Zell, the political solution

by Orval Overall on Feb 28, 2008 4:17 PM CST

I'm surprised that for all the attention paid to Zell's comments about selling naming rights, there is very little discussion of the political leverage Cubs fans throughout Chicago and Illinois currently have.

Its true, as Zell says, that Wrigley is "his asset" and without our own ownership interest we can't really stop him from selling the naming rights to it. But our elected leaders in State and City government absolutely can do something about it. Zell is practically begging them to purchase the stadium because the state can obtain tax-free financing, and can therefore afford to pay Zell a higher price. His analysts tell him that if he sells the stadium to a private buyer he'll get a lower return. Zell is also going to need City and State cooperation for any plan to remake or remodel Wrigley Field because of its historical landmark designation, a designation intended for just this sort of use. The cooperation of City and State officials is necessary to either of those ends; if they withhold it, the value of Zell's "asset" falls.

With that in mind, its remarkable that at the same time Zell is courting the Governor, the Mayor and hundreds of legislators, he manages to upset an untold number of their constituents. How many people would be sufficiently offended by the renaming of Wrigley Field to vote against the politicians who let it happen? Thousands? Certainly. Tens of thousands? Probably. Zell might not care what we think, but he should, because the politicians he needs to persuade will absolutely care if there are thousands of Cubs fans calling for their heads.

So, instead of focusing energy on polls that ask whether Cubs fans would go to games at a re-named Wrigley Field (they will), like the Sun Times is asking, someone should be posing the question: Would you vote to re-elect a politician who struck a deal with Sam Zell while turning a blind eye to his intention to re-name Wrigley Field? The answer to THAT poll, I think, would be a resounding "no." That's leverage, and its where we should focus our energies. If you start a "Save Wrigley" petition, make sure it lands on the desk of every politician whose consent is necessary for Zell to maximize the price for his "asset."

Poll

Would you vote to re-elect a politician who had the opportunity to insist that Wrigley Field keep its current name, but did nothing about it?

No

38 votes

Yes

16 votes

54 votes | Poll has closed

This is a FanPost and does not necessarily reflect the views of SB Nation or Al Yellon, managing editor (unless it's a FanPost posted by Al). FanPost opinions are valued expressions of opinion by passionate and knowledgeable baseball fans.

Tweet Comment 17 comments | 0 recs |

Do you like this story?

Comments

I say no with the caveat

I live outside of Chicago, but inside Cook County. Not sure how much play my elected officials have.

Worst to First in 2007, brought to you by Lou, Sori, A-Ram and D-Lee.

by drewishdrewid on Feb 28, 2008 4:23 PM CST reply actions

right idea, wrong reason

I would far more upset at any politician who agree to spend public funds on Wrigley and allow Zell to get anything out of it than freaking out over the name. What I DO NOT want is the state and or city, bailing him out, changing the landmark status,
adding concerts etc. Since they can't even change the marquis without city approval not sure how much value "naming " is going to have but the important thing is NOT to let him do any real long term actual damage to the park and to the sale to a serious owner who would actually want the park AND the Cubs.
I have no problem selling them seperately for tax reasons but
the state and city and state should do him no favors. What you
are I think unintentionally suggesting is that if out the kindness of his heart he agrees NOT to sell the name than they would let him get away with the things he needs their votes to do.

Bottom line, no policial support for anything that either the residents and the fans object to. JUST SELL THE DAMN TEAM

"It's the Cubbies. There's always a vibe. It's the greatest vibe in baseball." Greg Maddux on Cub fan's optimism even after the 06 debacle.

by jessica on Feb 28, 2008 4:30 PM CST reply actions

It doesn't matter...

... because Blagojevich is not up for re-election until 2010, and Daley not till 2011.

Without getting into political discussion here, I don't think a boycott of either of those men if they supported Zell would make a bit of difference in their re-election campaigns.

JMHO.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Feb 28, 2008 4:32 PM CST reply actions

Regardless of how this issue turns out...

...if Balgojevich gets re-elected, I will wear a White Sox hat outside of Wrigley.

Lou Brown: "My kinda team, Charlie, my kinda team..."

by ballhawk on Feb 28, 2008 4:39 PM CST up reply actions

true, but...

they have to get the consent of others who are up for reelection sooner -- the city council in the case of landmarking, and the legislature in the case of state financing.

by Orval Overall on Feb 28, 2008 4:42 PM CST up reply actions

The City Council...

... is up for election the same time as the Mayor is -- 2011.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Feb 28, 2008 4:57 PM CST up reply actions

I'm a political junkie...

... and the fact that anyone would base even part of their vote on this issue disturbs me.

DmL

by dmlichte on Feb 28, 2008 4:35 PM CST reply actions

I agree wholeheartedly!

