In the News

   August 22, 2025 01:12 PM

The proposal for a new, self-funded Chicago Fire stadium at The 78 in our Near South Side community is a welcome change from the sports teams that come to taxpayers with pockets full but hands outstretched. This could be just the ticket to jump-start the long-vacant lot stretching through this community.

But it's too soon to know for sure. 

At a recent public meeting with executives from the Chicago Fire and The 78 developer Related Midwest, we opened with a simple question: "You promise your new stadium will anchor a new neighborhood for Chicago: What type of neighborhood do you have in mind?"

The response was vague and disappointing. In a packed room of nearly 100 residents, Related missed the opportunity to demonstrate how, beyond the benefits of a new stadium, this "78th neighborhood" would support, enhance and fully integrate with the surrounding community.

Ours is a vibrant, highly walkable community that connects downtown to the important neighborhoods of Chinatown, Pilsen and Bronzeville with extensive mass transit options, a highly diverse population and a robust mix of retail, residential and commercial properties. This is what defines our community and makes it an exciting place to live, work and do business. We're not yet seeing how The 78 will be compatible with and further enhance these defining elements.

This is why we want to flip the lede on Crain's recent article on South Loop residents' response to the new Fire soccer stadium proposal ("South Loop residents weigh in on Chicago Fire stadium plan," Aug. 14). Rather than citing a recent questionnaire to conclude the community gives this project "a thumbs-up — with a few caveats," a more accurate interpretation is to say those caveats must be resolved before neighbors can fully support the proposal.

Our concerns — as reflected in the neighborhood questionnaire, as well as public meetings convened by One Community Near South and the Coalition for a Better Chinese American Community — all relate to the ways this development can and must enhance the quality of life here.

We have three major concerns:

First, we need better planning for safe vehicular and pedestrian access on days the Fire will host matches or other large events at this stadium. The proposal calls for primary access only from the north and south. The originally approved plan called for access to the east, plus a new CTA Red Line station, and, more recently, there's talk of a new Metra stop. None of those are in the current proposal, but the need remains. Without additional access, The 78 will be a perpetual bottleneck arbitrarily cutting off many of us from existing pathways to home, work and retail. Related Midwest says a traffic impact study is "nearly complete," pending input from the Chicago Department of Transportation. Residents should see the study and have input on traffic solutions before this development is further locked down.

Second, while Related Midwest has presented a comprehensive, phased-in plan, they say the market will drive what is actually built and when, warning it could take more than 10 years for any development beyond the phase one stadium and parking garage. In this highly uncertain market, what is the plan for the remaining two-thirds? Related promises openness to our ideas.

And we do have an idea. This site is ideal for the long-promised Near South Side high school, a missing piece that can attract and retain families in existing housing as well as new developments at The 78. Yes, Chicago Public Schools is cash-strapped. If Related were to donate land, as they did for the University of Illinois, this could open new funding options. We believe Chicago Fire owner Joe Mansueto would see the benefit of a high school near his stadium, knowing him to be an avid supporter of public education and of our city.

Addressing these issues will go a long way toward resolving a final concern: protecting our historic Chinatown, immediately south of The 78. In too many cities around the country, long-term Chinatown residents have been displaced due to private developments nearby. Chicago's Chinatown is the only one expanding both its population and geographic footprint. Affordable housing and jobs are priorities to protect long-term residents and small businesses.

We appreciate the dialogue so far and look forward to further conversation. We can't let The 78 set Fire to this community's self-determination. Nor can we rush through any of the crucial planning steps to make The 78 what Related calls "Chicago's next great neighborhood" with all the promise that carries.

Marj Halperin is the lead organizer for One Community Near South. Grace Chan McKibben is the executive director of the Coalition for a Better Chinese American Community.

  August 14, 2025 01:20 PM

As City Council members prepare to vote on Chicago Fire FC owner Joe Mansueto's plan to build a $650 million soccer stadium in the South Loop, many nearby residents are giving it a thumbs-up — with a few caveats.

An online survey of 653 South Loop residents conducted in recent weeks by the South Loop Neighbors community group found 73% of respondents said they were "supportive" and nearly half were "strongly supportive" of the Major League Soccer team's proposal, the neighborhood group said in a statement, while about 10% of respondents were opposed. (Read a summary of the survey findings below.)

