THE BEARS WERE NEVER THE STORY: What Illinois Lawmakers Don’t Want You to Know About the Mega Project Bill

Inside the push for Illinois’ mega project bill and the question lawmakers do not want answered

By Staff Writer | April 27, 2026

It starts with a promise.

Keep the Bears in Illinois.

That is the message from Governor JB Pritzker and the Democratic supermajority as they push forward what they describe as a necessary plan to protect one of the state’s most iconic franchises. It is simple. It is emotional. It is effective.

And according to what FactsFirstUS has learned, it may not be the truth.

At the center of this entire debate is one question. Are the Chicago Bears staying in Illinois?

When asked directly, the Bears organization would neither confirm nor deny whether a final decision has been made. That answer is not neutral. In negotiations of this scale, silence is rarely accidental. It is deliberate. It signals movement without explanation. And in this case, it leaves open a possibility lawmakers are not publicly acknowledging: that the outcome may already be decided.

Sources with direct knowledge of discussions at the Illinois Capitol tell FactsFirstUS there is a growing belief among lawmakers that the Bears are preparing to leave for Indiana. What was once framed as negotiation now appears to be about timing. Not whether something will happen, but whether something can be passed before it does.

That aligns with statements from Illinois attorney Thomas DeVore, a figure with extensive political ties across the state and direct familiarity with how decisions move through government.

“Multiple sources with direct knowledge of the negotiations are telling me the decision is effectively made. The Bears are leaving for Indiana.”
— Thomas DeVore, Illinois attorney with longstanding political ties

If that is true, it changes the foundation of this entire debate. Because the central justification for the bill disappears. And yet, the bill continues to move forward.

Supporters describe the legislation as a targeted effort to keep the Bears in Illinois. But the structure of the bill tells a different story. Reporting reviewed by FactsFirstUS shows this is not a narrow stadium proposal. It is a sweeping statewide framework that allows large, private, billionaire-backed developments to receive special tax treatment and public support. The cost does not disappear. It shifts onto local communities and taxpayers.

“This isn’t a targeted stadium incentive. It’s a massive, statewide framework designed to subsidize large private developments with public backing.”
— Thomas DeVore

That distinction is not technical. It is fundamental. A stadium deal is temporary. A statewide financial structure is not.

The Bears may be the headline, but according to both insider accounts and DeVore’s assessment, they may not be the purpose.

“The Bears are just the headline as it’s useful, emotional, and politically convenient.”
— Thomas DeVore

Sources familiar with Capitol discussions tell FactsFirstUS the Bears have become the reason being presented to the public for a bill with far broader implications. What is being presented publicly is not necessarily what is driving the legislation behind the scenes.

Sometimes the most important part of a deal is not what is said, but what is being passed while it is being said.

That raises a more important question. What do those broader implications actually mean?

Those implications are not abstract. FactsFirstUS reporting has already outlined how this type of framework can shift property tax burdens. When large developments receive preferential treatment, the lost tax revenue does not disappear. It is made up elsewhere. In many cases, that means homeowners and small businesses paying more. Under certain scenarios outlined in our reporting, property taxes could rise significantly, even doubling in some areas.

Timing deepens that concern. FactsFirstUS has confirmed there is an aggressive push to move the bill forward quickly. Not because a deal has been finalized, but because many lawmakers believe the window to act is closing. That urgency raises a simple question: if the Bears are still in play, why the rush? And if they are not, why proceed at all?

At that point, a familiar line from Rahm Emanuel, former Chicago mayor and longtime Democratic political strategist, becomes difficult to ignore.

“Never let a serious crisis go to waste.”

“If Democrat lawmakers already know the team is gone, then invoking the Bears starts to look less like urgency and more like strategy.”
— Thomas DeVore

The answer may lie in how the bill is being advanced. It is not moving forward on Democratic votes alone. Republican support is being brought in, creating what appears to be a bipartisan front. That changes the political equation. Because once a bill becomes bipartisan, accountability spreads.

“By tying the bill to something as high profile as the Bears, Democrats are pulling in Republican votes… spreading political ownership and insulating themselves from future criticism.”
— Thomas DeVore

If long term costs emerge, responsibility will not fall in one place. It will be shared. And with it, clear accountability becomes harder to trace.

But the most important question is not political. It is practical.

What happens next?

Because if the Bears leave, the bill does not leave with them. The framework remains. The financial structure remains. And the potential impact on taxpayers remains. FactsFirstUS reporting has already outlined how similar mechanisms could shift property tax burdens and expose residents to long term costs.

According to insiders, that outcome is not hypothetical. It is the expectation driving the timeline.

“After the Bears leave… we will all be left with a far reaching piece of legislation that was sold under false urgency.”
— Thomas DeVore

FactsFirstUS reports only what can be verified. The Bears organization has not committed to Illinois. They would neither confirm nor deny whether a final decision has been made. Multiple sources at the Capitol indicate lawmakers believe the team is leaving. And the bill tied to keeping them is still being pushed forward. Not as a short-term solution, but as a long-term structure that will outlast the very issue it is being used to justify.

There is one statement that captures the concern more clearly than anything else.

“The Bears are carrying the water for the special interests who really want this bill.”
— Thomas DeVore

If that is true, then this is no longer a story about football. It is a story about timing, leverage, and what can be put in place while public attention is focused somewhere else.

Illinois residents are being asked to accept urgency. To trust the process. To believe this is about keeping the Bears. But the facts now in front of them point to something far more complex. A bill with long term consequences. A timeline driven by pressure. A narrative built around uncertainty.

And a question that has not been answered.

Who is this really for?

Because if the answer is not the public, then the public deserves to know.

Read The Full Reporting

FactsFirstUS Updated Report
https://factsfirstus.com/post/illinois-bears-bailout-hb910-property-tax-controvsery

Additional FactsFirstUS Coverage
https://factsfirstus.com/post/the-bears-bailout-the-springfield-deal-that-could-double-your-property-taxes
https://factsfirstus.com/post/illinois-bears-stadium-tax-shock
https://factsfirstus.com/post/hb910-illinois-bears-stadium-tax-impact-indiana

Sources

FactsFirstUS reporting and analysis
Public statements from Thomas DeVore
Illinois General Assembly HB 910 records
Public legislative discussions and Capitol sources

If the Bears leave and this bill remains, Illinois will not have lost a team.

It will have locked in something far more permanent.