest in people. That’s what I’ve done this first year, and there has to be a public benefit and a public use for it. The Bears have put together a proposal that absorbs 72% of the cost, and the other cost will be paid for by visitors.
If someone else has a better solution to that, they should put it on the table.
Mariah Woelfel: If we want to stay on Bears for a second, Mayor, I mean, that is the breakdown when you look at the stadium itself, but the overall plan will rely on $1.5 billion in federal and state funding for infrastructure improvements. How much time and political capital are you spending to try to secure that federal funding and state funding from those legislative bodies? And does that add unnecessary strain on your relationship with those legislatures? While we’ve already heard in this interview, you’re using a lot of that political capital to try to solve the migrant crisis. Is it worth it to spend time and energy on a sports stadium when you need those relationships for other priorities?
Mayor Johnson: So the question is, is it worth spending my time to put forth a vision that puts thousands of people to work and provide public benefit and public use, as well as infrastructure needs for the entire city of Chicago?
Mariah Woelfel: Or does it strain your relationship…
Mayor Johnson: Listen, I hear what you’re asking. You’re asking me, is it worth my time to actually show it for the people of Chicago? It will always be worth my time to ensure that we’re investing in people.
That’s what I promised I would do, and that’s what I’m doing. As far as the infrastructure needs, I’m not sure if enough people get enough opportunity to hear more about the inflation reduction act. We’re talking about billions of dollars.
This is an unprecedented amount of resources available for infrastructure. This is actually what the Biden-Harris administration, this is what they want us to do. One of the top tourist attractions for the state of Illinois is the campus in which we’re talking about.
Now, that’s not the only place that needs infrastructure, so my ask is not limited to this particular development. It’s also a need for us on the southeast side, where there are real environmental hazards that have been there for a generation now. And so we have service lines that need to be replaced.
This is not about one stadium. This is about our vision for the entire city of Chicago. And so I’m always going to show up for the people of Chicago. And because there’s a need for real critical investment, something that has not happened in a substantive way for at least the last 40 years, I am proud to show up for the people of Chicago, calling for those types of investments.
Tessa Weinberg: On the Bears, you know, they also are seeking to keep revenue from other events like concerts that take place at the stadium, which would leave a major hole in the Park District’s budget. Will you commit to not allowing the Bears to keep that revenue?
Mayor Johnson: This is a proposal. So there’s still negotiations that are being done around, you know, revenue sharing. This is a proposal.
Lots of other stuff in there, so go listen to the rest.
posted by Rich Miller
Monday, May 13, 24 @ 1:03 pm
Previous Post: It’s just a bill
Next Post: Lawsuit filed over law forbidding post-primary legislative slating
WordPress Mobile Edition available at alexking.org.
powered by WordPress.
==If someone else has a better solution to that, they should put it on the table.==
The soundproofing on the Fifth Floor is unparalleled.
Comment by Roadrager Monday, May 13, 24 @ 1:07 pm
Who is advising the Mayor that it is good to continue using language like “we are owed” and we need our “just due?” As long as he keeps framing the conversation like that I would go tell him to pound sand.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, May 13, 24 @ 1:10 pm
Those are the kind of words you use during a contract negotiation not as the Mayor trying to advocate for the City of Chicago. He has completely failed to adjust his style to the job he now holds.
Comment by Demoralized Monday, May 13, 24 @ 1:11 pm
Johnson:
There is nothing in Illinois law that requires that the ISFA exist in perpetuity. In fact, the ISFA’s authority as the financial backer of Guaranteed Rate Field and Soldier Field currently only extends until 2033, when the last of the Soldier Field debt is set to be paid off.
At which point, that 2% tax on hotel stays in Chicago could either go away, or (more likely) be replaced by a city tax that could be used to benefit the people of Chicago rather than the billionaire owners of sports teams.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Monday, May 13, 24 @ 1:28 pm
He’s backing himself into a corner, acknowledging the other critical needs facing the city and then saying the stadium is on a par with them.
Th Bears really messed up when they didn’t build a dome the first time. There’s no public support for giving them a do-over now.
Comment by Give Us Barabbas Monday, May 13, 24 @ 1:30 pm
I don’t know if I have ever heard more from a person that is non substantive. I don’t think I have ever seen the mayor actually respond to a question, or even accept readily known facts. It’s like he lives in his own reality.
Comment by Henry Francis Monday, May 13, 24 @ 1:43 pm
I’m sorry to to say this but the Bears are responsible, solely, for paying for any new infrastructure improvements they desire. As a privately owned business they need to seek out their own capital.
Wasn’t this discussed during President Warren’s interview that managing a for-profit business is different from working at a not-for-profit?
