Chicago faces uphill climb for Olympics
By Kathy Bergen, Tribune staff reporter. Tribune staff writer Philip Hersh contributed to this report
Published September 28, 2006
As Chicago, Los Angeles and San Francisco pull the veils from their proposals to host the 2016 Summer Games, one thing is becoming crystal clear: Of the three, Chicago is facing the highest hurdles at this time.
Chicago is new to the bid process, while its competitors are veterans with established organizations and existing road maps. Chicago's stadium plan is the most ambitious and expensive, which will require more intensive private fundraising.
Still, San Francisco's previous run "had serious organizational questions that may or may not have been resolved," said John MacAloon, an Olympics scholar at the University of Chicago. The key issue was "how committed are all the public authorities?"
San Francisco is the only finalist that hasn't disclosed its full venue plan, saying it's still talking with affected communities.
Los Angeles, meanwhile, has most of its venues in place, but emphasizes that at least 70 percent of the sports will be in different facilities than in 1984.
"The Games will be held in beautiful new venues that are already in existence," said Barry Sanders, chairman of the Southern California Committee for the Olympic Games. The Coliseum, as it did in 1932 and 1984, would serve as the main stadium once a track is re-installed.
Costs for permanent and temporary construction for the Games should be less than $150 million, including $20 million to put the track in the stadium.
In contrast, Chicago's proposal involves nearly $2 billion in privately financed construction, including $300 million for the stadium, and $1 billion for an Olympic Village south of McCormick Place.
But Los Angeles' having hosted two previous Games could work against it.
Some International Olympic Committee members still resent that the 1984 surplus wasn't shared with the international movement, said MacAloon, of the U of C.
Sanders rejects this observation, saying the surplus has been used to foster youth sports. In any case, for 2016, "we are doing things differently, trying to employ all the best lessons 32 years later," he said.
While Chicago faces an uphill battle, it remains squarely in the game, say a number of observers.
Chicago's bid is the most compact of the three. "And Chicago has a great airport; the mass transit is superior, the hotel accommodations are ample," said Frazier.
And another strength, say observers, is political will.
"The mayor brings tremendous strength and credibility ... which is very important to the USOC and the IOC," said Jay Kriegel, who was executive director of New York City's bid for the 2012 Games, which ultimately went to London.
-
San Francisco
Weaknesses:
- Political cohesion of region in question
- Stadium plan still in flux
Strengths:
- Romantic image overseas
And, while informal polling by the U.S. Olympic Committee showed strong international interest in Chicago earlier this year, some observers believe Chicago's image overseas is dated, linked more to stockyards, steel and Al Capone than to its stunning skyline, blossoming Millennium Park and first-rate cultural and culinary offerings.
"I travel the world a lot ... and it astounds me how many people still view Chicago as Al Capone city, and Michael Jordan," said Marc Ganis, an expert in sports facility development.
Most early bets are being placed on San Francisco, which was the first runner-up in the domestic competition for 2012 behind New York. And some others are betting on two-time Olympics host Los Angeles, which has most of its venues in place.
"My gut feeling is that San Francisco might have an edge this time around," said Robert Livingstone, the producer of GamesBids.com, in Toronto. "It's got experience from 2012, it's got a lot of attractive international elements, and [Los Angeles] has already had the Olympics twice."
Still, it remains a horse race, and nobody is counting Chicago out just yet.
"Chicago has acquitted itself extremely well so far, but there is a tremendous amount to do," said Ganis, president of Sportscorp Ltd.
The Chicago 2016 Committee "has got to work on romance," said A.D. Frazier, who was the chief operating officer of the 1996 Atlanta Games. "They have got to overcome the steak-and-potatoes reputation."
Chicago voiced confidence in its approach.
"Our focus really has been on the athlete's experience ... and making a significant investment in the Games and the athletes," said Doug Arnot, director of venue development and operations for the Chicago 2016 Committee. The city's plan is compact, with many venues along the lakefront and near downtown, including an Olympic Village south of McCormick Place and a temporary main stadium in Washington Park, near the University of Chicago.
All three cities submitted revised proposals to the U.S. Olympic Committee last Friday, and the organization will issue evaluations of those proposals in late October. The field may be narrowed afterwards.
By year's end, the USOC will decide whether to float a U.S. bid city, and if it goes forward, pick the city by early April.
Chicago is not alone in facing hurdles.
Los Angeles will have to fight a "same-old, same-old" stigma and perhaps some lingering hard feelings that it didn't share the $225 million surplus from the 1984 Games with the international Olympics movement. And San Francisco will have to prove it can rally all necessary public authorities, a shortcoming in its bid to host the 2012 Games, some observers say.
But those two cities do have some advantages.
San Francisco found a way to bring the centerpiece stadium for opening and closing ceremonies, track and field, and soccer finals into the city, along the San Francisco Bay. The proposal involves temporary modifications to a planned new stadium for the 49ers football team.
And while no price tag has been disclosed for the Olympics adaptations, it is likely to be in the neighborhood of $35 million, a fraction of the $300 million Chicago estimates it would cost to build a temporary stadium in Washington Park on the South Side and later convert it into a 10,000-seat below-ground arena.
San Francisco's previous bid, for the 2012 Summer Games, was criticized for spread-out venues.
"The farthest bus ride for any athletes is 54 minutes, which means every single athlete will be able to stay in that one village," said Mark Dolley, a spokesman for the San Francisco 2016 Bid Committee.