- Today
- Holidays
- Birthdays
- Reminders
- Cities
- Atlanta
- Austin
- Baltimore
- Berwyn
- Beverly Hills
- Birmingham
- Boston
- Brooklyn
- Buffalo
- Charlotte
- Chicago
- Cincinnati
- Cleveland
- Columbus
- Dallas
- Denver
- Detroit
- Fort Worth
- Houston
- Indianapolis
- Knoxville
- Las Vegas
- Los Angeles
- Louisville
- Madison
- Memphis
- Miami
- Milwaukee
- Minneapolis
- Nashville
- New Orleans
- New York
- Omaha
- Orlando
- Philadelphia
- Phoenix
- Pittsburgh
- Portland
- Raleigh
- Richmond
- Rutherford
- Sacramento
- Salt Lake City
- San Antonio
- San Diego
- San Francisco
- San Jose
- Seattle
- Tampa
- Tucson
- Washington
Hammond Today
By the People, for the People
Chicago Bears Seek Public Funding for New Stadium
Team explores options in Illinois and Indiana, sparking debate over subsidies for professional sports venues
Mar. 29, 2026 at 6:55pm
Got story updates? Submit your updates here. ›
The complex negotiations over public funding for a new Chicago Bears stadium expose the tensions between team owners, taxpayers, and the potential economic and civic impacts of professional sports venues.Hammond TodayThe Chicago Bears are pursuing a new stadium, with the team considering options in both Illinois and Indiana. The Bears have proposed a $3 billion multi-use entertainment complex, including a domed stadium, in Arlington Heights, Illinois, and have requested $850 million in infrastructure improvements and a 40-year property tax freeze. However, Indiana lawmakers have also approved an amendment potentially allowing for a publicly financed stadium in Hammond, Indiana, raising concerns about a taxpayer competition between the two states.
Why it matters
The Bears' stadium pursuit highlights the ongoing debate over public financing for professional sports venues. While team owners argue that stadiums create jobs and boost the local economy, economists generally conclude that the costs often outweigh the benefits. The situation also raises questions about the use of taxpayer money and whether communities should be pressured into providing subsidies.
The details
The Bears currently rent Soldier Field in Chicago, a stadium with a capacity of just over 60,000. The team does not own Soldier Field or the surrounding land, limiting their non-football revenue streams. The proposed $3 billion multi-use entertainment complex in Arlington Heights, Illinois, would include a domed stadium, but the Bears have requested $850 million in infrastructure improvements and a 40-year property tax freeze. Before Illinois lawmakers could vote on the plan, Indiana lawmakers unanimously approved an amendment potentially allowing for a publicly financed stadium in Hammond, Indiana, approximately 30 miles southeast of Chicago.
- In 2023, the Bears purchased approximately 300 acres in Arlington Heights, Illinois, for around $200 million.
- The Bears have been renting Soldier Field for more than 50 years.
The players
Chicago Bears
A professional American football team that plays in the National Football League (NFL).
Halas family
The owners of the Chicago Bears.
Greg Casar
An expert who noted that the owners of the nearly $9 billion team could benefit from the competition between states for public funding.
What they’re saying
“The situation highlights a common dynamic where sports teams leverage the desire for civic pride and economic impact to secure public funding, potentially at the expense of other community needs. The threat of relocation is often used as a negotiating tactic, forcing communities into potentially unfavorable agreements.”
— Greg Casar, Expert
What’s next
Illinois lawmakers have not yet voted on the Arlington Heights plan, while Indiana lawmakers have approved an amendment allowing for public financing in Hammond. The Bears will continue to weigh their options, and it remains to be seen whether a new stadium will be built and how much public funding will be involved.
The takeaway
The Bears' stadium pursuit highlights the ongoing debate over public financing for professional sports venues. While team owners argue that stadiums create jobs and boost the local economy, economists generally conclude that the costs often outweigh the benefits. The situation also raises questions about the use of taxpayer money and whether communities should be pressured into providing subsidies.