The name of the park the Cubs play in is nothing. The economy. the state of disrepair of the streets and other intrastructure, health care and many many other things come before a silly little thing like the name of the park.

Kasey

See the Cubs 2008 schedule with TV schedule at http://ignarski.tripod.com/sched2008.html

by kaseyi on Feb 28, 2008 5:58 PM CST up reply actions

LSA!!!!!!!!!

n/t

"I've always felt that starting pitching is the most important part of the rotation." - Joe Morgan, Sunday Night Baseball 8-12-07

by gary varsho on Feb 28, 2008 6:06 PM CST up reply actions

I agree with dmlichte...

I would find it more reasonable for someone to say that the renaming of the field would change their being a Cubs fan before it would change how they would vote. If you would stop supporting the team over this issue, more power to you and if enough people do this it would affect the bottom line and have an excellent chance of killing the deal (no, I don't believe people care this much about the field's name, but I could be wrong). This isn't a political issue, in my mind.

More importantly, is Wrigley Field really a historical landmark? I didn't think so (source: http://www.nps.gov/nhl/DOE_dedesignations/wrigley.htm) although I'm fairly certain features of it are protected (the marquee and possibly the scoreboard?). As such, the ability of a politician to legally block the renaming of the field is grey, at best, and illegal, at worst. I'll be the first to admit that I could be mistaken on this.

I would think it was reasonable to not vote for someone if you thought that your local politician was being bought off in order to railroad the project through approval, but that's not what your poll question is asking.

I don't particularly care about the name change, myself (no one cares that it was renamed from its Federal League days, do they?), but part of that is probably because I was originally angered by the renaming of the New Comiskey Park and have since grown to appreciate how much the new money from US Cellular went into improving the stadium. If we had to put up with "Wrigley Field: Presented by AT&T" or whatever, I could live with it so long as the improvement of facilities (especially concrete, concourses, concessions, bathrooms) received some portion of the funds. The recent woes of Macy's in this area (after their takeover of Fields) should keep potential corporate sponsors from altering things too much, I should think, in any case.

That's my take, for what it's worth.

by MarchHare on Feb 28, 2008 5:04 PM CST reply actions

Loud, sustained applause.

As I have written many times, I simply don't care about any name change. It's not worth getting outraged about -- and it MIGHT (and SHOULD, if they do it for the right reason) provide enough money to make Wrigley Field (or whatever they want to call it) last for another 50-75 years.

That, I am 100% in favor of.

"That's my opinion and if you don't like it, well, I have others." ~ Groucho Marx

by Al Yellon on Feb 28, 2008 5:31 PM CST up reply actions

It should, but it won't.

I might be lukewarm to the idea if I thought that one penny made off of naming rights would be put back into the payroll or ballpark upkeep. But it won't be. Naming rights will help only Sam Zell, because he is pocketing the money. He made an 8.2 billion purchase and wants to pay down his debt. Naming rights will not to us, as fans, or the team one iota of good.

"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004

by ctcoff99 on Feb 28, 2008 10:09 PM CST up reply actions

I know I'm in the minority, but

this whole outrage thing is silly to me. I really don't care what they call the park. I sure would love to see the concourse dump improved and maybe spend a few of those dollars trying to modernize the park. Maybe even update some of the facilities to the 1980's, because state of the art isn't possible in a facility as old as Wrigley.

by cubswin on Feb 28, 2008 5:12 PM CST reply actions

Since when...

does Chicago elect it's politicians by "voting"?

As I've told you before, I never repeat myself.

by santoswoodenlegs on Feb 28, 2008 5:22 PM CST reply actions

Voting in Chicago

Having not lived there for over 20 years now, I wonder in how many precincts I'm still a registered voter...and how many times I vote in each election.

At least I was still alive last time I looked...

by MN exile on Feb 28, 2008 5:30 PM CST up reply actions

A fair compromise.

Let's just say the Illinois Sports Authority does purchase the ballpark. Chances are they would renovate it within a couple of years anyway, as we were discussing the other day. If selling out must be done, why not re-open the ballpark with a new corporate name AFTER the renovation? I wouldn't have nearly as much of a problem with that. Oh yeah, Sam Zell wouldn't be able to pocket $400 million that way.

"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004

by ctcoff99 on Feb 28, 2008 10:21 PM CST reply actions

And BTW....

Sam Zell can take "his asset" and shove it up his asset. He could have paid the national debt for the team, and in my book, he still would not own it. The team and the balllpark belong to the fans. Period. I know the legal system disagrees with me, but that's their problem. The Cubs are like a public utility...it's not a Wal-Mart.

"Don't complain to me about the stormy weather, boys. Just bring the ship into port." --Steve Stone, September 2004

by ctcoff99 on Feb 28, 2008 10:24 PM CST up reply actions