|
|
|
bars & clubs movie clock restaurants specials best of chicago film and video food and drink music and clubs stage style words sports features |
|
|
![]() FIGHT THE POWER The economics of battling Soldier Field renovation
Twenty-four hours after the Bears lost their shirt to the Philadelphia Eagles, Soldier Field was in full-on transition. Seats yanked, the field ripped up and an army of workers going like gangbusters to kick the controversial $606 million renovation plan into gear. In fact, it seemed like a little too much work, considering that a pending lawsuit could kill the project. But perhaps that's the point. As Friends of the Parks (FOP) and the Landmarks Preservation Council of Illinois (LCPI) sue to stop the renovation (alleging, among other things, that the project uses $406 million in public funds for something that really isn't public: "[Soldier Field is] not the kind of place you could go in and play ball when it's not being used," says FOP General Counsel Eleanor Roemer), work is occurring amazingly fast. "Obviously they believe that if they're far enough along, no judge will stop the work," says FOP Executive Director Erma Tranter. So why not stop them from getting ahead until the judge can determine legality? Because they can't afford to. A temporary restraining order (TRO) could stop the current workbut it could also wipe them out later. "The Bears have actually said in public that if we were to get a TRO and we did not win in court on the merits of the case, they would sue for damages," LPCI President David Bahlman says. "With a not-for-profit organization like ours, we have maybe a million-and-a-half in endowment foundsall of that would be subject to the Bears' lawsuit. In this particular case, given the players, we couldn't put ourselves at risk." Friends of the Parks came to the same conclusion. "We don't do many lawsuits, obviously," Tranter says, noting that this is only the second major court action in the organization's twenty-seven-year history. "But it's such a serious issue, the board deliberated long and hard. According to the lawyers there's some real risk. If we get the TRO and later lose the case, can they turn around and sue a little non-profit that was only trying to do good? Some of the attorneys say they can." But right now everyone says they don't need the TRO, especially after a January 22 court ruling to "expedite" their case. "They're removing the seats, removing the grandstand, removing the toiletsthose are all things that would have to be done in any renovation project," Bahlman says. With the expedited schedule, they're looking for a decision by the end of April. "We need to find out what the Bears production schedule is," he says, noting that it's an eighteen-month project, which means they may not be able to complete much in twelve weeks. "If they're not sinking pylons for the new structure yet we won't need [the TRO]. If they start doing that, then we're really going to have a problem." But, Roemer says, from a legal standpoint, the Bears carry the majority of the hazard. "They proceed at their own risk using public money," Roemer says. "If they want to go ahead and we prevail, they would have to repay that money." Also by Elaine Richardson TALLYING TURNSTILES
COSELL & CO.
IT'S ALIVE!
BALANCING ACT
HOT AIR
FILM VAULT
THE GIFT GUIDE
ALL ABOARD
BRAIN FREEZE
ANALYZE THIS
THE GOOD FIGHT
BIG MUDDY
|
|
about Newcitychicago | about Newcity magazine | advertising | privacy policy | FAQ | employment |