It just sounds magical, doesn’t it? The perfect Olympic games. Not a dime of public money expended, except on stuff we are planning to do anyway like upgrading the MBTA. No white elephant stadiums – every event will take place either in facilities we already have, or in ingeniously designed temporary structures that can quickly and cheaply be converted into something with long-term utility. All those billions of dollars to host the games? It’ll come from corporations eager to plaster the Olympic rings all over their brands. Cost overruns? Don’t you worry – the benevolent overlords of Boston 2024 will indemnify the city against any possible losses. No tax dollars will be put at risk.
Who could say no to that?
Maybe the International Olympic Committee (IOC), for starters. Economists who know a lot about the Olympics like Andrew Zimbalist say that this way of mounting an Olympics, modeled on the successful LA games in 1984, won’t fly today.
“You can’t do the LA model in 2024, you just can’t,” said Andrew Zimbalist, a Smith College professor who researches sports economics. “It’s pie in the sky.” … Zimbalist says Los Angeles was a unique case; the city was the only viable bidder for the 1984 Games, following three successive Olympics that were rocked by violence or burdened by debt.
Despite the IOC’s new lip service to reform, Zimbalist said, he predicts a low-budget Olympics would have no chance against pricier, government-backed bids.
“The IOC has always been about, ‘You’re going to honor us with glitz, you’re going to honor us with glorious facilities,’ ” Zimbalist said.
Rather than pick apart aspects of the slowly-emerging details of this proposal – about which I don’t know more than what’s in the paper and on which I’m not an expert anyway – let me just say this to Boston 2024: call the IOC’s bluff. They say they want reform? They say they don’t want only totalitarian regimes to be able to host the games? They say they’re no longer into ridiculously lavish perks and over-the-top government spending?
Then give them an offer that makes them prove it, and prove the skeptics like Zimbalist wrong. Remember, as I wrote a few weeks back, “the IOC is filled with awful people.” You cannot and should not trust them to live up to anything they are saying publicly. If you do, the people of Boston and of Massachusetts will inevitably be left holding the bag. Rather, you must hold firm against the IOC’s demands, which inevitably will push back against all the great stuff you’re saying now. If that means we don’t get to host the Olympics, so be it. We’ll be fine.
Most things that sound too good to be true actually aren’t, as we all know. Right now, that’s the category into which I’d put the publicly-disclosed details of the Boston 2024 proposal. So let’s see the fine print, and let’s be sure it lives up to the hype. And above all, for the love of God, let’s not make Boston into the latest round of fools who get suckered by the false promise of Olympic gold.
During the last winter Olympics, I remember hearing numerous times that BMW was the major force behind the US bobsled team. I can’t recall the name of the Olympians, only the advertisements for BMW.
That’s what it’s come to. That’s why I stopped watching. That’s why my “civic pride” is not impressed by the Olympics wanting to have Boston as its host.
it was impossible to get any sense of the competition. Between the ads, and the inane atmosphere pieces, only one competitor at a time was shown before breaking away. Toss in switching between events, and you end up with bits and pieces with nothing holding them together. Talk about the agony of defeat. I watched none of the last Summer Olympics because of this. It’s only because I love the Winter Olympics that I try to watch it, but it isn’t easy.
I like that Boston is introducing a sane plan for the Games, for the USOC and IOC to take or leave. I, too, expect them to leave it. The decision to award the games to Sochi was proof enough for me. But I like that Boston is putting them in that spot.
I know the easy thing (embraced by so many people around here) is to have a tantrum, declare that there is no way the evil homeless-kicking sheiks who run the IOC would ever endorse a smart-budget games, so the only noble thing to do is not challenge them.
However, given that the next Winter Olympics games will either go to China (again) or Kazakshtan (who?), the IOC is reaping what they’ve sown. The time may be right for a smart bid.
Not to channel Ronald Reagan, but reading this piece had me thinking one thing. As nice as the sentiments are about no public funds, how can we make sure, as in 100% certain, no chance whatsoever, that when the inevitable cost overruns happen, public funds are protected? Because words and even good intentions aren’t nearly enough, especially, as David correctly notes, the IOC is the real problem here, not this group of self-appointed Olympic cheerleaders.
I enjoy watching the Olympics on tv. I am impressed by the perseverance of the athletes — the vast majority of whom are, in fact, amateurs — who even make a team, nevermind win a medal. I love the big events in the City, from the marathon to the Head of the Charles to even a good championship parade.
