Rahimi, Harris & Grote Show - Geoff Buchholz talks Indiana House approving Bears stadium authority bill

Episode Date: February 25, 2026

Leila Rahimi and Marshall Harris were joined by Mike Florio WBBM political editor Geoff Buchholz to discuss the latest developments in the Bears’ stadium saga.

Rahimi Harrison Grody, Midday's Tyndel 2 on Chicago Sports Radio 1043, the score. It was a very first game was in Soldier Field against the Chicago Bears, and I won the job starting with that game, that preseason. And I can just tell you, from that moment on, I have been given nothing but the sweetest memories of the Chicago Bears. If you can't beat them, join them. I ask that you support this legislation. Let's go. That is former Coltspunter Hunter Smith and now

Congressman in Illinois, State, or Indiana, rather. So you heard what he had to say. And that's what happened. Senate Bill 27 did get passed. And we are here with a guy who knows how to talk about it. We called in the heavy artillery. Jeff Bocultz, the WBBM News Radio,

political editor, kind enough to join us in studio on Rahimi Harris and Grody. Great to be here. I'm sorry Grody's not here, although I understand his restraining order expires next week, so maybe we can be in a room together after that. Yeah, that sounds like Grody. Jeff, just let's zoom out here and kind of take an audit of where we are in this process. Sure, let's unpack it, man.

I'm ready. When you talk about where Indiana is and where Illinois is planning to be tomorrow, because there's a meeting tomorrow morning, can you walk us through side by side what stages the states are at with their negotiation with the Bears? Absolutely. Let's start with Indiana because that's the thing that's most recently happened in the thing that we led into the clip that we led into. So the Indiana House approved their version of Senate Bill 27, which sets up the stadium authority, which would clear the way for the state of Indiana to issue bonds to build a domed stadium for the Bears, probably in Hammond, probably. It has to go back to the state Senate now because the House amended it, so the Senate has to concur in those amendments.

There's no action on it today. It'll probably, the soon as it'll come up will be tomorrow. And Indiana's kind of on the clock because their legislature is set to adjourn at the end of this week. The session's supposed to be over, though Governor Mike Braun could bring them back for a special session if you wanted to. That's probably not going to happen. This thing's been sailing through the Indiana legislature, and I have no reason to think that that's not going to happen. So that's where we are in Indiana. In Illinois, it's been called the pilot bill.

It's payment in lieu of taxes. This is the bill that would allow the bears to negotiate and lock in long-term property tax rates for the Arlington Park property that it bought three years ago for a stadium. This proposal is coming up in a House committee tomorrow. It's sponsored by Representative Mary Beth Canty who represents that area. The governor has indicated he is on board with this. He thinks there's broad agreement in the legislature. We'll see what happens in the committee. But Indiana's got a little more daylight to work with in terms of when their session is over.

It's not supposed to end really. The general session doesn't really end until May. But a lot of their timing may be dependent on what happens in Indiana. Well, and the thing I want to ask you about, Jeff, before we get to the Indiana side of this bill, which I think we're still trying to figure out the taxing framework, and there's a lot. It's complicated, yeah.

On the Illinois side, there's been discussion surrounding, when they say tax certainty, they want a guaranteed property tax rate, which is not something that, like, a resident of Illinois gets, not something that, like, somebody who owns a house house. That's true, that's true. So part of that, I, now we're trying to figure out, does that mean the entire plot of Arlington Heightsland?

Like if, say, the Bears want to do the whole apartment, Say it's a Wrigley concept. All right. Say it's like Wrigley Field. If there's apartments at the stadium, do those apartments get the same, like the owner and operator of apartments, get the same tax certainty, quote, quote,

that the stadium does? Or is this just for the stadium regarding the property tax concerns? So my understanding is that this would deal with the stadium and whatever entertainment properties. Obviously, if a residential development were built there, then the developer of that residential property would incur the property tax burden

until such time as it's sold to a private owner, and then that's what happened. So we're talking about kind of the stadium plus whatever development is owned by the Bears. And in a conversation last month with the mayor of Arlington Heights, who I know has been on the score a lot, he mentioned that without that kind of certainty, without the ability to negotiate a long-term property tax rate over a period of 20, 30, 40 years or whatever, you know, the Bears would be subject to reassessment every three years just like everybody else who owns property in the area. And the estimate for what the property tax bill would be on that land is somewhere between $100,200 million, which is a lot of money. I mean, right now, the assessed value of the empty plot of land that used to be Arlington Park is