The results come a couple of months after the Fire unveiled their vision for a privately funded, 22,000-seat venue to anchor an $8 billion mixed-use campus at The 78, a 62-acre vacant swath controlled by developer Related Midwest along the Chicago River between Roosevelt Road and Chinatown. 

The survey is a temperature check of the South Loop community a few weeks after Related Midwest formally submitted a zoning application to the City Council for the stadium plan. City officials will consider the proposal and details of how taxpayers would help through tax-increment financing dollars to pay for new public infrastructure needed to boost access to and throughout the long-fallow site.

Respondents to the South Loop Neighbors survey — about three-quarters of whom were homeowners in the area rather than renters, the group said — generally praised the stadium plan for its design and vision for new public space and amenities, such as a riverwalk extension.

But the results also showed residents' concerns with how traffic congestion would be mitigated and frustration with "limited pedestrian connectivity," according to a survey summary. Related Midwest also revealed in June that it was scrapping plans for a new Chicago Transit Authority Red Line station at 15th and Clark streets that was originally proposed for The 78, a change that survey respondents identified as another concern.

Ald. Pat Dowell, whose 3rd Ward includes The 78 property, said in an interview with Crain's today that the survey results "mirror the feedback" she has received in meetings with local community groups about the plan over the last few weeks.

"There are still some details that need to be worked out related to pedestrian access from the southern end of the site and real clarity on traffic impacts," Dowell said. "But beyond those two items — and also people wanting clarity on how TIF dollars are going to be used — this seems to be a very well-received proposal."

Dowell said she has more community meetings about the proposal scheduled for later this month, which will lead up to a larger town hall-style meeting for residents to share concerns directly with the developer and team and hear their responses. She is also coordinating a community meeting with 11th Ward Ald. Nicole Lee, whose Chinatown residents recently aired their worries in a community meeting about what the stadium and other development at The 78 might mean for future affordability in their neighborhood.

"The concerns that they're raising can be addressed, but I need to hear more about those concerns specifically," Dowell said.

South Loop Neighbors President Jim Wales said in a statement his community group is "looking forward to ironing out the concerns to make this development an asset to the city and neighborhood."

Related Midwest and city planning officials are still negotiating terms of a revised redevelopment agreement, or RDA, that would govern the use of TIF money for infrastructure at The 78. The original deal inked in 2019 called for as much as $551 million in infrastructure projects that Related would finance up front and be reimbursed for using future property tax gains generated by the site.

Related said in June the new dollar figure will be lower than that because some big line items won't be needed under the stadium plan, including the $364 million CTA station and an $85 million realignment of Metra tracks running through the site.

The South Loop Neighbors feedback "means a great deal to us, as we have worked hard to form a plan that delivers lasting benefits for the community," Related Midwest President Curt Bailey said in a statement to Crain's. "In partnership with the Chicago Fire, we are committed to making The 78 the best it can be, and we know that happens by listening to and working closely with our neighbors every step of the way." 

Mansueto, the billionaire founder of credit ratings agency Morningstar, struck a deal with Related earlier this year to buy nearly 10 acres of The 78 from the developer on which he would privately finance the stadium. The venue is pitched as the anchor of a sports and entertainment district on the site that could boost spending and foot traffic downtown that haven't been fully restored after the COVID-19 pandemic.

Fire President of Business Operations Dave Baldwin said in a statement that the team was "encouraged" by the results of the survey, "which reflects the consistently positive feedback we've received from our fanbase and Chicagoans in general."

Pending City Council approval of the planned development and RDA, the Fire aim to break ground on the stadium by early next year with the goal of beginning to play there in 2028.

 Mayor Brandon Johnson said “there’ll be time” to work out stadium details. But if the goal is to craft a deal for a new stadium in a new neighborhood that benefits all of Chicago, the time is now. 

By CST Editorial Board   Jan 27, 2024, 5:30am 

At first blush, a new White Sox ballpark on the southern edge of downtown, with gleaming skyscrapers, the Chicago River and a planned new neighborhood called The 78 as a backdrop is an exciting prospect for Chicago.

  But the devil is always in the details when it comes to big projects. And the public deserves to see a lot more of the particulars before declaring the proposal a winner.

