New bill would divert amusement tax funds for Wrigley work

[J.R.]

From the Tom:

 

When my family and I took ownership of the Chicago Cubs just about one year ago, we committed to being good neighbors and to preserving Wrigley Field. We're excited to tell you today about an opportunity to achieve both.

 

As the third largest tourist attraction in Illinois, the Chicago Cubs and Wrigley Field account for more than $600 million annually in impact to the local economy, including almost $400 million in annual new spending - spending which would not take place but for the team and the ballpark. This spending supports more than 7,000 jobs and generates more than $230 million in annual personal earnings. The Cubs and Wrigley Field also generate nearly $60 million in tax collections each year.

 

For many years, Wrigley Field has required millions of dollars in annual maintenance and, partly as a result, the team-owned campus around the ballpark has remained largely undeveloped. The Wrigley Field campus development, the centerpiece of our future, has been on hold for nearly a decade.

 

In the next few weeks the Illinois General Assembly will consider a bill to preserve Wrigley Field. Simply put, the plan allows a portion of future City and County amusement taxes, the 12% currently added to each ticket price, to be invested directly in the preservation of the Friendly Confines.

 

The plan is fair, simple and focused. Most importantly, it will not increase taxes you currently pay and will not create any new taxes.

 

This plan will preserve the historic character and tradition of the Friendly Confines for the next generation and will enhance the Lakeview community. If approved, the Cubs will undertake more than $200 million in renovations during the next five years and, in addition, the Ricketts family will invest a comparable amount in neighborhood development. The team will commit to play in Wrigley Field over the long run and to remain in the field during construction so, in this difficult economy, local businesses will continue to enjoy revenues the Cubs help attract.

 

We understand the importance of community and fan participation in this process. Wrigley Field renovation designs are being developed and we look forward to input on our surveys, discussions in forums and other communications we will send to you int eh weeks and months ahead.

 

We have an opportunity in this upcoming legislative session to begin the process of renovating and restoring Wrigley Field and securing its continued future. I look forward to hearing your thoughts and hope you, like me, see this as a fair and straightforward way to accomplish our mutual goals. If you would like to support our legislative proposal in the fall session, please contact us at renovatewrigley@cubs.com.

 

http://view.ed4.net/v/S92JV6/ORV7DV/U1E117T/I0F0/MAILACTION=1&FORMAT=H

[SouthSideRyan]

If that prick to the south got a free stadium from the taxpayers, why can't I get some upkeep!!

[daske17]

If that prick to the south got a free stadium from the taxpayers because the mayor and governor at the time were Sox fans, why can't I get some upkeep!!

 

Bolded answers your question Mr. Ricketts.

 

Anyone know where Rahm stands on baseball?

[UMFan83]

how many sox and cardinals fans are on the illinois general assembly?

[daske17]

how many sox and cardinals fans are on the illinois general assembly?

 

I have to imagine there are actually a fair number of Cardinals fans downstate... and Mike Madigan is a Sox fan. There's the only assemblyman who matters.

[Outshined_One]

Having a hard time seeing how this passes considering the current state budget crisis. Illinois needs every dime it can get.

[Cubs Fan Dan]

Tom... you might want to run this by the Mayor before the whole world knows about it.

[Sammy Sofa]

Uh, yeah, [expletive] that noise. I love the Cubs, but this city is hard up for that cash.

[daske17]

Uh, yeah, [expletive] that noise. I love the Cubs, but this city is hard up for that cash.

 

But they're not losing on that revenue. The state will issue $300 million in bonds to cover the revenue diversion and any future ticket increase will reimburse the bonds.

 

It's actually a pretty good deal. The state gets its credit rating improved through issuance of the bonds and the Cubs get the necessary funding immediately to start renovations.

 

The Ricketts just aren't doing a very good job at selling this proposition at a time when everyone is hard up for tax revenue.

[Sammy Sofa]

Aren't they losing on the revenue in the immediate future? Chicago needs that money NOW.

[Guest]

Uh, yeah, [expletive] that noise. I love the Cubs, but this city is hard up for that cash.

 

But they're not losing on that revenue. The state will issue $300 million in bonds to cover the revenue diversion and any future ticket increase will reimburse the bonds.

 

It's actually a pretty good deal. The state gets its credit rating improved through issuance of the bonds and the Cubs get the necessary funding immediately to start renovations.