But let’s make damn sure that if we’re going to spend $5 Billion and counting, it’s not coming out of programs, it’s not coming out of agencies and critical work that government accomplishes. Let’s get that Al Gore lockbox and put public funds inside it, so there’s no chance that we spend the next 30 years paying for Olympic cost overruns, much as we still have decades left on Big Dig overruns.
A high school track meet or something along those lines if you really want to watch the perseverance of the athletes. At least you will not be inundated with corporate logos and the like.
I first refer you to my own thread on this subject for more in depth analysis. Additionally I will add two observations to this specific bid
The Organizing Committee is full of Fools or Liars
1) They are Liars:
In Bob’s post on the committees, this is a bid by and for the 1%, that to paraphrase FDR will cost less and work better than any other bid in history. We should be very skeptical of that. The promises of fiscal accountability and responsibility are ultimately there as political cover to win over your hard earned tax dollars to fund what will ultimately be a party for the global financial elite.
2) Or Fools
The boosters are either lying, or are sincerely expecting that Boston, in spite of being substantially behind its past and present American competition, will be the exception to the modern IOC’s rules. In the former case, they are beggining the bid lying to the public, in the latter case, they are amateurs who will have no chance at winning. Either way, massive waste of money we don’t have.
3) Never forget: We are a 19th century city bidding on a 21st century game
Remember this is a state that still won’t open bars on Sunday, still won’t run the T all night, still lacks a direct public transit route to the airport (compare the silver line to the BART, DC Metro, or CTA Blue line and get back to me before patting yourself on the back), sensible regulations for private personal transit (taxis that take cards! reasonable regulations for uber and lyft!), and the infrastructure near the planned event sites is sorely lacking.
Oh, and no black professional I’ve encountered in Chicago, DC, or New York wants to relocate to Boston. A black couple my fiancee and I know are asking me to escort them around Boston neighborhoods when they are in town for New Years, and are asking which ones are safe for them to walk in. They are from the South and asking me this. I am not saying that perception is fair, I am just saying outside of our bubble this is what people still think the city looks like. And those are African Americans, I have no idea what international delegations would think.
Red Herring 1. Just because people have outdated (but real) perceptions of Boston doesn’t mean we should give in to those perceptions. I know white people who ask if it’s safe to walk around Jamaica Plain.
Red Herring 2. Please tell me where you can’t find an open bar on a Sunday. It’s surely not in this state. You can trust me on that, from personal knowledge.
As for the real issues, your point is exactly right. If they are fools or liars, either way, if we are able to create an absolute rock solid protection of public funds, like Denver did in 1976, then let the IOC decide if we’re in or out. That’s the deal-breaker for me. There has to be legislation passed that protects the public, and the pro-Olympic committee has to support it, for me to buy in.
In theory, I agree with you, Sabutai , Christopher, and others taking the “wait and see approach”. A public bid that is honest, built with iron clad protections-that basically tells the IOC to eff itself would be a fine statement of what Boston stands for. We want a progressive , sustainable Olympics that directly benefits our communities that is fully paid for by the private sector. If the IOC accepts we are path breakers, if they reject we can go to sleep knowing we were right.
The thing is-that kid of bid has no chance in hell of getting passed. Spending all our or energy, all of Walsh’s political capital, all of our focus on getting an event we have no chance of getting would be a massive waste of time and money. Which is exactly why this bid, with the decks stacked with corporate elite board members and powerful city institutions, is not going to end as a principled bid. When those powerful folks eventually confront the hard reality that we either do the bid the IOCs way or don’t so it at all, which way will they go? Which way did casinos or the big dig go?
Lets spend our capital on the people of Boston-the ones who will live, go to school, use our roads and hospitals, and try to scrape by with an honest living long after the closing ceremonies of a two week game.
…but what if we learn in February that Boston is the USOC selection. Are you saying that we shouldn’t be organizing to make sure that if for whatever reason we get the Olympics, that it’s the Olympics we can live with, and not the one that will destroy our state?
My point is you are very likely right, we got a snowball’s chance in hell. But what if you’re wrong?
What if the IOC has come to recognize that nobody but an autocratic regime could ever put on an Olympics again under their rules? That realization is going to happen at some point. On the off chance that 2024 is the test case, I sure as hell don’t want to be left with a $10B olympics (half the recent average) with taxpayers on the hook for $5B of it.
Someone has to protect state revenues. And once protected, many of those who lean heavily against it now (which includes myself) might be more willing to give it a second look.
This would actually be so easy, though. If the Boston Committee themselves actually proposed, lobbied for, and used their connections to pass legislation protecting taxpayer revenues for this and any future Olympic bid, it would be awfully hard to find much opposition left.
