Publicly funded stadium deals can involve questionable incentives for politicians. The megaprojects bill in Illinois would drive up neighbors’ property taxes.

Any deal between Illinois and the Chicago Bears for a new stadium must avoid giveaways to lawmakers and property tax increases for others.

The Bears own the former Arlington Park Racecourse in Arlington Heights and have said they’re also considering Northwest Indiana for a stadium development. A bill in the Illinois General Assembly would offer property tax breaks to such “megaprojects.”

Agreements for publicly funded stadiums in other cities often have included luxury suites and free tickets for lawmakers. Local officials in Kansas City have been criticized for getting access to tickets and suites during ongoing stadium negotiations. Officials in Arizona have repeatedly used free access to publicly funded stadiums to host guests.

A bill in Ohio would prohibit state lawmakers from knowingly accepting free or discounted tickets to pro sports events. The proposal comes amid negotiations with the Cleveland Browns over public funding for a new stadium.

Offering free admission and luxury suites to lawmakers who make decisions about publicly funding stadiums creates a clear conflict of interest.

From a taxpayer perspective, such perks can divert public resources if lawmakers have an incentive to offer a team or other megaproject a tax break when that revenue could go toward broadly shared public benefits. From a free-market standpoint, these arrangements distort competition by subsidizing select teams and projects rather than encouraging municipalities to make themselves attractive for private investment.

Illinois legislators should ensure that any stadium agreement with the Bears does not include free tickets or luxury accommodations for lawmakers.

Perks for politicians are only half the story. The proposed incentive package in Springfield, HB 910 House Amendment 1, would be devastating for taxpayers.

Much of the current discussion revolves around the massive property tax reductions the bill would provide for so-called megaprojects as an attempt to spur economic development.

While negotiating targeted tax incentives is bad policy to begin with, the legislation would make Illinois’ property tax crisis even worse for other taxpayers. Although approved megaprojects would pay steeply discounted property taxes, a clause in the bill allows a taxing body to count the cash value of the megaproject in its total assessed value.

In other words, taxing bodies can still increase taxes as if the project were paying normal tax rates, generating increased revenue, but the project would not pay those higher taxes. Neighboring businesses, homeowners and renters would pay more to make up for the team’s discount.

Here is some of what’s in the bill, which has passed out of committee and could be called for a full House vote any time:

• To qualify, a project must have at least $500 million in eligible costs, which can include the property purchase and can be retroactive up to five years before the megaproject certificate is issued. The project must be completed within seven to 10 years, but that can be extended by five years. The site must be operated for at least 20 years; the tax incentive would last at least 23 years and up to 40 years.
• The megaproject’s assessment would be frozen so that its property tax bill is calculated on the “base year” of the project, meaning the value of the property before any improvements, such as a stadium.
• However, for purposes of issuing bonds and property tax extension limitation calculations, the taxing body could use the current fair cash value of the property. In other words, new development, which is generally exempt from Property Tax Extension Limitation Laws, would allow for the levy to grow beyond the limited rate, which other taxpayers will have to cover.

The bill’s “incentive agreement” allows for separate payments from the megaproject entity, such as the Bears, or an alternative source, to affected taxing bodies in addition to property taxes bill. The payment amount would be negotiated with taxing bodies.

Illinoisans already pay the highest property taxes in the nation. Homeowners in Arlington Heights pay average annual property taxes of more than $8,000. HB910 would make it even worse. One simple solution is to strike this language from the bill:

“Projects to be valued at fair cash value for purposes of bonded indebtedness and limitations on property tax extensions. Projects to which an assessment freeze applies pursuant to this Division shall be valued at their fair cash value for purposes of calculating a municipality’s general obligation bond limits and a taxing district’s limitation on tax extensions.”

Removing that language would ensure that businesses, homeowners and renters in the megaproject area would not face higher property taxes because of an incentive agreement.