IOC report: Chicago's bid is "ambitious"

Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Olympics still leaves some doubts over how the Games will be managed and financed, according to a report released today.

The International Olympic Committee issued a detailed evaluation report on each of the city candidates vying for the 2016 Olympics, which are Madrid, Spain, Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, Tokyo, Japan and Chicago.

Rio de Janeiro has been called the "emotional favorite" to win the bid, because an Olympic Games has never been held in South America, and the report emphasizes the cohesion between the city’s government, the national government, and the bid committee.

The report says that Chicago’s bid aspires to create a “spectacular experience” that would showcase the city’s acres public gardens, parks and lakeshore. However, it also cautions that the proposed relationship between City Hall and the Organizational Committee of the Olympic Games leaves “some doubt as to the ultimate responsibility for delivery of the Games.” Of particular concern to the report is how the city’s organizing committees, local government, and federal government will share responsibilities for implementing proposed environmental and mass-transit initiatives.

The report also details the projected costs for holding the games, including the budget for venue operations ($1.06 billion), Games employees ($509 million) and transportation ($226 million). The evaluation also tucks a wary prognosis on Chicago’s financing plans into its additional comments section: “the budget is ambitious but achievable.” The city-commissioned report on the Olympic bid by the Civic Federation, released last week, has deemed the Olympics budget “adequate.”

Another concern of the report is that Chicago had not agreed to fully guarantee the Olympic Games for the IOC in April when the report was commissioned. The full financial guarantee, a staple of all past host city agreements with the IOC, has been the source of much tension between City Hall and the community in recent months because of fears that such a guarantee will burden taxpayers.

On a more positive note, the evaluation offers some praise for the temporary venue construction projects, such as the Olympic Stadium and Aquatic Center, which would be deconstructed after the Games into smaller, public venues to be used by the Washington Park community. This concept, according to the report, supports previous recommendations to the IOC that the Olympics host city should “build a new venue only if there is a legacy need.” In Chicago’s case, the bid committee determined that the city did not need an 80,000-seat stadium or an Aquatic Center with four Olympic-sized pools, but would benefit from the venues if the stadium could be shrunken after games, and the pools moved separately to other parts of the city.

These plans, the report concludes, would to some extent reduce the environmental impact of hosting the Games.

The report also cites the White House’s new “Olympic Office” and the “Memorandum of Understanding,” an agreement between the bid committee and community members, as positive examples of public support for the bid. However, it also said that a public opinion poll commissioned by the IOC shows Chicago has the second-lowest popular support for its bid among the four candidate cities, with local support at 67% and national support at 61%.

Click here to view the complete report.