$3.3 million. That's what the bears are paying in property tax right now on an undeveloped piece of land. They're paying in property tax rate based on $3.3 million. That's correct. And the assessed value or rather the property tax bill on, for instance, SoFi Stadium in Los Angeles is like $9 million. But property tax in California is not a major part of how the revenue of the state or the taxing burden of the state is calculated. Correct. It's calculated to be a graduated state income tax, entertainment tax that plays in.

They're all different. The property tax burden for everyone is minuscule compared to the rest of the state taxes that incurred. That's true. But it is, but it does look at the sort of competitive pressure the bears may feel as they look at how to develop this area and whatever financial obligations they have versus owners of other NFLT. If I owned a house, I would also point out my dad's property taxes compared to what I own here. Yes. That was, that would be an argument that I would also use. Correct. And try to use. Yeah, sure. And it's true. And back to income taxes, the other issue, of course, is that Illinois doesn't have a graduated income tax. The governor and other,

have long favored one in the effort to pass one failed some years ago. Like the property, the income tax in California, just the state income tax, goes up to 13 and a half. I am aware. Yeah. And I've also paid the state income tax in California. I did not pay 13 and a half. I wasn't bawling out that badly.

But that is a point to be made when it comes to all of this. Which is why the bears, of course, yeah, I'd use the California property tax as a comp as well. Yes. I just, you know, the overall scoreboard is. different when Stan Cronkey puts in $5 billion of his own money into the stadium. You know, what's a couple million between friends after that yearly? Yeah, a million here, a million there. Pretty soon you're talking real money.

I also, and this is off topic, but just because people have asked this, I feel like it's worth bringing up. There's also a $100 million tax payback that the Rams and SOFIRE are supposed to do. I don't know how much the chargers factor in because they're tenants of that stadium. But that is supposed to happen in connection with the building project in California. So that's something to keep in mind as well. There is an understood, like, tax partnership there. So looking at it right now, Jeff, I guess my biggest question is,

do you get the sense that all things being equal? And when I say equal, I don't even really mean equal. I just mean if they get what they want from Illinois, and Illinois can agree to it, and it's not killing taxpayers and the governors and all of the representatives' eyes, they're going to build an all on the heights. That's where they have the land, right? Do you see this huge advantage that Indiana has right now?

Because I don't. The thing about the Bears is, I think we talked about this a little bit last week. The Bears, none of this is, there's no rational appeal here at all, right? This isn't something you can look at on a balance sheet. People are attached to their football teams, right? The Bears in particular, I mean, anybody who's listening to the station knows how very invested everybody in this area is in the Bears. And I think the McCaskey family understands that.

And I think the McCaskey family understands at some level that if they end up moving to Indiana, they're going to end up looking worse in the eyes of the fans. I was talking to Judson Richards, who I know is a host on the score and often fills in on our side of the floor as well. And he was taking calls on his last show. And I asked him, when you. talk to people who were calling in, who would they be prepared to blame if the Bears bolt to Indiana? And he said, most people said the McCaskey family. And I think they understand that. I think

they understand it's a business and we have to get people in the door in order to make this work. And if cutting a deal like this in Indiana causes us to lose some of that fan base, you know, that's got to be taken into consideration. I agree with you, Marshall. I do think they're going to wind up in Arlington Heights. It's just a matter of how much money it's going to cost them. Our segment with WBBM political editor, Jeff Buckholtz, is brought to you by AlmostFreeteeth.com because confidence should never cost a fortune. Look, the reason why I asked you that question, because I wanted to, you're, you're as ingrained as anyone in this whole process and how it works. And I told Layla last week, look, this will come down to, yes, they're definitely going to get a better deal in Indiana. How much money are they willing to save to make that move? And I think

as long as Illinois can figure it out without it killing us, me, you and Lela and everybody else, the taxpayers, they're just going to do the Arlington Heights thing. Yeah, I think part of, so the Bears have already said, and there's been a lot of conversation, and I was talking to some people I know, and not that long ago, we're like, well, Indiana or Illinois shouldn't build the Bears a stadium. And of course, that's not on the table. The Bears have said, we're going to build the stadium. and we're going to pay $2 billion to do that.

