The 2024 Olympics: Are Two U.S. Cities Better Than One?

OLYMPIC GAMES-After Boston bowed out of the running for the 2024 Summer Olympics earlier this week — with Mayor Marty Walsh saying he didn’t want to put taxpayers at risk in pursuit of the Games — speculation over potential U.S. host cities quickly centered on the West Coast. And the buzz was all about a joint Los Angeles-San Francisco bid. 

The San Francisco Chronicle reports that San Francisco Giants CEO Larry Baer received a call about a joint proposal on Tuesday from LA sports executive Casey Wasserman. “I’m not saying we are going to do it, but we are certainly open to discussing it,” Baer said, according to the Chronicle.

NBC reports Baer and Wasserman helped lead their respective’ cities finalist bids last year to be the 2024 U.S. Olympic bid city. Boston beat Los Angeles, San Francisco and Washington, D.C., to be the U.S. bid in a Jan. 8 announcement.

In an LA Times op-ed today,Neil deMause, co-author of Field of Schemes, writes about why Los Angeles might be better off without the Games:

A recent Oxford University study of 17 Olympics from 1960 through 2012 found that every single one had busted its budget, on average nearly tripling initial estimated costs. That’s a big reason why, despite the flood of ticket money and corporate sponsorships washing around the games, cities are often left with seas of red ink.

The cross-California partnership’s far from a done deal, but we’ll soon know for sure. A new U.S. host candidate would need to be submitted by a deadline of September 15.

(Jenn Stanley is a freelance journalist, essayist and independent producer living in Chicago. This piece was originally posted at NextCity.org.)  

 

-cw

 

 

CityWatch

Vol 13 Issue 63

Pub: Aug 4, 2015

{module [1177]}