3 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Yeah, I don't get that last line from the article. "Lawyer up" against what? Against the Constitution's Interstate Commerce Clause and a railroad's ability to build on land that has been railroad property for over a century? There isn't even any eminent domain arguments here. This will all be on what is now Union Pacific property.

It reads as Hintz making that part up to add stakes. The politicians against this know they can’t make get their way if this blows up into a legal issue. Mike Quigley even said as much when speaking to residents with Lee, Mendoza, Pappas, and others, something along the lines of, “We will not win this if it goes to the courts,” which is a telling statement. Lawyering up would waste a lot of money and only serve to prolong death.

1 hour ago, 77 Hitmen said:

"However, inward-looking, bungalowed Bridgeport never has been interested in such around-the-clock excitement. Local Ald. Nicole Lee, 11th, tells me she’s willing to talk about some development to keep a team that’s called the neighborhood home for more than a century. Growing the 35th Street corridor already is a priority for her, she says. However, she notably adds, “There’s a lot of space between what we have and what the Ricketts have (done) in Wrigleyville.”

Interesting to see Ald. Lee confirming in print what's long been the position of the Bridgeport neighbors: In addition to not wanting the Amtrak facility, they also don't want a major "ballpark village" development. So even if Reinsdorf had wanted to develop the parking lots (or Ishbia tries to pivot to that plan in the future), there would be resistance.

On 9/18/2026 at 2:03 PM, 77 Hitmen said:

In case people missed it, the Sox Machine article has a link to Amtrak's website for this proposed project.

https://mwmaintenancefacility.com/

Most not all Sox fans don't come to throw a party. They come for the game. Cubs don't influence my activities.

10 minutes ago, pcq said:

Most not all Sox fans don't come to throw a party. They come for the game. Cubs don't influence my activities.

It has nothing to do with the Cubs. This is how teams make a shitload of money off the books now. Ballpark villages are a boon for revenue.

"Lee is determined to convince Reinsdorf to stay in Bridgeport at a new stadium on the site of Rate Field."

Chicago Sun-Times

Ald. Nicole Lee wants full-fledged environmental review o...

Earlier this week, the Federal Railroad Administration responded to a political firestorm of protests against Amtrak's plans for a maintenance facility in Bridgeport by promising a federal environment

29 minutes ago, kba said:

Interesting to see Ald. Lee confirming in print what's long been the position of the Bridgeport neighbors: In addition to not wanting the Amtrak facility, they also don't want a major "ballpark village" development. So even if Reinsdorf had wanted to develop the parking lots (or Ishbia tries to pivot to that plan in the future), there would be resistance.

I remember that coming up in the past too.

Bridgeport residents protest against Ishbia outside of a "Invest for Kids" conference he was attending. Any Soxtalk members pictured in this article?

Is it a good look to protest outside a conference called "Invest for Kids"?

Block Club Chicago

Amtrak Protesters Vow To ‘Stop Ishbia In His Tracks’ As D...

Protesters rallied outside the Invest for Kids conference Downtown, opposing Amtrak’s proposed $915 million rail maintenance facility in Bridgeport and Chinatown.

1 hour ago, kba said:

Interesting to see Ald. Lee confirming in print what's long been the position of the Bridgeport neighbors: In addition to not wanting the Amtrak facility, they also don't want a major "ballpark village" development. So even if Reinsdorf had wanted to develop the parking lots (or Ishbia tries to pivot to that plan in the future), there would be resistance.

Which is their right, and shows why the Sox have a legitmate reason to leave.

Ald. Lee says the environmental review by the FRA will not be enough. She also wants to convince Reinsdorf that the area around Rate Field could be developed into a year-round entertainment district like what Ricketts has done around Wrigley.

Chicago Sun-Times

Ald. Nicole Lee wants full-fledged environmental review o...

Earlier this week, the Federal Railroad Administration responded to a political firestorm of protests against Amtrak's plans for a maintenance facility in Bridgeport by promising a federal environment

2 hours ago, kba said:

Interesting to see Ald. Lee confirming in print what's long been the position of the Bridgeport neighbors: In addition to not wanting the Amtrak facility, they also don't want a major "ballpark village" development. So even if Reinsdorf had wanted to develop the parking lots (or Ishbia tries to pivot to that plan in the future), there would be resistance.

