It's been a few days since my last update, but significant developments warrant a full breakdown. Let me lay out the documented facts, explain what they mean, and give you my read on where this ends up.

The Illinois Situation: What's Actually Happening

HB910 remains parked in the Senate. It has received one of three required readings. The Senate's lead sponsor, Bill Cunningham, publicly acknowledged last week that May 31 "may come and go without a final answer." That's the bill's own co-sponsor lowering expectations on the record.

Before a Senate-amended version can become law, it has to clear several sequential hurdles:

• The Senate must pass an amended version
• That version returns to the House for a concurrence vote
• Speaker Welch will not call a bill without 60 confirmed Democratic votes — his self-imposed rule throughout this process
• The governor must sign it

Here's the structural problem that hasn't been solved in four weeks of Senate control: the provisions that bought Buckner's 78-vote House coalition are the same provisions that make the bill unworkable for the Bears and their lenders. Strip them in the Senate and you lose House votes on concurrence. Keep them and the Bears can't get the financing they need. Cunningham knows this. He said publicly that finding a solution to the property tax relief problem is why the Senate didn't move the bill last week.

Infrastructure funding doesn't exist in any legislation. This isn't a minor detail — it's arguably the most important fact in this entire saga. The Bears have requested roughly $855 million in public infrastructure funding for roads, sewers, and utilities around the Arlington Heights site. That money is not in HB910. It is not in any other introduced bill. It has not been committed by the state in any form.

When asked about the surrounding municipalities demanding a seat at the table, Pritzker said "that's a conversation between those municipalities and the Bears." Those municipalities — the mayors of Palatine, Rolling Meadows, and Schaumburg — have said publicly they don't trust Bears-conducted studies and would require independent traffic analysis. Cunningham confirmed the state cannot commit $855 million in infrastructure spending without a traffic study. Traffic studies of this scale typically take months to complete. There isn't one.

The opposition coalition is real. The Illinois Federation of Teachers launched a dedicated calculator tool to quantify school funding losses under HB910. The Chicago Teachers Union president gave an on-record interview opposing the bill. Mayor Johnson went to Springfield for two days explicitly to lobby against it. Senator Willie Preston went on record calling the bill a non-starter. The Senate Progressive Caucus released a formal statement conditioning their support on progressive revenue measures.

Pritzker publicly said Johnson has "no plan" for keeping the Bears in Chicago. Johnson called out Pritzker's wealth and pushed back. These are Illinois's two senior Democrats publicly feuding over Bears strategy with eleven days left in session. That is not a coalition that passes complex bipartisan legislation under deadline pressure.

The Chicago Detour

Something worth understanding about the recent chaos: the Bears contacted Chicago in late April. The Bears say it was about Soldier Field lease parameters — standard planning for a franchise that plays there through 2033 regardless of where they build next. Chicago interpreted it as the Bears signaling openness to a lakefront reunion.

Johnson ran with it. He told Chicago-area legislators the Bears were still considering the city. Cunningham publicly confirmed this breathed new life into opposition from Chicago legislators. A source close to the Bears told NBC Chicago that Johnson's use of the conversation "appears to be another effort by the mayor to kill the bill that would keep the Bears in Illinois."

Whether that was Johnson's intent or a genuine misreading, the effect is the same: Chicago legislators now have cover to slow-walk a bill that would move the Bears to Arlington Heights. That cover doesn't go away before May 31.

The Environmental Hit Piece

The Chicago Tribune ran a piece on the Hammond site's environmental history the morning of the NFL owners meeting in Orlando. The piece was sourced partly from Arlington Heights Mayor Jim Tinaglia, who happens to have a professional and political interest in the Bears choosing his city.

The piece discussed biosolids capping on the Lost Marsh Golf Course. What it didn't mention: biosolids are a standard practice used at Winnemac Park, Horner Park, Maggie Daley Park, the 606 trail, and the Wilmette Golf Course, among many others. The actual stadium site sits across Calumet Avenue from the golf course, adjacent to Wolf Lake. The slag under the golf course is confirmed capped. The Bears have already conducted Phase II environmental testing on the actual construction parcels.

The timing — published the morning of the NFL owners meeting — is worth noting. The environmental facts in the piece were not new. The same information has been publicly available for months. Running it that morning suggests it was intended to influence the conversation happening in Orlando, not to inform the general public of something new.

Goodell's statement following the owners meeting did not address the Tribune article. He described both sites as viable and said he had spoken with Pritzker recently about the Illinois legislative process.

