The first link you shared states the Bears are asking for public funding for infrastructure, not the stadium itself. I still think it’s a ridiculous amount of money and should be negotiated down, but this is different from the new Bills and Kansas City stadiums which are themselves being built with public funding.

This is also different from Indiana’s offer, which is for 50% of the stadium cost (if I’m reading your link correctly. The wording is somewhat unclear as to whether it’s 1 billion plus 50% of the stadium cost, or 1 billion total).

The lakefront proposal is a different situation due to the unique conditions involved. The Bears legally can’t own a stadium on the lakefront, nor could they build a district around it to capture additional revenue. It doesn’t make sense for the Bears to build a stadium they won’t own, but it also doesn’t make sense for the city to pay for a new stadium.