The Illinois General Assembly has until midnight on Sunday, May 31, 2026, to pass the megaprojects economic development bill that the Chicago Bears have called a prerequisite for building a new domed stadium in Arlington Heights. The Illinois House approved the measure on April 22 by a 78-32 vote. The Senate has yet to act. Five days remain.

What happens after Sunday matters more than what is happening this week. The Bears, Mayor Brandon Johnson, Gov. JB Pritzker, the village of Arlington Heights, and Indiana lawmakers in Hammond all stand at different points of leverage depending on which of three outcomes lands. The political maneuvering being covered hour-by-hour in Springfield is the surface. The structural consequences of the deadline are the story.

What the Bill Actually Does

The megaprojects bill would allow large developments meeting certain investment thresholds to negotiate payments in lieu of property taxes with surrounding taxing bodies for up to 40 years. The designation is not Bears-specific. It applies to any development meeting the financial criteria on a tiered basis. The 377-page measure approved by the House is about 10 times the length of a version a House committee passed in February.

The Bears have indicated the framework “aligns with the things they have said they want to see from an Illinois bill,” in the words of bill sponsor Rep. Kam Buckner. The team also stated additional amendments are necessary to make the Arlington Heights site feasible. The Senate is expected to make changes, which means the bill that arrives on Pritzker’s desk, if it arrives, will not be identical to what passed the House.

Indiana has approved a public funding package offering more than $1 billion in direct stadium construction subsidies for a site in Hammond, just across the state line. Illinois’s bill does not fund construction. It allows a property tax negotiation. The two states are not offering the same product.

Outcome One: The Bill Passes Before Midnight Sunday

The most likely outcome, according to Statehouse sources, is that some version of the megaprojects bill clears both chambers before the May 31 adjournment. Sen. Bill Cunningham, D-Chicago, who is handling Senate negotiations, has acknowledged “substantial opposition” but said the obstacles are being worked through.

If the bill passes:

The Bears gain the legal framework to begin formal negotiations on a property tax structure with Arlington Heights and surrounding taxing bodies. The 326-acre Arlington Park site the team purchased for $197 million in 2021 becomes a viable development location. Stadium construction would still face approval, financing, and design timelines that could stretch years, but the legislative ceiling on the project would be lifted.

Mayor Brandon Johnson loses his strongest leverage point. His public position has been that the Bears “belong in the city of Chicago,” and his 2024 lakefront stadium plan with the team would have required $2.4 billion in public support that Pritzker rejected. If the megaprojects bill passes, Chicago becomes a secondary player in the Bears’ future unless the team’s Arlington Heights development encounters delays.

Gov. Pritzker gets credit for the deal without committing direct state dollars to stadium construction. His public position has been that no public money should fund a privately owned stadium. The megaprojects bill structure lets him hold that line while delivering an economic development framework his administration can claim.

Arlington Heights gains a stadium anchor for a 326-acre redevelopment that includes hotels, housing, and entertainment options the Bears have outlined. The village’s property tax base would be reshaped under the negotiated payment structure for decades.

Indiana loses the Bears as a realistic target. Hammond’s pitch was built on Illinois’s inability to act. Once Illinois acts, the cross-border threat dissolves.

Outcome Two: The Bill Dies on May 31

The second possibility is that the Senate fails to agree on amendments before adjournment, the bill stalls, and the General Assembly leaves Springfield without passing the legislation. The political cost of letting the Bears walk to Indiana is high enough that most observers consider this outcome unlikely, but the obstacles Sen. Cunningham described are real.

If the bill dies:

The Bears face a decision point with no clear winning path. The team has publicly stated Arlington Heights is the only Cook County location where a fixed-roof stadium is feasible. Without the megaprojects framework, the property tax structure at the site becomes uncertain. The team would then choose among three options: pressure the General Assembly to return in a special session, accept Indiana’s $1 billion subsidy offer in Hammond, or reopen conversations with Chicago for a lakefront stadium that requires public funding Pritzker has refused.

