As Chicago Mayor Brandon Johnson stood with Bears officials to announce plans for a sprawling stadium campus on the city’s lakefront this week, he reflected back on his candidacy for mayor, claiming he was the only contender willing to try to keep Chicago’s NFL team within city limits.

Johnson was, in fact, most enthusiastic about negotiating with the team, while his run-off rival argued the city already “blew it” with the Bears.

But what Johnson left out Wednesday was that a year ago, he was also adamant and clear that keeping the team shouldn’t come with a multibillion dollar bill for city taxpayers, telling WBEZ that money could instead be used to remove lead pipes, house thousands of people experiencing homelessness, pay down pensions “or meet dozens of other urgent needs — all of which would also generate much-needed economic and quality-of-life returns.”

The glossy $4.7 billion plan for a new stadium campus south of Soldier Field relies on upwards of $2.4 billion in public funding. While alderpersons acknowledged the differences between campaigning and governing, the apparent about-face still has some Chicago alderpersons concerned the plan is out of step with taxpayers and the progressive agenda Johnson campaigned on.

• RELATED STORY
• Culture & The Arts

Bears to reveal how to pay for $4.7 billion domed lakefront stadium development — and what it will look like

read more

“We came into office saying we’re not here to subsidize multi-billion dollar corporations,” said Ald. Andre Vasquez, 40th Ward. “From a progressive lens, it’s very challenging to think that we’d be subsidizing this much for a large corporation that has the ability to put up $2 billion of its own money, plus $200 million in Arlington Heights. I just struggle to see how that ends up really being a true public benefit.”

Speaking on NBC Sports Chicago Wednesday, Johnson defended the plan, saying it is “not at all” inconsistent with his progressive platform or roots.

“Having the opportunity to stand with billionaires, you could not have convinced me a decade ago that I would have the opportunity to do that,” Johnson said. “The fact that a middle child, 10 siblings, from a working class family is in a position to speak to the interests of everyday Chicagoans and challenge billionaires to put skin in the game — that’s what I promised that I would make sure happen.”

The Bears’ pitch would deliver on his progressive agenda, the mayor said, by creating 43,000 construction jobs for the region, bringing in millions in anticipated economic impact and adding green space and amenities that all of Chicago could enjoy.

“I’m proud to be a union member,” Johnson told NBC Sports. “But I’m also very proud of the fact that we have an organization and we have a leadership with Kevin Warren, who listened to my platform: public benefit, public use. Let’s make sure we do something that’s special that generations to come can benefit from.”

Leaders from the progressive Chicago Teachers Union attended Wednesday’s news conference, but did not respond to WBEZ about whether the group — which has spoken out against public funding for stadiums previously — supports the plan.

Trade unions that could benefit from the construction jobs are still reviewing details.

“The prospect of improving our sports infrastructure for the Chicago Bears is exciting: creating jobs and opportunities for people who build, operate, and take the field,” Chicago Federation of Labor President Bob Reiter said in a statement Thursday.

Ald. Gilbert Villegas, 36th Ward, fears Johnson’s backing of the plan was premature and hurts the city’s ability to negotiate with the Bears to commit “as much skin in the game as possible.”

“I think that we gave our leverage away by ultimately showing up at the press conference and blessing this project,” said Villegas, who noted Arlington Heights Mayor Tom Hayes said Thursday the suburb is “very happy to be plan B.”

“I don’t know how you sell a subsidy for billionaires as being progressive. Because when the mayor is talking about investing in people, the question is, which people are you investing in?’ Villegas said. “It’s hard for me to put a correlation there between a public subsidy for billionaires and a progressive agenda. Those are oxymorons.”

Ald. Walter Burnett, Johnson’s vice mayor, gave Johnson a pass, saying as a candidate Johnson likely “didn’t really understand the whole breadth of this situation.” Burnett touted the $2 billion investment from the Bears, and said the project’s benefits will extend beyond the stadium’s footprint.

“We can’t deny the fact that money that comes to (the) downtown area benefits the rest of the city,” Burnett said. “We got to stop pitching the city against the West Side and the South Side when everybody’s feeding off of the central area in order to help everywhere else.”