And the governor has said, Governor Pritzker has said, I'm down with helping them with infrastructure around, wider roads, better, you know, water delivery, whatever they need to do. And so what we're talking about now is this bill, this pilot bill, that would let the bears get some certainty, as Laila points out, in how much property taxes they're going to be paying on this development in the meantime. It doesn't seem like a big lift. But it is because you've got a lot of different interests involved. The lawmakers who represent Chicago are not super crazy about giving the bears any assistance in leaving Soldier Field,

which, of course, they'll be in until 2033. So I wouldn't be surprised if the final version of whatever this bill is includes some way, A, to take care of the remaining debt on the Soldier Field renovation from 20-some odd years ago, and to make the city of Chicago in some way whole for losing the bears to the suburbs. I also, when people talk about the Indiana bill, want people to know, there's a lot of concern and ambiguity when it comes to the amount of additional taxes that are on that bill, especially for the residents of Northwest Indiana. Anybody who uses the tolls in the northwest, the region, that part of the state,

and then what's on top of that? So, like, for example, there's been discussion, Jeff, about the 1% food and beverage tax and Lake and Porter counties. Yep. But that's in addition to a preexisting tax that's 6%. Like, what could you tell us about the extra taxes as far as what we know that Senate Bill 27 to have? Right. So there's that tax, which you mentioned. There's a hotel occupancy tax that would take effect for that general area.

Which would, like, double that one from 5 to 10%. It's a pretty sizable chunk. And in the debate in the... Indiana House yesterday, the House Speaker Todd Houston finished up right before the vote and made the point that the bonds, and they're going to have to borrow money to build this stadium, that's clear, the bonds that they will issue in order to get that money will be paid for with revenue that comes from that area, from those taxes, that higher restaurant tax, the higher hotel occupancy tax, whatever higher tolls are paid for on drivers.

And he said, we didn't have to go to the taxpayers for extra money to pay for bonds for Lucas Oil or for Bainbridge, even in the depths of COVID. And I had to go back and listen to this this morning because I thought he said this and he did. He said, and we won't have to do that, I am sure, in this instance. And boy, the phrase, I am sure, was doing a lot of heavy lifting in that sentence. Like, he can't guarantee that in five or ten years the state of Indiana is, isn't going to have to go to the residents and say, hey, we need, we need to help front this because the, you know, the bears aren't, you know, the bears can buy the stadium for whatever the outstanding debt is. But there's a scenario where they aren't in a position to do that. And the state of Indiana winds up being on the hook. And Governor Pritzker made that point yesterday when we were talking to him down on the southwest side. He said, I don't know if the taxpayers of Indiana really know what they're going to wind up getting socked with in taxes. Are they going to be okay with that? that? He said, I guess we'll see. I think I said on this show last week that people hate taxes,

but they love football more. So, I mean, maybe that's a moot point, but that is going to be something that, and as usual with something like this, that kind of gets rushed through at the last minute, it's one of those things where we'll find out what's in it after everybody passes it. That's Jeff Buckholtz. He is the WBBM Political Editor. Happy to join us in studio today. We are thankful for your presence here and the latest information. So what's the next thing we're looking for? It's that meeting tomorrow morning. Yeah, it's to the hearing tomorrow morning of a committee in the House down in Springfield where they'll consider this proposal from Mary Beth Canty that would create the ability for the bears to negotiate long-term property tax rates. We'll see what

happens. You know, everyone's, everyone's weighing in now. The governor has said he's not opposed to it. So we'll see if it makes it out of committee and then we'll see where it gets scheduled. The House Speaker, Chris Welch, who is from Chicago, has sort of an informal rule that he doesn't bring bills to the floor unless he can get at least 60 votes for. So he's reading the tea leaves and counting noses as much as everybody else is. So we'll see what happens if it makes it out of committee. Yeah, hopefully they show up this time. Jeff, thank you again. That's Jeff Buckholtz coming up next.

It's halftime and something that may be a memory for you might get unlocked next.