  For instance, how do you orient and build a Major League Baseball stadium in a way that doesn’t merely fit on The 78’s narrowish site but also contributes to the ongoing redevelopment of the South Branch and brings people — not just paid ticket holders — closer to public spaces along the river edge?

  And what happens to Guaranteed Rate Field if a new stadium is built?

  Then there is the likely billion-dollar question: Who pays for a new stadium and needed infrastructure improvements?

Mayor Brandon Johnson met last week with White Sox owner Jerry Reinsdorf to discuss the stadium proposal.

  “We have not gotten into the intricacies and the details just yet,” Johnson said afterward. “There’ll be time for that.”

  Yes, but if the goal is to craft a deal that benefits Chicago, and not just Reinsdorf and the Sox, the time to work out those intricacies and details is now.

   As the Sun-Times’ Fran Spielman, Tim Novak and David Roeder first reported , the Sox and Related Midwest are discussing building the 35,000- to 38,000-seat ballpark at The 78, a 62-acre parcel along the eastern edge of the Chicago River south of Roosevelt Road.

  There were already plans to develop the site into a mixed-use community, but under the new effort , Related Midwest would build 5,000 residential units — with 1,000 of them affordable — plus an office building, a hotel and dozens of restaurants and bars along the riverfront.

  The (potential) good: Done correctly, the stadium could be a shot in the arm for The 78’s development and help the project feel more like a destination neighborhood, albeit a dense one with mid- and high-rises, rather than bungalows and two-flats. 

  But here’s where things get tricky. Reinsdorf wants a new home for the Sox, but a big reason Guaranteed Rate Field hasn’t worked well for the Sox … is Reinsdorf himself.

Built and owned by the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority, Reinsdorf’s input into the stadium’s original design led to the creation of what was then one of the ugliest parks in baseball: an unfriendly ball of concrete that turns its back on the city’s fabled skyline.

  While renovations that began in 2001 have significantly improved the stadium, Reinsdorf for years has wrongly resisted efforts to redevelop the 70 acres of surface parking surrounding the stadium into a mixed-use neighborhood that could make the ball field more of an attraction.

  Why the resistance? Reinsdorf’s lease agreement with the ISFA lets him keep gross receipts from the parking lots.

  Add to that the fact the franchise has mostly fielded season after season of mediocre teams since winning the World Series almost 20 years ago.

   With all those unforced errors, City Hall must make sure a new stadium is planned and built with the public’s interest — not just Reinsdorf’s — in mind.

  Lastly, one of the toughest calls would be deciding the fate of Guaranteed Rate Field. The 33-year-old stadium is maintained by ISFA bonds backed by a 2% statewide hotel tax.

The ISFA still owes $50 million on that debt, so we’d hate to see the ballpark wrecked. 

   A better option — at least one worth investigating by the city and the ISFA as part of any new stadium deal — would be to grow Guaranteed Rate’s live performance business, finally redevelop the surfacing parking lots … and aggressively scout for a new tenant.

   If we had our druthers, a professional baseball franchise that’s worth $2 billion , and a deep-pocketed real estate developer who has control of 62 acres of some of the most valuable land in the city, would entirely pay for their own stadium.

But that probably won’t be the case. The ISFA, created by the General Assembly in 1987, likely would be called into duty at some point to help foot at least some of the bill.

And the public might well be asked to kick in the millions of dollars for infrastructure.

After his talk with Reinsdorf, Johnson said he “did appreciate … what they’re considering, it’s the way new stadiums should and could look. That they have community benefit.”

But the track record nationally is that publicly funded sports stadiums tend not to bring a boost to local economies, including more jobs and growth in income .

Could Chicago be different? Only if Johnson and his administration are up to the task of making sure the public indeed benefits.

In an April 18 interview on WCPT, Dowell expressed concerns about Landmark Development's planned One Central mega-project. But she also highlighted benefits she expects it would bring to the Near South community and to Chicago's treasury. 

   Dowell told host Marj Halperin that she shares some of the community's concerns about the project, starting with the last-minute legislative approval in 2019 of a $6.5 Billion taxpayer subsidy." The state approval was a major misstep without having a lot of community engagement. People are suspicious about that," she said, adding, " I think we have to be clear on what the benefits are to the taxpayers across the state that are investing in this project and I don’t think we have clear answers on that yet."         Dowell also indicated she's aware of other community concerns. "I do feel that project is way too dense and needs to come down in density. Those are discussions we need to have with the community as well." 