Indiana has several potential sites the Bears could have chosen if all they wanted was leverage. The focus on Hammond's Wolf Lake is there because they determined through dilligence that it's not an issue.

What Indiana Has Actually Done

Indiana Governor Mike Braun signed SB27 into law on February 26. The bill establishes the Northwest Indiana Stadium Authority, creates the bond issuance mechanism, authorizes zero property taxes for 40 years, provides a Bears purchase option at the end of that period for approximately $1, and commits $700 million in Toll Road-related infrastructure funding.

At a business event, Braun confirmed that Bears leadership met with him at the Governor's Residence "last week." While Illinois legislators were publicly feuding and the Senate bill sat untouched, the Bears were meeting with Indiana's governor privately.

Braun said he expects due diligence on the Hammond site to conclude in "about three or four weeks" — pointing to mid-June. He said he will be surprised if Illinois produces anything that competes with what Indiana has already enacted into law.

Hammond Mayor McDermott confirmed in a recent interview that roughly $700 million in infrastructure improvements are planned for the site, including a dedicated highway interchange from I-90 directly to stadium parking. On transit, a South Shore Line rail spur to the stadium site is actively being discussed with the Congressman representing the area, the city, and the state. Notably, a rail spur already exists from the South Shore Line toward the proposed stadium footprint — currently used by Ferro Chemical, which would be an obvious acquisition target as part of stadium development.

McDermott also confirmed what many people have asked about: the Bears would retain 100% of event revenue — concerts, Final Fours, boxing, whatever — under the Indiana lease structure. The state owns the building; the Bears operate it and keep everything it generates. This neutralizes one of the primary arguments for Arlington Heights, which was that building ownership would give the Bears full revenue capture.

The Fertitta Connection

Tilman Fertitta's bid to acquire Caesars Entertainment is progressing. The Financial Times reported that a roughly $5 billion debt financing package from a syndicate including Morgan Stanley is being assembled. The deal is described as several weeks away.

Why does this matter? The Horseshoe Hammond holds the gaming license for the Hammond area. Fertitta — who owns Golden Nugget, Landry's restaurant empire including Morton's Steakhouse and Del Frisco's, and has built sports-casino campus developments — would be a natural co-development partner for the Bears' entertainment district at Wolf Lake.

Braun's mid-June due diligence timeline coincides roughly with when the Fertitta-Caesars deal is expected to conclude. That alignment may or may not be coincidental. Either way, having one of the most experienced gaming-hospitality operators in the country as a potential development partner significantly strengthens the economic case for Hammond's entertainment district.

My Read on Where This Is Heading

This is analytical conclusion, not established fact — but it's grounded in everything above.

The document we keep being handed by the Illinois process is not the picture of a state that's closing a deal. It's the picture of a state that's building a political exit narrative.

The Bears have not delivered a traffic study for Arlington Heights despite years of ownership and Illinois legislators wouldn't trust it if they did and it costs less than a million to conduct. They are not actively lobbying Springfield to fix HB910. They met with Indiana's governor at his residence while the Illinois Senate sat idle. They have spent over $10 million on Hammond due diligence. Their Chairman walked the Wolf Lake site in person.

When you look at all of this through the lens of what leverage looks like versus what acquisition looks like, the behavior doesn't fit leverage. Organizations that use alternatives as leverage want those alternatives visible and threatening. They don't maintain coordinated silence across two states for over a year under legal NDAs. They don't spend $10 million on due diligence for a site they plan to use as a chip.

My thesis, which I've held since before most of this became public knowledge: Hammond is the destination. Indiana was never a stalking horse for Arlington Heights — it was, and remains, the leverage for Chicago. When Chicago didn't materialize, Hammond became the plan. Arlington Heights has been the decoy all along including for Chicago. The traffic study absence, the lack of engagement with Illinois legislators, the contact with Chicago that gave Johnson his ammunition — all of it is more consistent with a team setting Illinois up for a clean public failure than a team genuinely trying to make Arlington work.

HB910 may still pass. But my prediction is that it passes in a form the Bears cannot use — sufficient for the White Sox at the 14th Street rail yard and Bob Dunn's One Central project, but not for the Bears at Arlington Heights. Every Illinois politician gets to say they tried. The Bears say they couldn't get the financing. The finger-pointing begins. The Bears announce Hammond.

And Hammond, in the long run, turns out far better than most people are currently willing to believe.

The biggest Bears stadium news this week was what didn't happen.

The Senate received HB910, gave it one of three required readings, parked it in Assignments Committee, and went home. No committee hearing scheduled. No amendment filed. No vote. Two weeks burned off a calendar that runs out May 31.