Comment by Jerry Monday, May 13, 24 @ 1:52 pm
=he state of Illinois owes the city of Chicago $1.1 billion=
Nearly every school district in Illinois was shorted either by GSA proration or reduction in reimbursement for Mandated Categoricals (MCATS) during the financial crisis. MCATS like transportation were down to 25% of the entitlement. Thaty money was never paid back and no serious person ever thought it would be. So if that is what the mayor is talking about, get in line pal, but adults knew that was never coming back.
Comment by JS Mill Monday, May 13, 24 @ 2:08 pm
Didn’t realize that a dome is a prerequisite for a building to have a public benefit.
Or that Bears games are the only activity that occurs at Soldier Field today. My trip there a couple of weeks ago must have been a complete figment of my imagination.
I also presume when Soldier Field is currently unusable because of the weather for non-football events, the bulk of the time the Bears are not going to permit other activities to take place at their new domes stadium anyways. (I can’t imagine the Bears being ok with a Taylor Swift concert on a Saturday in December when they have the Lions coming to town on Sunday.)
Comment by Juice Monday, May 13, 24 @ 2:10 pm
==You know, again, the state of Illinois owes the city of Chicago $1.1 billion==
Im sorry but I still don’t understand how he arrived at that number.
Comment by low level Monday, May 13, 24 @ 2:17 pm
Can someone remind MBJ that we still owe $629 million for the stadiums we are presently using?
“1.1 billion here (for CPS), 1.5 billion there (for the Bears), and pretty soon you’re talking real money.”
-Everett Dirksen (attributed)
Comment by Jocko Monday, May 13, 24 @ 2:31 pm
Phew. I need a cigarette after reading that.
Seems like City Hall is [heck] bent on turning the bad Daley era Soldier Field ISFA deal that is at least paid off in 2033 into a 30-40 year financial ISFA albatross.
Comment by ChicagoBars Monday, May 13, 24 @ 2:31 pm
==Soldier Field ISFA deal that is at least paid off in 2033 into a 30-40 year financial ISFA albatross.==
Considering the deal started in 2002 and is paid off in 2033, it already was a 30-40 year albatross.
Comment by supplied_demand Monday, May 13, 24 @ 2:41 pm
I guess the Chicago Bears are not part of the old cadre that had unfettered access to City Hall. That spaceship really did just land on Soldier Field.
Very Blagojevichian.
Comment by Three Dimensional Checkers Monday, May 13, 24 @ 3:04 pm
We’re just here in Arlington Heights..
Comment by Rahm's Parking Meter Monday, May 13, 24 @ 3:06 pm
Stay with him…right over the cliff. The tone deafness is absolutely incredible. And at what point can someone on his team shake him and say “Wake up! What are you doing?!” It’s like a train wreck that you can see coming, yet he refuses to take the car off the crossing. Sad really. And as a Chicago citizen and taxpayer, it’s really frustrating, maddening and disappointing all at once.
Comment by Just a guy Monday, May 13, 24 @ 3:19 pm
== At which point, that 2% tax on hotel stays in Chicago could either go away ==
After the bonds are retired in 2033, the law requires that the hotel tax is used to reimburse Chicago for all the past LGDF diversion that occurred when the bond payments came up short. (It’s projected that those diversions will occur repeatedly between now and ‘33.) After that, the tax is scheduled to stay in place with all revenue going to McCormick Place. Of course, this arrangement is governed by a state law that can be changed anytime the legislature wants.
Comment by Tony T. Monday, May 13, 24 @ 3:28 pm
Thousands of jobs, that truthfully will be the same as the ones in Arlington Heights if it’s the construction jobs? If he’s saying there are thousands of permanent jobs coming with the new stadium I’d like to see the math. 10 games, some concerts (which as it stands now the Bears keep that revenue), maybe soccer or Big Ten. Those aren’t full-time living wage employment.
When are they going to explain the public benefit? Having the State fund a stadium for the lakefront doesn’t provide a public benefit to Moline, Mount Vernon, or Naperville but they’ll be the ones who help pay for it.
Comment by Frida's boss Monday, May 13, 24 @ 4:39 pm
As Yogi said I know a stupid idea when I see one
Comment by Hank Sauer Monday, May 13, 24 @ 4:40 pm
“Of course, this arrangement is governed by a state law that can be changed anytime the legislature wants”
I never meant to imply that it would sunset, only that we’re not bound to finance stadia beyond 2033 — unless we once again bind ourselves.
– MrJM
Comment by @misterjayem Monday, May 13, 24 @ 5:43 pm
I think the CTU has been spinning lies for so long that they can’t stop and they actually believe what they say. This is who he is.
Comment by Shytown Monday, May 13, 24 @ 8:16 pm