Revisiting the Olympics selection process
Not because they read my blog entries:
-- "Big sporting events (World Cup/Olympics), economic development and trickle down economics," 2014
-- "(Not enough time for a) 2024 DC-Baltimore Olympic Bid (to make sense)," 2014
-- "Rio Olympics," 2016
-- "Washington-Baltimore Olympics Bid for 2024," 2012
-- "More thinking on "return on investment" from different types of sports facilities and DC, and an Olympics in DC," 2015
but it appears that the International Olympics Committee is moving more towards the recommendations I made for improving the process of selecting host cities and mounting the games by providing more time to cities to prepare after the games are awarded and before they are held, providing some (but in the great scheme not nearly enough) money to the host city in the interim, and sharing some of the risks, rather than putting most all the financial risk on the host city.
The current awards cycle was supposed to only award the 2024 Olympics.
But after many cities in many nations were forced to drop out of the competition because of citizen opposition in the face of large costs and likely overruns, there were only two contestants, Paris and Los Angeles, both with strong bids.
Rather than have a loser, the IOC made the decision to award the 2028 Summer Olympics as well. Paris and Los Angeles worked it out between them for the particulars, with Los Angeles choosing to go second, in 2028, giving them four more years to prepare.
I didn't know that the leader of the No Boston Olympics campaign has co-authored a book on the campaign and lessons learned.
Clearly the rise of citizen opposition, in fact Chris Dempsey, the guy (who had been a professional consultant for Bain & Company) who led the anti-Olympics campaign in Boston is now a consultant to citizen groups fighting these kinds of big projects ("Leader of No Boston Olympics tapped for transportation ," Boston Globe and "The inside story of No Boston Olympics," CommonWealth Magazine), forced the IOC to react and back down from its previously intransigence positions about the requirements it imposed on host cities.
From the Los Angeles Times article, "L.A. gains financial concessions in return for agreeing to host the 2028 Olympic Games":
After weeks of intense negotiations with the International Olympic Committee, Los Angeles officials have agreed to host the Summer Games in 2028 — instead of 2024 — in return for a deal they hope will generate hundreds of millions in additional savings and revenues.
It could also set a precedent as the IOC made concessions to L.A. that involved sponsorship sales, the retention of any potential surplus and upfront funding for youth sports programs throughout the city. ...
Talks focused on four major issues, beginning with corporate dollars.
The IOC has estimated it will contribute $1.7 billion of its broadcast and sponsorship revenues to Paris 2024 organizers. L.A. sought a different arrangement that could boost its share to $2 billion or more in 2028.
Under normal circumstances, host cities begin preparations seven years in advance but do not receive most of the IOC contributions until two years before the Games.
For 2028, the IOC has agreed to give L.A. a $180-million advance that would cover the organizing committee’s costs for an extra four years and pump as much as $160 million into youth sports throughout the city. ...
If the Games finish at or under budget, the $487-million contingency would convert to a surplus — similar to the one left by the 1984 Los Angeles Games — and L.A. officials have struck a deal to keep most of that money.
The United States Olympic Committee would still take 20% of any surplus, but with the IOC waiving its customary 20%, the city could realize $100 million or more.