Chicago Bears plan to prioritize development for Arlington Heights stadium
The spokesperson said in a statement that the mayor spoke with leadership from the team, who indicated they "intend to prioritize the development site located in the Village of Arlington Heights."
The team, in a statement, said:
"Over the last few months, we have made significant progress with the leaders in Arlington Heights, and look forward to continuing to work with state and local leaders on making a transformative economic development project for the region a reality."
The Bears have been talking about a move from their home of more than 50 years at Soldier Field since 2021.
The Bears bought the site of the old Arlington International Racecourse for $197 million in February of 2023, and had the grandstand and other structures on the site demolished. But months later, the team put the Arlington Heights plan on the back burner in favor of building their new stadium along the Chicago lakefront.
The location later came back into the picture as a possible stadium site.
In November 2024, the Bears reached a tentative deal over property taxes, and the village board approved an agreement between the Bears and nearby school districts the following month.
The mayor's office said the Johnson Administration worked to present a good deal to the Bears and the city for the team to remain at the lakefront, but was not allowed to move forward financially due to the climate in Springfield.
The office also said, "The city remains open and will help facilitate any movement to keep the team in Chicago."
The video above is from a previous report.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
What does SEC's move to 9-game conference schedule mean for future of CFP?
We can all breathe a giant sign of relief: Finally, the SEC is moving to a nine-game conference football schedule. Stop the presses! It only took them four years of debating, arguing and posturing. But what does this move mean for the greater landscape of college football? For one, it means fewer SEC games against non-power conference opponents in FBS and those in FCS, as the league will retain its requirement for schools to play at least one non-conference game against a fellow power league team or Notre Dame (yes, that means 10 power league games). But the move's most notable impact may lie with the future of the College Football Playoff format. Let's first start off with a fact: This may not mean anything immediately for the CFP format, and there is unlikely to be any agreement on a future format very soon. Yes, the SEC's decision may ease and make more productive conversations with Big Ten officials over a future format, but it doesn't mean Big Ten leaders will jump to agree with the proposed '5+11' format that the SEC, ACC and Big 12 have openly supported. In fact, on Thursday, one Big Ten official told Yahoo Sports that while the SEC's move is a positive step, the league has more concerns, most notably related to the CFP selection committee's criteria of choosing what would be 11 at-large playoff teams. Remember, according to an agreement that all the FBS conferences signed last year, the Big Ten and SEC hold authority over future CFP formats as long as they have 'meaningful' conversation with the ACC and Big 12. The disagreement between the two conferences lingers. One wants more at-large selections and another wants more automatic qualifiers. The Big Ten proposed 16 and even 28-team formats that grant an unequal number of AQs to specific leagues, as many as four to each the SEC and Big Ten in a 16-team model circulated this past season and seven AQs for the two leagues in a model that emerged last week. The ACC and Big 12, along with the SEC, have thrown their collective weight behind the 5+11 model, and so have the Group of Six conferences plus Notre Dame. It's put the Big Ten on an island and has resulted in an impasse in CFP format negotiations. The SEC's desire for a 5+11 format 'remains' after the move to a nine-game conference schedule, SEC commissioner Greg Sankey told Paul Finebaum on his show on Thursday. 'There are other ideas that have been talked about. We haven't taken positions on those. Lot of work to be done,' he said. The most recent 'other' idea is a 24 or 28-team format circulated last week by Big Ten leaders. While some SEC school executives are interested in exploring such a model, many others — especially the league's room of presidents — are turned off by such a large postseason field, to the point that one quipped recently, 'It's a non-starter.' Is the SEC's move to nine games a compromise to the Big Ten to get that conference on board with the 5+11 model? After all, Big Ten administrators and coaches have made it clear that they were against a move to a format with such a big at-large pool if the SEC remained at eight conference games. They believe the league would have an advantage in landing those at-large spots (they were probably right on that thinking, by the way). But it may take weeks or months for the Big Ten to gather enough support to push aside its administrators and coaches' desire to have a more NFL-like field with automatic qualifiers. However, the SEC's move to nine wasn't only for CFP reasons, of course. Money is at play here. As previously reported, the schools are in line to receive additional revenue from ESPN to play an extra conference game, as much as $5 million a school annually. At the most financially stressful time in college sports, any new money is welcomed. There's something else, too. The shift to nine provides the league with the ability to sell tickets to another SEC game, to include such a game in season ticket packages and to generate more sponsorship and advertising dollars for that game. They'll play one another more too. The nine-game schedule will follow a '3-6' model, where each school plays three permanent opponents and six rotating each year, assuring each of the 16 schools play the other at least once in a two-year span. By the way, the SEC, at least years ago when this '3-6' model was selected, planned to choose each school's permanent opponents based on three considerations: (1) primary and secondary rivalries; (2) geography; and (3) equity. How do you solve the equity consideration? It's pretty simple actually: The SEC's original plan was to use the last 10 years of win-loss records to create tiers and then pair schools that way. But the most important component, probably, is historic rivalries. Anyway, back to the impact nationally. Thursday's decision, for many, came as a surprise. 'That came out of nowhere,' said one SEC leader. 'I wonder what changed?' pondered another. Momentum grew in the spring for a nine-game schedule, coinciding with the Big Ten and SEC's discussion over the '4-4-2-2-1' CFP format that leaned heavily on automatic qualifiers. However, SEC coaches in May rejected the format, and many believed that the league would likely remain at eight conference games. What changed this week? The CFP announced an adjustment to its selection committee criteria in choosing at-large teams, more heavily weighing games against top programs. Was it enough to tip the scales among a split room of athletic directors debating, for four years, between eight and nine games? Perhaps. Either way, they got there. And now the question lingers: Will the Big Ten come around on the 16-team format that everyone else wants?
