NSR: CHICAGO Political Thread ***HIGHLY TOXIC - ENTER AT YOUR OWN RISK***

It doesn't help that it is, largely, being described as $425 mil of public money for the Firehouse (22 acres) instead of the tax money going for infrastructure upgrades for a 62 acre area that will hold 100's of new apartments and condos, commercial/retail and the Firehouse.

 

Yeah, but that wouldn't make headlines and clicks.

 

I don’t know that that’s necessarily fair. It’s still taxpayer money that will benefit private interests, which despite how prevalent it is has and always will suck when we could spend it directly to benefit the public good, but I think the larger issue is where it’s a coming from (a neighboring TIF district) and what it’s going to (parking- rather than transit) are a big reason for the pushback. The city will own the lot (at least initially) but will lease it to the team on game days, which seems to run counter to the benefit of the city owning it, at least until we see the lease agreement. If this was being done in addition to the originally planned new red line stop and Metra realignment it’d be one thing, but instead it seems like it’s being done at the expense of those plans.

 

Unfortunately the locals complained about the train stop. I'm not sure why they won't move the Metra train though.

 

Locals complaining about the stop would seem specious reasoning for dropping it when the article mentions that part of the justification for raiding tif funds from a neighboring district was because the project benefits the entire city. I don’t recall seeing locals complain about the red line stop though- one local organization actually expressed disappointment it was left off, especially considering the parking garage is going to increase car traffic in the area.

https://www.coliseum-online.com/taxpayers-425-million-tif-for-chicago-fire-fc-home-at-the-78/

I understand the Roosevelt stop is a short walk for an able bodied person, but I never saw a problem with the walk to Soldier Field from that station, either. The city is adding 1,200 opportunities for someone that might have taken transit to drive in instead, and eliminating what could have been a much more convenient way for some of them to get to the stadium without driving. It seems like a bad trade off, and I can see why neighbors would be against it as well.

 

Your points are legit. What I'm pointing out is that the whole of the public TIF funds are being presented as being for Joe's benefit. Most of us here would really prefer no tax money be connected to a privately owned stadium. As a matter of real-politick, there are two ways damn near every stadium gets built in this country:
A.) the taxpayer takes the bath for all the costs involved with a stadium, or
B.) the stadium owner pays for the stadium and the local government pays for infrastructure upgrades that allow the stadium to function without grossly overloading the existing infrastructure.
Related Midwest is the overlord developing the 78 whether the 78 ends up with the Firehouse, a new Sox Park or just commercial/residential, and the 78 needs a ton of infrastructure upgrades no matter what the plan.
Now how the TIF money gets spent on what infrastructure happens is a whole, wide open beast in and of itself. Not saying that Joe has no influence on this, but he ain't driving the bus.

 

I think the terms of that lease will be telling if we’re ever privy to them, but that does seem like a mechanism for a nice little, unnecessary, handout. We’re paying for the lot, so we should be the one to profit from it - I can’t see how leasing it benefits us as opposed to just not leasing and keeping the game day profits as well. There are certainly more considerations to be made on game day vs other days, more staff, traffic control, etc. but is the team going to be paying for that? Maybe we’ll get a share of the team’s profits on game day, but that certainly won’t be greater than what our profits would be - there would be little to no incentive for the team to undertake a lease if there was any chance they would lose money.

No idea how much influence Joe has over this, I’m happy he is at least paying for the stadium costs and definitely don’t think he is dictating (or cares) which specific funds go toward what on a micro level. But I think we've all seen deals before where a municipality will find a back door way to hand taxpayer money over to a private entity after the fact, and sometimes those can basically offset any initial investment from the team at taxpayers’ expense. And I’m not saying this is that, right now, but my skepticism is growing.

 

“While I fully support ‘The 78’ development as unique and necessary opportunity for growth in the City of Chicago, I can not support Related Midwest’s proposal to add a new CTA Red Line Station on 15th St. and Clark St., right in the middle of an established, entirely residential area,” Dowell said in a statement. “This location would be too disruptive for my residents and completely out of character with the area.”

"Dowell claimed in her statement that most 3rd Ward residents are against the new facility because it would be located within the existing Dearborn Park II development of condos and townhomes and because the staging and construction for the project “would eliminate already limited community green space for years.”

https://chi.streetsblog.org/2019/01...to-block-a-sustainable-transportation-amenity

That's what an Alderperson said. YMMV.

 

The site sucks for cars because of the shitty raised Roosevelt Road, while being blocked off on the East and West. It's a dead end, perfect for good transit. The Wells/Wentworth connector shouldn't even exist because it's yet another road between people and a body of water like LSD. I get that parking will be necessary if people are going to live there but I'm not sure how that even works with a stadium.

 

Fair, that was also six years ago, pre-COVID, and pre-we knew we were getting a stadium there, and seems to contradict more recent sentiment from residents, but Streetsblog is reputable as a source and I didn’t follow the 78’s development as closely pre-Fire. Which is all to say that I highly doubt that was the reason the stop was 86’d, and I need to set a reminder to contribute to Streetsblog so that we continue to have access to their excellent reporting and archives.

 

Sorry, I didn’t realize how old that article was. It was just the first one I found. I heard it verbally within the last year, and looked it up and saw it was stated. I honestly don’t know when the most recent mention would be from but an alder person shouldn’t be able to stop a new train stop (or protected bike lanes).

 

I didn’t realize there were some primaries today…

 

No Wis. Supreme Court race this time around?

 

Talarico studied at Austin Presbyterian Theological Seminary, earning a Master of Arts in Theological Studies and was working on his Master of Divinity.

White evangelicals are a demographic and religious group in the United States comprising white Protestants who identify as "born-again" Christians, characterized by strong theological conservatism and a steadfast political alignment with the Republican Party. Core Beliefs

• The Authority of Scripture: Adherents view the Bible as the literal, error-free word of God and the ultimate guide for life.
• Personal Conversion: A central focus is placed on being "born again" through a personal acceptance of Jesus Christ and his sacrifice on the cross.
• Active Proselytizing: Believers emphasize sharing their faith and actively converting others to Christianity

​

Paxton is not holding back. “Talarico's views are antithetical to Christian, historical Christian views”, “They’re — it’s deceptive for him to present his views as historical Christianity. They are not Christian views. They are his views that he’s adopted from liberal theology that do not reflect what Scripture says. None of his views that I’ve heard match up. They’re literally the opposite of Christianity.”

Would be helpful if the poll included numbers/size of the categories

 

Fundamentalists of every description: religious, political ("left" and "right"), economic, former smokers, drinkers and meat eaters, etcetera, are collectively the principal source of human suffering.

Not allegedly.

 

Jeez, that looks just like my news feed.