This, like the “lawyer up” comment, is also posturing by Hintz. There’s no quote from Lee to back up that assertion.

23 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Ald. Lee says the environmental review by the FRA will not be enough. She also wants to convince Reinsdorf that the area around Rate Field could be developed into a year-round entertainment district like what Ricketts has done around Wrigley.

Chicago Sun-Times

Ald. Nicole Lee wants full-fledged environmental review o...

Earlier this week, the Federal Railroad Administration responded to a political firestorm of protests against Amtrak's plans for a maintenance facility in Bridgeport by promising a federal environment

Seems a little too late for this, to say the least.

29 minutes ago, Mouthsider said:

Seems a little too late for this, to say the least.

35 years too late...they're willing to put their own investment $$$ on the line to make it a success, or the easier route of taxpayers'???

59 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Ald. Lee says the environmental review by the FRA will not be enough. She also wants to convince Reinsdorf that the area around Rate Field could be developed into a year-round entertainment district like what Ricketts has done around Wrigley.

Chicago Sun-Times

Ald. Nicole Lee wants full-fledged environmental review o...

Earlier this week, the Federal Railroad Administration responded to a political firestorm of protests against Amtrak's plans for a maintenance facility in Bridgeport by promising a federal environment

This should have started in 1990. But at worst, once Jerry tried to get the 78 built. once Ishbia stepped in and got stuff done, game over.

8 minutes ago, southsider2k5 said:

This should have started in 1990. But at worst, once Jerry tried to get the 78 built. once Ishbia stepped in and got stuff done, game over.

She really should have brought this up while Jerry was pushing for the 78, right? If there was ever going to be another taxpayer-funded stadium/site for the Sox, it would be a lot easier to pitch it as investing in the existing site rather than building anew on abandoned land in the South Loop. She should have known her time was up when Ishbia put out his commitment to privately funding the new stadium.

Lee continues to demonstrate that she is several steps behind. Which stage of grief is “bargaining”, again?

12 minutes ago, Mouthsider said:

She really should have brought this up while Jerry was pushing for the 78, right? If there was ever going to be another taxpayer-funded stadium/site for the Sox, it would be a lot easier to pitch it as investing in the existing site rather than building anew on abandoned land in the South Loop. She should have known her time was up when Ishbia put out his commitment to privately funding the new stadium.

Lee continues to demonstrate that she is several steps behind. Which stage of grief is “bargaining”, again?

I think it goes back to the Aldermen of Chicago feeling like they decide everything. When Lee figured out they got cut of the process they realized that they might be in trouble if the Sox leave and they get a train depot instead. But the time to negotiate was when the 78 came up for. Instead the Sox got put on ice and instead did it themselves. FAFO as the kids say.

17 hours ago, Mouthsider said:

She really should have brought this up while Jerry was pushing for the 78, right? If there was ever going to be another taxpayer-funded stadium/site for the Sox, it would be a lot easier to pitch it as investing in the existing site rather than building anew on abandoned land in the South Loop. She should have known her time was up when Ishbia put out his commitment to privately funding the new stadium.

Lee continues to demonstrate that she is several steps behind. Which stage of grief is “bargaining”, again?

Excellent observation. So far, I've seen denial, anger, and bargaining. You're right, they should have been trying to promote to ISFA and the Sox an entertainment district at least when the 78 proposal was announced in January 2024. Perhaps much earlier than that as they knew the lease was ending in 2029 and we've all seen what most other teams around the league are doing around their ballparks. I don't know if that would have worked, but it seems too late now to start scrambling with suggestions for site redevelopment.

Trying to convince Amtrak to select an alternative site might have a better chance of success than threats of lawsuits since it's been clearly settled law that railroads can do these kind of things on their own property.

21 minutes ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Excellent observation. So far, I've seen denial, anger, and bargaining. You're right, they should have been trying to promote to ISFA and the Sox an entertainment district at least when the 78 proposal was announced in January 2024. Perhaps much earlier than that as they knew the lease was ending in 2029 and we've all seen what most other teams around the league are doing around their ballparks. I don't know if that would have worked, but it seems too late now to start scrambling with suggestions for site redevelopment.

