A View From the Sears Tower's Ledge
Illinois Is Getting Fatter
Mayor Blames Violent Holiday Weekend On Booze, Heat
Kuma's Pats Itself On Back With Block Party
Chicagoan Involved In Mount Rushmore Ruckus
So, who still wants the Olympics here? Show of hands? Anyone? Bueller? Bueller? Even with these rose-colored glasses on, we see an Illinois that has maybe filtered out a little bit of the pay-to-play 'How You Doin'" governmental interference by 2016. So, in the event that the world decides we're still not completely [bleep]ed,* here's what Crain's Chicago is reporting will be the city's final bid, with the report due to the Olympic Committee in February. It goes before the City Council next week. Here are the numbers:
- A $1 Billion guarantee from the city and state in funding ($500 Million from the city, the remaining half-billion from “an unspecified insurance policy”)
- A $1.1 Billion Olympic Village on the old Michael Reese Hospital, built by a private developer and to be resold after the Games, with no named developers on board
- Total construction costs at $945 million, including a $360 million temporary Olympic stadium (down from $386 million, with the removal of skyboxes)
- A total budget of $4.7 billion for the Games, with…
- A generation of $22.5 billion of “new economic activity,” from 2011 through 2021, paying off nearly $4 for every dollar invested in the Games.
Awesome! What could go wrong? Now, we ae at Chicagoist have always been evenly split when it comes to pro/con on the Olympic bid - but all these financial tidbits make it really, really hard to get excited about it, especially in light of the state's recent [bleep]ery.*
Now, would it be nice if they were high-balling it in order to play with our expectations? And then deliver an Olympics that came in under-budget with a huge surplus for the city? [Bleep] yeah. Is this at all likely? Do we give them that much credit for forethought and frugality? And do we think these numbers will be anywhere close what the reality is going to be? [Bleep] no.* Go Rio!
*From now on, anyone in the state using the f-word owes G-Rod and Patti a nickel. He's kinda cornered the market on it. At this rate, we might actually have the Olympics paid off by the next transcript release.
add to digg
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
I still want them here. Yeah, I do. You think there won't be $945M worth of corrupt, delayed and overbudget construction projects in Chicago anyway between now and then? Might as well have it go to something interesting and beneficial. And yes, I'm aware I'm over-simplifying it.
the environment that the city will be building in will actually be very friendly for staying on budget. with the construction boom essentially over there are tons of contractors who are so desperate for jobs they'll take on these projects for cost. there are plenty of other factors to weight but unlike london, chicago won't be competing for materials and labor in a boom market.
Standard operating procedure for Daley, et al: Decide Chicago "needs" something, come up with project that doesn't seem all that expensive to taxpayers, not at first, then regularly add costs in and taxpayer guarantees.
Might as well have it go to something interesting and beneficial. And yes, I'm aware I'm over-simplifying it.
Well, at least you are aware, but you realize the time and money spent on what is sure to be a massive fuck-up (this is Chicago, after all, and other cities have fucked this up, too--look at the history of cost estimates for London 2012) likely will result in less money and attention for full-time city residents, right?
How people can support this idea given the recent dim history of other big projects in Chicago---Mil. Park, OHare runway, Block 37, CTA Brown Line overruns, etc--is beyond my puny brain. People want this from some misguided sense of city pride, apparently unaware that a city that works, and it cheap enough that one does not need a huge salary to live here, should spark enough pride. Think about that the next time you slip on the ice or have trouble stopping your car at intersections.
Go Rio!
It's a lot easier to stomach if you remove the "$," and replace the words "million" and "billion" with the word "hugs". I'm also still for it.
Scwherve: Great points, and opponents such as myself must consider them.
But supporters must consider how Daley operates on these big projects (see above) and whether the city or state can afford to put hundreds of millions of dollars into this thing.
And also, what will materials cost, say, 3-4 years from now, or 5 years from now? That is, how long do you think the global recession will last? How much of taxpayer money are you willing to gamble on this?
I realize this is all moot. Daley and the city's big-business subjects has decided what needs to be done, and we are all along for the ride whether we like it or not at this point, assuming we get this fucking thing, which we probably will.