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Gov. Cox defends Utah Senate president
Utah Gov. Spencer Cox stood by state Senate President Stuart Adams on Thursday, defending the top lawmaker's decision not to disclose his personal connection to a law inspired by the criminal case of his granddaughter. During a tense exchange with reporters, Cox said there is no need for an investigation into Adams' behavior because he and Senate Majority Leader Kirk Cullimore, R-Draper, have openly stated the extent of their involvement in the law's passage. 'There's nothing to investigate,' Cox said. 'The facts of this are very, very clear.' What is the new law? The provision, which passed in 2024 as part of SB213, allows 18-year-old high school students to be charged as 17-year-olds if they engage in noncoercive sexual activity with teenagers who are 13. In a stated effort to keep the process fair, Adams did not tell legislators, except for Cullimore — the bill's primary sponsor — that his granddaughter was currently the defendant in a Davis County criminal case falling into that category. Cullimore has said that after Adams told him about his granddaughter's situation in 2023 he contacted her defense attorney, Cara Tangaro, to identify statutory changes to prevent high school students from being charged with child rape when no force was involved. The change was discussed in committee hearings and floor debates before passing as part of the 49-page criminal justice omnibus bill. The law did not apply retroactively to Adams' granddaughter, but it was referenced at her sentencing. Court observers disagree on the extent to which the law may have shaped the eventual plea bargain that let the granddaughter avoid a prison sentence and sex offender designation. 'I don't think there are any facts in dispute,' Cox said. 'He talked to the Senate majority leader. The Senate majority leader took that information and he proposed a piece of legislation.' Calls for Adam to resign State Sen. Nate Blouin, D-Salt Lake City, Utah Democratic Party Chair Brian King, and activist groups across the political spectrum have called on Adams to resign, alleging that he abused his power. But Cox said these criticisms are unfounded. This is the process taken by many pieces of legislation, the governor said, and by not disclosing his personal situation, including to Cox, Adams allowed lawmakers to focus on the policy's merits. 'Every single legislator has experiences in their life where they see something that they feel may be unjust, and that influences the way they bring legislation to the table,' Cox said. Cox pushed back against some legislators who have said the provision was snuck into the bill late in the process. It was part of the initial draft and was debated by stakeholders, Cox said, adding that those who say they didn't know about the provision are 'lying to you, or they're a terrible legislator.' Review will happen Cox repeatedly said he was 'grateful' that Adams had not told him 'this was impacting someone in his family' because it may have changed how he 'reacted to the bill.' But Cox said he and others now have a chance to revisit the legislation if needed. On Friday, Utah House Speaker Mike Schultz announced the creation of a working group of policy experts to 'review' SB213 and analyze state laws related to unlawful sexual activity among high school students. In an interview with Deseret News and last week, Adams said he had no participation in the drafting of the provision, or its placement in SB213, and said the way the bill became law 'was done ethically and morally perfect.' Cox said on Thursday that Adams made the right call by staying out of the legislative process as much as he could as it related to the provision — even if it was initiated by his concerns tied to a family connection. 'I think it was appropriate for the top person in the Senate not to weigh in on this bill, which is exactly what happened,' Cox told reporters. 'He did not weigh in on this bill — I can only imagine what you would have written if he had.' Play Farm Merge Valley
Yahoo
21 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Trump administration not eyeing equity in companies that are increasing US investment, WSJ reports
(Reuters) -The Trump administration is considering taking equity stakes in companies receiving funds from the 2022 CHIPS Act but has no plans to seek shares in bigger semiconductor firms that are increasing their U.S. investments, the Wall Street Journal reported on Thursday, citing a government official. The development follows comments made by U.S. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick, who on Tuesday said the government is continuing to work on the possibility of taking a 10% stake in troubled chipmaker Intel. However, the administration does not intend to take equity stakes in companies like TSMC, which are ramping up investment, the official told the Journal. Businesses not increasing their commitments may need to offer equity to the government in exchange for subsidies. "The Commerce Department is not looking to take equity from TSMC and Micron," the official told WSJ. TSMC executives have already had discussions about giving back their subsidies if the administration asks to become a shareholder, according to the report. The White House and TSMC did not immediately respond to Reuters' requests for comment. TSMC, which counts Nvidia and Apple as key clients, announced plans for a $100 billion investment in the United States during an event with President Donald Trump at the White House in March. This investment is in addition to $65 billion committed for three manufacturing facilities in the state of Arizona. The U.S. Commerce Department, which oversees the $52.7 billion CHIPS Act, formally known as the CHIPS and Science Act, late last year finalized subsidies of $6.6 billion for TSMC to produce semiconductors in the United States. Besides Intel, Micron, TSMC and Samsung were among the biggest recipients of CHIPS Act funding. In the past, the U.S. government has taken stakes in companies during periods of economic uncertainty to provide financial support and restore confidence. Sign in to access your portfolio