   Dowell weighs these concerns against what she sees as benefits for a city with growing plans and a shrinking treasury.      

   "We have to weigh that against the real urgent need that the city of Chicago has for increased tax revenue from the sales tax, the property taxes, parting taxes that could be generated from this particular site when we’re kind of bleeding, so to speak, with the city budget," adding, "I think the things that he wants to place on the civic build: the new restaurants, the health and wellness section, stores, housing, are all good things," she said.  "We’d get more revenue from that but we have to make sure it can be a win-win for both the development team and the residents who have to live adjacent to it, just west of the site."  

    Dowell's last words on the subject are a true understatement: "A lot of work to be done." Links to listen to Dowell on One Central here and hear the entire interview are coming soon.

Crain's Chicago Business added One Central to the list of topics put forward to Mayoral candidates in advance of the April 4 runoff election. Crain's columnist Greg Hinz writes,

"...though Johnson has a reputation of being a help-the-little guy official who’s no friend of big developers, he has been quite flattering about One Central," adding the following quote 

“I actually think that’s a pretty promising idea,” Johnson told Crain’s editorial board. Senior campaign adviser Jason Lee later confirmed that the statement was no fluke. Like the Chicago Urban League, Johnson believes in Dunn’s goals, including creating lots of jobs on the South Side and “a real effort to connect people to those jobs,” Lee said. While there are “issues to work out and differences of opinion,” Johnson and Dunn did meet in person earlier this year to discuss the proposal in detail, Lee said. 

Read Hinz's report here.

Sun-Times Columnist Dave Roeder identifies the three key questions for government agencies to answer to bring more transparency to One Central project. Read the full story.

Between a rock and a Hard Rock place? Casino developer hears resident gripes about traffic, crime — and looming ‘millstone’ Developers of the proposed Hard Rock Chicago casino were met by hundreds of South Loop residents concerned about more traffic, crime and noise in the neighborhood — and the prospect of another massive development next door. Read the full Chicago Sun-Times story.

Many experienced and talented leaders are among those chosen by Mayor Lightfoot to  "focus on outstanding cultural amenities, recreation and open spaces, athletic facilities, and transit access," What's missing? Those of us who live in the community. Will there be public hearings or other input on the suggestions to be delivered "by this summer"? Not unless we demand it. Read the story here, and contact anyone you  know on the committee.

Representative Kam Buckner introduces legislation to "take away the loaded gun that could let another governor commit $6.5 billion of taxpayer funds to this project."  He says, "There are still questions about a number of things, including financing, traffic, pollution and equity. A truly independent analysis of the project has to happen. " Read the full story.

Chicago Tribune editorial board sounds warning: "For us, it’s that transit hub that prompts a double-take, and has us worried about the burden it would put on state taxpayers. " Read the full story. 

Streetsblog joins the chorus raising questions about why One Central should put  taxpayers on the hook.  Read the full story. 

What's known is that Johnson and Bears President Kevin Warren talked, by phone, and then jointly issued identical statements.

"Today, we met and discussed our shared values and commitment to the city of Chicago, the importance of deep roots and the need for equitable community investment throughout the city," the statements said. "We are both committed to the idea that the city and its major civic institutions must grow and evolve together to meet the needs of the future. We look forward to continuing the dialogue around these shared values."

    Johnson and aides had signaled that, at least at any initial meeting, the new mayor would be listening to the Bears rather than making any specific proposal to keep them at Soldier Field or move to a new stadium at another location in Chicago proper, rather than move to the suburbs as the team has seemed inclined to do.

    A meeting had been widely expected since the Bears' last week announced that they were exploring other options and no longer focused solely on moving to Arlington Heights, where they recently spent $197 million for the former Arlington International Racecourse.

    Team ownership has publicly griped that school districts in the Arlington Heights area have been unwilling to give the team the tax breaks it wants to build a new stadium and related entertainment area.

Read Greg Hinz's report here: https://www.chicagobusiness.com/greg-hinz-politics/brandon-johnson-chicago-bears-begin-stadium-talks