It's not as if all this money is going to up and disappear, these funds will fuel construction employment and will help boost the fortunes of the neighborhoods surrounding the olympic sites. To say no now on a poorly surmised guess that the current economic crisis will last more than 7 years is absurd. The olympics would undoubtedly be good for Chicago and would force improvements in infrastructure that would benefit residents for decades to follow.
"New Economic Activity"
Aw, fiddlesticks. I'd like to see some final figures on the "new economic activity" generated in Atlanta and Salt Lake City. Not counting the Chinese Tortur-lympics, they just lie anyway.
This is giving BILLIONS to the friends of the Machine to built "temporary stadiums" and vast "olympic villages" where lower and middle income people will never be able to afford to live. Remember all that "mixed income" housing around cabrini green? Mixed means, you poor black people in your ruin on one side, the nice white family 3/4 million dollar condo on the other. See, mixed.
Matilda, it's 3 for 3. Go Rio!
matilda,
in the boom market its been impossible to gauge material costs 2 weeks out let alone 2 years. its one of the major forces which have caused cost overruns and revised estimates which make you're eyes bulge. with the drop in demand for materials these costs should stabilize significantly and allow for estimates much more inline with reality than the dart-wall methodologies which are currently used. Even if the market recovers in only 2 years, chicago can take advantage of the low market to lock in prices/contract etc. so while I think you're skepticism is valid and warranted there are converging forces which would suggest that the current estimates are much more accurate than other large projects you've cited.
Just a couple of days ago some of the same people here were commenting negatively on the fact that the city can't even clear the sidestreets of ice to avoid running over third graders on their way to school. Until they can get that basic necessity taken care of, drop this Olympic talk. Really.
Can we just privatize Lake Michigan? That would pay for the funding and construction of the venues, and taxes wouldn't go up.
i've been cheering on rio since this whole thing started. see these two personal posts (including a duran duran parody!!) for examples.
i just can't imagine why anyone can come with good reason for us to host now that all fans have been hit with shit.
i personally think hosting olympics are overated. I mean, is Atlanta the international city they hoped it would be post olympics?
I understand all the arguments against the Olympics, but if they result in a net gain of money and international attention for the city, then I think the investment is probably worth it. Besides, if we wait for all of our civil problems to be solved before we embark on any "big plans," we will wait forever.
There's enough motivation for Daley to get this done right - if he does, he'll have a new, sustainable tax base on the south side.
Besides, if we wait for all of our civil problems to be solved before we embark on any "big plans," we will wait forever.
There are "civil problems" and there are CIVIL PROBLEMS. We are virtually bankrupt, selling off assets left and right just to keep afloat. This city is turning into a day-by-day operation. We've got a disgruntled police deparment, record crime... Yeah, we have CIVIL PROBLEMS. If there are "big plans" to be developed here, I think fixing the budget and controlling the rampant gang crime would be big enough.
So, yeah, scrap the Olympic.
@mss2400:
Stealth nailed it, but on top of that you have a city government that is MIRED in a culture of corruption that would make Boss Tweed feel right at home. Handing that big ugly beast BILLIONS when they've also got a thumb in Washington DC? Bad news.
Daley and company see the city as succeeding perfectly fine. If you live in a white neighborhood with political clout. Outside of that, you're very much on your own kids.
The fiscal conservative side of me cringes at the thought of yet another Olympic Games on American soil, let alone in my backyard. Go Rio!
If I'm still living here in 8 years, I intend to shoot myself ... or else I'll get a tan and drive around the south side until CPD does it for me. As such, I'm all for Chicago 2016. It'd serve the city right.
Don't get me wrong. In a near-perfect scenario, I wouldn't mind seeing the Olympics here. But it's too big of a crapshoot. If we don't reap the financial windfall from the games that they keep telling us we will, given our current financial state (which shows no signs of abating anytime soon), we will be, in financial terms, SCREWED BLUE. And not too many previous host cities of the Games have a massive profit to show for it, so...
Glad to see so much new ground is being covered in this pro/con Olympics debate. Definitely different than the 1000 other debates on this website.