Trying to convince Amtrak to select an alternative site might have a better chance of success than threats of lawsuits since it's been clearly settled law that railroads can do these kind of things on their own property.

There's no other site as good as the proposed one. It's right near the old one, massive and not used currently. Finding a different site is easier said than done.

3 hours ago, 77 Hitmen said:

Excellent observation. So far, I've seen denial, anger, and bargaining. You're right, they should have been trying to promote to ISFA and the Sox an entertainment district at least when the 78 proposal was announced in January 2024. Perhaps much earlier than that as they knew the lease was ending in 2029 and we've all seen what most other teams around the league are doing around their ballparks. I don't know if that would have worked, but it seems too late now to start scrambling with suggestions for site redevelopment.

Trying to convince Amtrak to select an alternative site might have a better chance of success than threats of lawsuits since it's been clearly settled law that railroads can do these kind of things on their own property.

In the past, the neighborhoods (Bridgeport, Armour Square, Bronzeville) were always limited on what could be negotiated on the 35th and Shields site, because Reinsdorf had ultimate veto power. Jim Thomspon said so himself -- as he mentioned in his oral history, his plan was always to have mixed retail/housing on the old Sox Park site, but Reinsdorf had final say as the site's only tenant. And JR wanted parking revenues over development: https://johnowens711.substack.com/p/is-this-what-sox-park-was-supposed

33 minutes ago, Sleepy Harold said:

I hope I get an invite. I've been a Season Ticket Holder for years.

1 hour ago, WBWSF said:

I hope I get an invite. I've been a Season Ticket Holder for years.

As of this we didn't get an email invite, but I hope whoever is able to go expresses the importance of fixing the gate entry issues.

Edited 6 hours ago6 hr by Sleepy Harold

" it's been clearly settled law that railroads can do these kind of things on their own property."

Not sure whether Amtrak owns all of the subject land in fee simple, has easements or rights of way ... or if any of that even matters if the ISFA is not going to question any of it, for example,

"In response to questions from Block Club sent after the meeting, a spokesperson for Amtrak said there is a “railroad-owned easement” to a ramp in Lot G that would allow it to build on the Illinois Sports Facilities Authority property. "

The Ishbias and Amtrak appear to have lawyered up on this.

Regarding the proposed Railyard stadium site, is there a contract for the additional BNSF land to the West of it ? I have read that the Ishbia Brothers were negotiating to obtain it or alternatively for air rights so that Tollway style pedstrian bridges might be constructed over those tracks, as depicted on some of the AI Railyard renderings.

Interesting that Mat Ishbia now comes out in support of Reinsdorf and other Owners for a salary cap.

The Ishbias and Amtrak stand to benefit from over $600 million in federal grants to move the rail yard. Ishbias have duked in 125 Million which is contingent on the deal getting done and then that amount will be refunded to them. LOL. What a deal - free property that is essentially pre-leased with two big Isbia bros. middle fingers to the South side while taxpayers are left with an abandoned stadium and acres of vacant land next to a massive rail yard.

Oh yea, they will get this done but fvk them.

"Interesting that Mat Ishbia now comes out in support of Reinsdorf and other Owners for a salary cap."

All thirty ownership groups are united...except for maybe the Dodgers or Mets, who would be surrendering their extravagant spending/contract deferral advantages over the rest of baseball.

Not even clear Mark Walter will be able to hold onto the Dodgers at this point.

The Dodgers and Mets' Stance: The ownership groups for the Dodgers and the Mets have notably remained opposed to or hesitant about a salary cap. As the two highest-spending teams in the league (with payrolls and luxury tax bills eclipsing hundreds of millions of dollars), both franchises benefit from the current system of high spending and luxury taxes rather than a rigid cap that would restrict their ability to spend.

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by caulfield12

I thought that the combined wealth of the Ishbia nepo babies and their father was a big reason that some fans thought they might be big spenders.

OK but where has Mat Ishbia been.. in Michigan or AZ? It sounds like he is now asserting himself as co-owner

Edited 3 hours ago3 hr by tray

5 minutes ago, tray said:

I thought that the combined wealth of the Ishbia nepo babies and their father was a big reason that some fans thought they might be big spenders.

Yes, because the Ishbia group didn't spend big in the NBA with its salary cap.

Why do you insist on just making things up to get mad about?