Let me explain why this matters and what I think is actually happening.

How We Got Here

On April 22 the Illinois House passed HB910 78-32 and sent it to the Senate. This happened despite Buckner acknowledging during pre-vote deliberations that the bill contained a STAR bond flaw that would need to be fixed. Rather than fixing it first, the House passed it anyway and handed the problem to Cunningham. That's not how you pass urgent legislation. That's how you pass the hot potato.

The bill the Bears received was one they explicitly called insufficient to make Arlington Heights feasible. The Bears' statement said so in writing the night it passed.

The Core Impasse

To get 60 Democratic votes Buckner needed sweeteners. Those sweeteners are exactly what makes the bill unworkable for the Bears. Specifically:

Half of whatever PILOT amount the Bears negotiate with local school districts gets diverted to statewide property tax relief. The governor's own office ran the numbers and found this produces $1.29 per Illinois household annually from a hypothetical $20 million PILOT payment. Negligible by their own description. But not negligible for the Bears — because the school districts will still need the same net amount regardless of this provision. For the schools to net the same figure they agreed to, the Bears effectively pay twice. Cunningham told Crain's this is "exactly why we didn't run a bill this week." He has identified the problem. He has not found the solution.

There's also the 9% amusement tax provision which the Bears oppose because it cuts into the margins of their mixed-use entertainment district. Buckner needed it to get votes. The Bears won't accept it. That's an impasse, not a negotiation.

The Rule of 60 and Brandon Johnson

Speaker Welch has an informal rule that he won't call a bill to the floor unless 60 Democrats will vote for it. This means the Senate can't just pass a cleaner version and call it done — any Senate amendments have to go back to the House for a concurrence vote, and Buckner needs to rebuild his 60-vote coalition around whatever the Senate produces.

Now subtract the Democrats loyal to Brandon Johnson, who spent two days in Springfield this week explicitly lobbying against HB910 and for keeping the Bears in Chicago. Senator Willie Preston went on record saying the bill is a non-starter and claiming enough Chicago-area Democrats to kill it. Whether that coalition is as large as Preston claims is unknown, but it's a real obstacle stated by a named legislator.

Why Johnson May Rationally Prefer Hammond To Arlington

This is my analysis and I want to be clear it's inference, not established fact. But the numbers support it more than the conventional narrative acknowledges.

If the Bears move to Hammond rather than Arlington Heights, several things happen for Chicago:

Wolf Lake sits directly adjacent to the Hegwisch neighborhood on Chicago's far South Side. A development of this scale would trigger federal traffic impact studies along the approach corridors from Chicago. Based on the scale of similar projects, this would likely produce mandatory road improvement requirements that Indiana or federal highway funds would need to address — essentially infrastructure investment on Chicago's South Side that the city and Illinois doesn't have to pay for.

The South Shore Line connects to Metra Electric rail service, and a stadium in Hammond would require renegotiation of that service agreement — producing transit funding that flows back toward Chicago rather than the additional expense that Arlington Heights transit improvements represent.

The entertainment district spillover from a Hammond stadium would flow north into Chicago's South Side neighborhoods, creating development pressure along the lakefront corridor in a way that's geographically cohesive rather than disconnected from the city.

Meanwhile $700 million in state infrastructure funding going to Arlington Heights is $700 million not available for Chicago. Illinois bonds carry a cost premium given the state's credit rating, making every dollar borrowed for Arlington more expensive than it looks.

In short — Hammond produces infrastructure benefits for Chicago's South Side, transit funding, and South Shore development while costing Illinois money that would otherwise compete with Chicago for state resources. Arlington produces a suburban stadium that reduces Chicago's event revenue, costs Illinois money on infrastructure that doesn't benefit Chicago, and leaves the South Side with nothing.

That doesn't mean Johnson is actively rooting for Hammond. It means he has rational reasons to be indifferent between Hammond and a failed Illinois deal in a way that makes his opposition to HB910 serve multiple interests simultaneously.

The HB910 Passes Anyway Scenario

Here's where it gets interesting. HB910 in its current form — with all the provisions the Bears find unfeasible — may actually pass anyway. Not for the Bears, but for everything else in it.

The White Sox stadium at the 14th Street rail yard fits the RREDY rail yard redevelopment designation Buckner wrote into the bill. One Central fits it. The Chicago Stars FC stadium fits it. Cunningham confirmed to Crain's he's actively pursuing Stars stadium legislation. These projects don't need the Bears to move to Arlington Heights — they just need the megaprojects framework to exist.