Ald. Lamont Robinson, whose 4th Ward includes Soldier Field, said at first glance the Bears’ pitch “is potentially a win for the city of Chicago” and expressed support for Warren’s leadership. But he said there’s still outstanding questions as to what funding sources the Bears will tap for planned infrastructure upgrades.

“The devil is in the details,” Robinson said.

But as Johnson faces criticism from some Chicago City Council members, the real question is whether the mayor has the power to climb an uphill battle in Springfield. The $2.4 billion in public dollars the Bears are hoping to secure won’t come from the city’s budget, Johnson’s team has said, but from state and federal funding, and state bonds. But those bonds are backed by the city’s hotel tax, and the city is the “ultimate backstop” of the debt, the city’s CFO said.

And Johnson’s endorsement of the Bears’ plan is in stark contrast to stiff skepticism from Gov. JB Pritzker, who questioned the plan’s ability to earn lawmakers’ support and whether taxpayers are getting a good deal.

“The priorities of the people of Illinois are not building stadiums,” Pritzker said Thursday. “We have important things we need to invest in for the future of the state and again, stadiums from my mind, don’t rank up in the top tier of those.”

Democratic State Rep. Kambium Buckner, whose district covers Soldier Field, was at Wednesday’s announcement, but told the Chicago Tribune the appetite for public funding from Springfield is “extremely low.” That’s somewhat of an improvement from a year ago, as Buckner was running for Chicago mayor, and was adamant the appetite was non-existent.

“There won’t be state funds going to Soldier Field or to keep the Bears in Chicago — I can tell you that right now,” Buckner said at a mayoral forum last year. “I fought in Springfield to protect the people of Chicago from that happening.”

Johnson also faces a potential battle with Friends of the Parks, a group that aims to protect Chicago’s lakefront from development, and has successfully sued in the past to stop such projects. The group argued the details of this announcement should have been negotiated with the public, not, as the group argued, behind closed doors.

“We are all being asked to trust the process and accept that it will, in fact, be Bear-a-dice,” the group said in a statement. “Yet, Chicago has a long history of closed-door planning and rushed decision-making that does not end well for taxpayers. Just look at The Lincoln Yards, The 78, a Chicago casino, and the infamous parking meter deal. Each of these was going to make Chicago into a ‘world class’ city and be a ‘win-win-win’ for residents.”

Johnson, who did call the deal a “win-win-win” on Wednesday, addressed the criticism, saying he looks forward to continued conversations, including in Springfield.

“I know that there has been a regular practice in the city of Chicago, where things have just been rammed down people’s throats. This is a proposal,” Johnson told NBC Sports Chicago.

The Bears’ pitch follows a winding saga in the team’s search for a new home. Last year, they spent $197 million to purchase the former Arlington International Racetrack as a potential site for a new stadium. But on Wednesday, Warren made clear he believes Chicago is the place to be.

“One of the reasons why we strongly believe that the Museum Campus is the best location is that we’ve been in this area for 100 years,” Warren said, calling the lakefront “the greatest piece of art that exists on the planet.”

Asked why he would prefer being a renter in Chicago than the landowner of a new stadium in Arlington Heights, Warren said he believes in the power of a public-private partnership — and in Johnson.

“I believe in Mayor Johnson. I believe in his staff. I believe in his vision. I believe in this city. And so I don’t look at it as being a renter. I look at it as being able to develop a relationship that one plus one equals 100…” Warren said.

Warren was instrumental to the construction of the Minnesota Vikings’ new home at the U.S. Bank Stadium that opened in 2016, which is similarly publicly-owned and relied on hundreds of millions in public funding. The Minnesota state legislature paid off the stadium’s bond debt two decades early, but anticipated maintenance needs could cost $280 million over the next decade, the Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported last year.

The Bears’ proposal is the latest in a recent run of professional sports teams making ambitious pitches for stadium complexes aided by hundreds of millions in public subsidies. But they haven’t all panned out. Kansas City voters earlier this month rejected a 40-year sales tax to pay for construction and renovation of stadiums for the Kansas City Royals and Chiefs.

Tessa Weinberg and Mariah Woelfel covers city politics and government for WBEZ.