RAHM EMANUEL IS NOT GOING TO BE THE MAYOR WHO “LOST THE CUBS.”

7/11/14

As a result of yesterday’s decision by the Emanuel rubber stamp Chicago Commission on Landmarks, the Ricketts family and the Chicago Cubs they control will get all they want…and more.  Now it’s seven signs in the outfield, more seats, more suites, new bullpens, new light towers, etc.   Assuming that the revised proposal that was approved was not a mere bargaining chip to get the original smaller scale plan the Cubs first proposed, and it probably wasn’t, Wrigley Field will finally enter the 21^st Century while probably retaining much of its charm, the Cubs will stay in Chicago, and the rooftop club owners and those in the Lakeview neighborhood who don’t like the new plan will just have to deal with it.

None of this should come as a surprise, certainly not to my readers; see, inter alia, THE CUBS,WRIGLEY FIELD, RAHM EMANUEL, AND CHICAGO POLITICS:  PLAY BALL!, Rant Lifestyle, 5/30/14.   Just look at the plusses for Rahm Emanuel in the new plan:   the Cubs stay here, Wrigley Field becomes an even more attractive “entertainment venue” (Note that “entertainment venues” form the core of every “economic development” plan that seems to come down the pike in our town; see THOSE HORRIBLE SOUTH WORKS AND RAHM EMANUEL’S CORE CONSTITUENCY of a few days ago.), the taxpayers are more or less protected, and the Ricketts, who know how to express their gratitude financially, become an annuity for the Mayor’s boundless political ambitions.  Then consider the downside:   a few yuppies around in the Lakeview neighborhood get upset.  Ouch.   They, and those like them, form the core of the Mayor’s base. Where are they going to go on election day? 

Rahm Emanuel was not going to be the mayor who lost the Cubs; if anything had the potential to even partially sour his dazzling urbanite suburban import base on him, it would have been losing the Cubs, the darling of that oh so chic set.   Don’t get yours truly wrong; the Cubs have some true baseball fans among their loyalists; many of them read my musings.  But, for the most part, the Cubs exist to provide a bizarre twist on urban street cred for kids from the North Shore who have decided that they are now hardened, die-hard Chicago residents.   So not only are the Cubs good for Chicago’s economy (though probably not as good as the “consultants” they and those in their corner hire would have you believe), they are an important part of the fragile self-image of the core of Mr. Emanuel’s constituency.  Though Mr. Emanuel’s chances of losing in 2015 are about as remote of those of the Cubs winning the World Series any time in the foreseeable future (See TONI PRECKWINKLE ANDTHE RAHM EMANUEL JUGGERNAUT, Rant Lifestyle, 3/20/14), why would he take the chance of losing the Cubs to, say, Rosemont?  And why would the Ricketts kids take the chance of abandoning Wrigley and having to fall back on the Cubs as the main attraction of the multi-million dollar toy their father’s wealth has acquired for them?

See my two books, The Chairman, A Novel of Big City Politics and The Chairman’s Challenge, A Continuing Novel of Big City Politics, for further illumination on how things work in Chicago and Illinois politics.