So Illinois may pass HB910 in the only form it can — containing all the provisions the Bears find unfeasible. The Bears announce Hammond. Every Illinois politician points to the bill as evidence they tried. The Bears say it passed with unworkable provisions. Everyone has cover. It's an amicable divorce.

What's Still Missing Even If The Bill Passes

Infrastructure funding. There is no mechanism in HB910 for it. There is no separate bill introduced. The Bears need a written, legally binding commitment for a specific infrastructure dollar amount before their lenders will close a $2 billion construction loan. That commitment doesn't exist in any introduced legislation.

The Fertitta Factor

The Caesars acquisition by Fertitta Entertainment remains unresolved. The exclusive negotiating window was extended after Fertitta had a family emergency. Fertitta, who owns Golden Nugget, Landry's restaurants including Morton's Steakhouse and Del Frisco's, would be a natural co-development partner for the Hammond entertainment district — he's already built sports-casino campuses and owns the restaurant brands that would anchor a mixed-use district. The Horseshoe Casino in Hammond holds the gaming license for the area. Until the Caesars acquisition status is clarified, the Bears cannot finalize co-development agreements for the Hammond campus that significantly affect their financial model.

Bottom Line

The Senate didn't move this week because the core problem — producing property tax relief meaningful enough to hold the Senate coalition while not doubling the Bears' effective tax burden — has no solution anyone has found yet. That problem doesn't get easier as the calendar runs down.

The committee meets with the Bears again around May 13. The owners meet May 18-20 in Orlando. The session ends May 31.

Every piece of evidence continues to point toward Hammond. The legislative math in Illinois remains genuinely difficult. And the politicians may be constructing a bill designed to fail in the specific way that gives everyone maximum cover when the Bears announce Indiana.

The Bears presumably meet with the NFL Stadium Comittee again next week. Maybe that meeting is one of those that would be better off as an email.

EDIT 3: via a conversation with councilman Woerpel, I have become convinced this is nothing and just business as usual. Disregard.

While Chicago media watches Springfield debate a Senate game plan that Senate President Harmon won't touch until "late next week," I have been reading Hammond city government documents. What I found in tonight's amended Common Council agenda — filed two days before the NFL Stadium Committee meets with Bears brass on April 29 — tells a different story than anything being reported.

Let me be precise about what is documented, what is inferential, and where geographic confirmation is still needed. I am not calling this a smoking gun. I am calling it a pattern that deserves serious attention.

Background: The Cancelled CIB Meeting

Start here because it sets the context.

On April 15, the Hammond Capital Improvement Board cancelled its regularly scheduled April 20 meeting. That notice was filed the same week Bears Chairman George McCaskey and President Kevin Warren flew to Hammond and walked the Wolf Lake site at Lost Marsh Golf Club. CIB meetings generate public agendas, minutes, and records. Things become part of the public record. Cancelled meetings do not.

Why does a city cancel a Capital Improvement Board meeting in the middle of the most significant development negotiation in its history? One possibility is routine scheduling. Another possibility is that items related to the Bears stadium site were about to surface publicly before the Bears were ready to announce.

Keep that in mind as you read what appeared on tonight's amended agenda.

Finding #1: Bond Infrastructure Being Built — Ordinance 26-13

This is the item nobody is reporting and it is arguably the most significant.

Ordinance 26-13 creates four new dedicated municipal funds for Food and Beverage Tax revenues:

• Fund 3384: Food and Beverage DSR-MM
• Fund 3326: Food and Beverage Redemption Account
• Fund 3327: Food and Beverage Rebate Fund
• Fund 3343: Food and Beverage Depository

The casual reader sees routine municipal accounting. The informed reader sees bond infrastructure.

DSR stands for Debt Service Reserve. A Debt Service Reserve fund is created when a municipality is preparing to issue bonds backed by a specific revenue stream and needs to demonstrate to underwriters that reserve requirements are satisfied. You do not create a DSR fund for casual municipal bookkeeping.

Here is why this matters specifically: the Food and Beverage Tax is one of the exact revenue streams identified in Indiana Senate Bill 27 — the Bears stadium legislation — for repaying stadium-related bonds. Section 5 of SB27 specifically identifies food and beverage tax capture as part of the stadium authority's revenue framework.

Hammond is not just talking about financing a stadium. Hammond is building the financial plumbing that bond underwriters require to see before they will commit capital. This is pre-issuance infrastructure. You build it when the deal is real.

Finding #2: Eminent Domain Authorized — Resolution 26R-07

Resolution 26R-07 authorizes the Hammond Redevelopment Commission to file a condemnation lawsuit for the "total taking" of property at 4205-49 Calumet Avenue.