Mayor Brandon Johnson gains leverage by default. If Arlington Heights becomes unworkable and Indiana becomes politically toxic for the team’s brand, the lakefront option returns to the table. Johnson has said the door remains open and that his proposal remains the only plan centered on public ownership. His political position strengthens, though the financial obstacles to his 2024 plan have not changed.

Gov. Pritzker absorbs significant political blame. The Bears leaving Illinois on his watch would be a major economic and symbolic loss for a governor who has staked his administration on Illinois’s competitiveness for major projects. Pritzker has publicly pressured lawmakers to move faster, suggesting he is aware of the political exposure.

Indiana becomes the most likely destination. The Hammond site, with a $1 billion subsidy already approved, becomes the path of least resistance for the Bears. The team has spent two years signaling it will leave Illinois if the state cannot deliver, and a failed May 31 deadline would be the clearest signal yet that the state cannot.

Illinois taxpayers avoid a tax structure that the Cook County treasurer has called “murky” in its benefits, but they also lose the economic activity from a $3 billion-plus stadium development and a 326-acre redevelopment project.

Outcome Three: The Bill Passes in Modified Form That the Bears Reject

The third possibility is that the Senate passes a version of the megaprojects bill that the House approves on a concurrence vote, but the final language does not include the specific amendments the Bears have said are necessary to make Arlington Heights feasible. The bill becomes law. The team continues to say it cannot build under the framework.

If this happens:

The Bears face the same options as a bill failure, but with the political optics shifted. The team would be in the position of rejecting legislation Illinois passed specifically to keep them. That posture is harder to defend publicly, but the team has shown willingness to leverage public pressure throughout the negotiation.

Mayor Brandon Johnson is in roughly the same position as Outcome Two, with the added argument that the state delivered and the Bears refused to commit.

Gov. Pritzker can claim he passed economic development legislation that benefits Illinois beyond the Bears, even if the team ultimately leaves. The megaprojects structure applies to other developments meeting the investment threshold, so the bill is not solely a Bears bill.

Indiana still benefits, but the political pressure on the Bears to accept Illinois’s deal would be much higher than under Outcome Two.

What to Watch Between Now and Sunday

Several signals will indicate which outcome is materializing.

The first is whether the Senate amendments address the Bears’ stated concerns about Arlington Heights feasibility. The team has not publicly detailed those concerns in full, but the gap between the House bill and what the Bears say they need is the most concrete barrier to a clean passage.

The second is whether Chicago-based legislators continue to oppose the bill at the same intensity. Opposition from Chicago lawmakers intensified after news of a meeting between the Bears and the city last month. If that bloc holds, the Senate’s vote count becomes much tighter.

The third is whether Pritzker leans harder on legislative leaders in the final days. The governor’s public pressure to “move faster” has been visible. A private push behind the scenes in the final 72 hours will matter more.

The fourth is whether the Bears send any signal about how they would respond to a delay. The team’s statement after the House vote welcomed progress but called for changes. A more aggressive posture from the team in the final week would suggest negotiations are deteriorating.

After Sunday

Whatever happens by midnight on May 31, the Bears stadium question does not resolve next week. A passed bill triggers years of construction, financing, and design negotiations. A failed bill triggers either a special legislative session or a serious move toward Indiana, both of which would dominate the summer.

The May 31 deadline is the political pressure point. The structural question of where the Chicago Bears will play their home games a decade from now is a much longer story. What the General Assembly does this week determines which version of that longer story Illinois lives through.

For Chicago, the question is whether the city retains a 105-year-old franchise that has played at Soldier Field since 1971. For Arlington Heights, the question is whether a 326-acre redevelopment moves forward. For Hammond, the question is whether two years of patient positioning finally pays off. For Illinois taxpayers, the question is whether the megaprojects framework delivers economic returns commensurate with the property tax structure it creates.

All four answers depend on five days in Springfield.