 

The Ricketts just aren't doing a very good job at selling this proposition at a time when everyone is hard up for tax revenue.

It only works if people buy the bonds, right?

[Wilson A2000]

Ricketts knew before he bought the Cubs that Wrigley would need to be renovated. I'm sorry but he should use his own money for this.

[Outshined_One]

One passage interests me...

 

If approved, the Cubs will undertake more than $200 million in renovations during the next five years and, in addition, the Ricketts family will invest a comparable amount in neighborhood development.

 

This proposal is not necessarily an attempt at a free handout, but I'd like to see what plans the Ricketts family has when it comes to investing in neighborhood development and how that investment would benefit Chicago and Illinois.

[Sammy Sofa]

[expletive], I [expletive] hate Wrigleyville. What a [expletive] shakedown.

[Wilson A2000]

If this passed, where would the Cubs play? Would the renovations occur during the offeasons?

[questionmarkgrace]

Aren't they losing on the revenue in the immediate future? Chicago needs that money NOW.

 

For once I agree with you. This city is F-ed financially. its a joke and its deals like this make sure it continues to happen. just because the metropolitan sporting authority gets paid for every empty seat at the cell doesn't mean its right nor does it mean the cubs should get a similar sweet deal. For all intents and purposes this deal amounts to tax freeze on the present levels of the amusement tax until 2035. The money that would have come from increases then goes to pay for the bonds issued by the state for immediate repair of wrigley. This is money the city desperately needs in areas other than rich baseball team owner and overtime it amounts to staggering losses when considering inflation and the relative rate of ticket increases.

I don't think the city should be rewarding the cubs with this incredible break. Save this for the company that wants to come and provide 8,000 new jobs.

 

The worst part is I really feel that our activity in the free agent market for years to come hinges upon this bill.

[d_money]

While the tax % will remain the same, I tax $'s will increase as tix prices increase over the 30 year term. In my mind, its not a bad deal considering its the 3rd largest tour atraction in the city. Is the city already upside down? Yes, thanks in large part to Daley/alderman (parking meters, tollway, flower plants on Ashland, etc...). Do you seriously trust the same people to manage these funds better moving forward? I give Ricketts credit for the balls to pull this move, knowing full well that it needed vast improvements. If they're forced to leave Wrigley and build something on the west side or burbs, I personally don't care - I'll still be a fan in search of a WS title and however they get there, I really don't care.

[questionmarkgrace]

While the tax % will remain the same, I tax $'s will increase as tix prices increase over the 30 year term

 

thats completely wrong. They said that the city would continue to receive the 16.1 million, the current level, every year this plan goes for. The annual increases from more ticket sales and increases in ticket prices was to be used to pay back the state for those bonds. This is why numerous media outlets called it a "loan" but it is hardly a loan when you take city funds to pay back the state for what you borrowed.

[BCVM22]

If this passed, where would the Cubs play? Would the renovations occur during the offeasons?

 

I believe the plan would have them spread the renovations over three or four offseasons.

[Guest]

The taxpayers should pay $0 to renovate Wrigley. It's just nonsense. The Ricketts family knew what they were buying when they bought it and they will reap millions of dollars every year they own the team.

 

[expletive] them. You want to improve Wrigley, sell some of your ownership rights to investors.

 

The rich keep feeding the rest of us [expletive] and we continue to believe its stake.

[Soul]

I doubt the Sox fans in power will allow this to happen, but nice try Tom.

[BCVM22]

Unsurprisingly on a number of levels, the mayor and the governor both say "lol no".

 

http://chicago.cbslocal.com/2010/11/15/wrigley-renovation-proposal-strikes-out-with-daley-quinn/

[Soul]

I guess the only remaining question is whether this reflects on Tom's ability to grasp the political landscape he's been put in by becoming the owner of the Cubs.

 

In short, this seems like a pretty naive proposal, if he really did expect it to go through.

[Wilson A2000]

Tom had to have been asked about Wrigley renovations before he bought the team. What was his response at that time?

[Soul]

He's on Tribune live right now -- and actually, I'm kind of surprised. He sounds good to me; has some substantive things to say about where he's taking the club.

 

He has less of that deer-in-the-headlights look to me than he did in the beginning.