The documents show Hammond made a good faith purchase offer to the owner of record, John G. Loxas, as required by Indiana Code 32-24-1-5. The offer was the average of two independent appraisals. Loxas did not accept. Tonight Hammond authorized going to court.

Important geographic caveat: I have not yet independently confirmed that this specific parcel sits within the proposed stadium footprint. Calumet Avenue runs north-south through Hammond and the legal description references the East-West Toll Road (I-80/94) as a boundary, which could place this parcel in different parts of the corridor. Before treating this as a stadium land grab specifically, the mapping needs verification.

What I can say without reservation: the timing is extraordinary. Hammond does not use eminent domain casually. Authorizing a condemnation lawsuit on an amended agenda two days before the NFL Stadium Committee meets is aggressive municipal action. The stated justification is blight elimination and economic development — the same language used throughout the SB27 framework.

If this parcel is inside the development footprint, it confirms McDermott's reference to "half a dozen parcels" that needed to be acquired, and explains why those property owners have been silent — they are in active acquisition negotiations under NDA.

Finding #3: Infrastructure Reconfiguration — Resolution 26R-09

This item requires the most careful reading. A development agreement for UESCO Industries to build a $25 million industrial crane manufacturing facility at 5009 Calumet Avenue contains a specific covenant: the developer must move and reinstall Hammond Sanitary District HVAC equipment from 5009 Calumet to an adjacent parcel.

I want to be careful not to overstate this the way others have. Moving municipal sanitary district equipment is a standard condition placed on industrial developers who acquire properties hosting existing infrastructure. This alone does not prove Bears-specific utility reconfiguration.

What it does show is that Hammond is actively reconfiguring industrial infrastructure along the Calumet Avenue corridor right now — the same corridor adjacent to the Wolf Lake development area — and doing so on a timeline that aligns precisely with the stadium due diligence process. Whether this is stadium prep or coincidental industrial development is a fair question. The timing and location make it worth noting.

The Timeline Assembled

Here is the sequence when you put it all together:

• Thanksgiving 2025: A Calumet Avenue business owner receives a letter from the State of Indiana saying their location has been selected for a stadium project. Mayor McDermott is contacted to confirm. This is when Hammond finds out.
• Late February 2026: Indiana passes SB27 establishing the Northwest Indiana Stadium Authority. Framework is legally enacted.
• April 8, 2026: HB1292, establishing the Northwest Indiana Sports Development Commission, had been voted on exactly one year earlier to establish the commission meant to attract professional sports teams.
• April 15, 2026: Hammond Capital Improvement Board cancels its April 20 meeting.
• April 17, 2026: McCaskey and Warren visit Lost Marsh Golf Club — the Wolf Lake stadium site — meeting with McDermott and Hammond officials. Bears confirm ongoing due diligence.
• April 20, 2026: CIB meeting does not happen.
• April 22, 2026: Illinois House passes HB910 78-32. Bears immediately release statement calling it insufficient.
• April 27, 2026 (tonight): Hammond Common Council amended agenda includes DSR bond fund creation, eminent domain authorization, and infrastructure reconfiguration along Calumet Avenue.
• April 29, 2026: NFL Stadium Committee meets virtually with Bears brass. Bears stadium is the only item on the agenda.

What This Means

I have been writing for weeks that the Bears are going to Hammond and that the Illinois legislative process is political theater designed to give everyone cover when the announcement comes. The Facebook post circulating from a Republican elected official citing "multiple sources with direct knowledge" saying the decision is effectively made aligns with this read. McDermott himself said the Bears have spent at least $10 million on Indiana due diligence and that "this is not a leverage play."

Tonight's agenda is not confirmation that the deal is done. It is confirmation that Hammond is behaving exactly like a city that believes the deal is done and is executing accordingly. Cities do not build bond DSR funds and authorize eminent domain on amended agendas two days before NFL committee meetings for exploratory projects.

The financial plumbing is being built. The land is being cleared. The infrastructure is being reconfigured. The NFL is meeting with the Bears Wednesday. That needs to happen before a final announcement is made.

Springfield is still looking for a Senate game plan.

My expectation is for a Bears announcement on May 1st.

The Bears are going to Hammond! Bear TF Down!

EDIT: Here's the link to Hammond's amended agenda.
https://www.gohammond.com/document_library/meeting_minutes_and_agendas/city_council/2026/04-27-26_agenda-AMENDED.pdf

EDIT 2: councilman Woerpel has given explanations for the city business, noting it is standard business. It is possible that is the case