The goal of the committee is to get the games. Period. It is not to protect Massachusetts taxpayers on the off chance any Olympics happens to come here. Olympics aren’t events you create a rainy day fund in case they show up, they are events you hire an army of corporate lobbyists to win, events that will reshape the look and even the laws of your city* for decades to come, and events the IOC has no responsibility for once it leaves town and there are no future tenants to fill those empty stadia.
Many of the ideas you see today will have to change in order for our bid to be viable. Once we are the USOC selection I am certain any protections or promises will go out the window. As they did when Daley had to reneg on promised benefits to the South Side. As they did in London when their temporary stadium had to be made permanent. As they did in Athens when a subway the public didn’t want and obviously the state couldn’t afford had to be built to meet these specifications.
And when this group of corporate elites has to choose between giving up on the bid they have now devoted years and capital to, or, fleecing the Commonwealth, what choice do you think these unelected officials will make? You don’t think DeLeo or his lieutenant or the city council will give Walsh and the boosters every penny they want?
That what if will never come, like FIFA, the IOC will persist in not giving two fucks about democracy.
*This was a FIFA example, but the main reason they did change the law permanently was because the IOC was coming into town
…other than my opinion, which I think is shared by others, that this model is unsustainable. You know more than me, since you obviously have inside knowledge. My outside view is that the IOC has no choice but to change. When very few countries even want an Olympics anymore, something has gone wrong. Something is going to have to give, or the Olympics will die. And with the amount of tv money at stake, they can’t let it die. It might not be 2024 that the change happens. But it has to happen at some point.
As for your point about Boston’s corporate interests, I have no disagreement. My only point is if they are going to say no public money, codify that statement. Because nobody is going to believe just words. You can throw out trust. All that matters is the proof. Without it, opposition will very likely grow. If that ends up being the dealbreaker with the IOC, aw-f’ing-well.
We are on the same page there, what I have been trying to argue is that it’s highly unlikely they can do that. I don’t see us spending time, money, and political capital pursuing the games only to back out if the IOC doesn’t give Boston what it wants. It’s far more likely we are pressured by that point to give them what they want in order to win, and compete with richer cities and more autocratic systems.
The IOC will care when Coke, McDonalds, and NBC choose to stand up for human rights. Seeing his bravely they did that in Sochi and Beijing, I am less optimistic than you that they are desperate enough to find a democratic host to change how they operate.
…that all or even most of the cities that have heretofore hosted the Olympics are now the proud owners of fancy stadia and other venues that have sat unused ever since? That certainly is what I am inferring from this diary.
They were able to convert the Olympic Village into a prison after thr games.
That was really another time and place. It would be great to replicate that kind of Olympics, but I don’t know if it’s possible any more. The Winter Olympics, because of their venue needs, are usually in off the beaten path locales, unlike the Summer Games which thrive in a more heavily developed, populated places.
There’s been a lot of discussion of this topic, here and elsewhere. Google is your friend.
London was going to be a “cheap” Olympics too, until its budget spiraled out of control and was multiplied by three.
The security costs of London’s Olympics alone were about half of what Fish is “projecting.”
Fish and Co know that they can make up any magical number they want — and the IOC does, too — because if Boston gets the games, all of these elites of the elite know and understand that Massachusetts will be forced to spend whatever it takes to put on the games, regardless of whatever phony projections were suggested to sell it to the public.
This is not an uncommon strategy. The same thing was done for the Big Dig and many big public or taxpayer funded projects around the world.
But at least the Big Dig delivered something tangible for the public good that would be enduring, so it would be worth it in the end.
An Olympics would leave Boston and Massachusetts with nothing — except the bill, and one we can’t afford after costs spiral and corporate funding fails to come in.
This is a con and a sham. No one should be fooled by Fish.
in private capital as lobbying funds should Boston be a finalist for 2024…That sure as shit buys a LOT of scholarships even at today’s inflated prices. The values are wrong, the decisions therefore are wrong so the outcomes are wrong, the sequence is simple stark & profound.
Elias
http://www.chimesatmidnight.blogspot.com
should tell you that it’s small potatoes compared to the kind of money they stand to make, if successful. Fish and his construction business would be at the head of the line for the billions in construction projects. Do they plan on eating any cost overruns as they move ahead? I won’t hold my breath.
My favorite part of the Olympic Committee’s proposal is the heavy reliance on local higher educational institutions as facility partners. Yes, the same institutions that have been stiffing Boston as far as paying for their share of city services. Story here
Is there anybody backing this Olympic bid that isn’t set to make out like a bandit if selecte?