Barring a major surprise in the final days of a drama that has played out over two years, the Chicago Bears soon will become the “Chicago” Bears.

With either Hammond or Arlington Heights designated as its new home, the charter NFL franchise won’t really be Chicago anymore. The Bears will get a rent-to-own deal worked out in Indiana or build on land they already own in Arlington Heights, thanks to decades-long tax cuts that will take money away from the village and local three school districts.

A new “mega-projects” bill aiming to give the Bears long-term tax certainty could benefit a new stadium near Chicago’s lakefront, too — on the outskirts of the Bronzeville neighborhood, which could use the new investment. But the McCaskey family that controls the Bears won’t even look there: The family owns 326 acres in Arlington Heights, and a new stadium there could anchor a multi-use development.

Whether in Hammond or Arlington Heights, the new stadium will be a loss to the city and state. If the team lands in Hammond, Illinois loses economic activity and prestige. If in Arlington Heights, that already prosperous suburb will benefit, but Illinois will suffer the missed opportunity of a Chicago investment that could have helped strengthen the economics of the city’s South Side. 

It did not need to turn out this way. 

And because the stakes are so high, it’s worth considering how we have come to this. What actions or lack of actions by elected officials are responsible for getting to this point and might there still be a better path forward than either Hammond or Arlington Heights?

Mayor........

© Chicago Tribune