Boston Mayor Martin Walsh is bringing on former Goldman Sachs analyst Sara Myerson as the city’s "financial 'fact-checker' of Boston 2024’s books and to make sure taxpayer money isn’t used in the group’s plan to host" the '24 Games, according to Matt Stout of the BOSTON HERALD. Walsh said Myerson will begin April 27 as the Exec Dir of the newly created Office of Olympic Planning in City Hall, where her “main job is to make sure we’re not using taxpayer dollars to build venues." Walsh: "We had a lot of discussions about (finding someone) not connected politically, not connected to 2024, not really connected to what’s going on. What we were really looking for is financial credentials, someone who knows about putting deals together." Walsh said that Myerson will "report directly to him, with the possibility of adding staff under her 'as the Olympic bid grows.'” Stout notes Walsh also "left open the door to hiring an outside consultant to help review" Boston's final bid (BOSTON HERALD, 4/17). USA TODAY's Rachel Axon notes with several groups opposing Boston's effort, organizers "face a difficult task of persuading Bostonians to support it while building a case" with the IOC. Cities "must formally declare as applicants by Sept. 15." Boston "faces competition from Rome and Hamburg ... as well as a likely bid from Paris." Budapest, Istanbul, Qatar and Baku, Azerbaijan, also will have "potential bids." If Boston's bid makes it to the November '16 public vote, Boston 2024 CEO Richard Davey has said that it will "not proceed further if the referendum does not yield majority support in the city and the state." Though the IOC "has approved recommendations designed to reduce costs of bidding for and hosting the event, public votes or pressure have forced four cities to drop out of the running" for the '22 Games, leaving just Beijing and Almaty, Kazakhstan, as finalists (USA TODAY, 4/17).
PLAYING MARTY BALL: In Boston, Adrian Walker writes before the city "can be sold to the world as an Olympic host, the Olympics have to be sold to Boston." There is "only one person who can do that" -- Walsh. It has been "agonizing watching him try to decide how to approach this bid." Initially, he "was lukewarm," but then "gave a speech early last month calling it the opportunity of a lifetime." Walsh would "like to see the bid succeed, but he doesn’t want to own it if it fails." What he "doesn’t get is (a) he already owns it and (b) it’s already failing" (BOSTON GLOBE, 4/17). GRANTLAND's Charles Pierce writes under the header "The Boston Olympic Debacle" and notes as soon as Boston was named the U.S. bid city in January, there was a "palpable distrust for the rosy scenarios painted by the project's booster, and a richly deserved reluctance to hand the city over to the IOC." It is possible the upcoming ballot initiative that could "derail the Boston Olympics will be straight, aboveboard, conducted completely according to Hoyle." Pierce: "It might be an election that makes Aristotle proud. But I will be terribly disappointed if my home state doesn't rise to the occasion and make a hash out of the whole business" (GRANTLAND.com, 4/17).
FINDING AN ALTERNATIVE? USA TODAY's Christine Brennan writes if the U.S. "wants to have even a sliver of a chance" to host its first Summer Games since '96, the USOC "must dump Boston ... and immediately turn" to L.A. The "problem for Boston, and the USOC, is that polling consistently shows that more Bostonians are against the Olympics than for them." The IOC "will be winnowing the field of international candidate cities to a short list of no more than five finalists" in spring of '16, and Boston normally "would have no trouble making that list." But with the public vote "looming six months later, how can the IOC feel comfortable moving ahead with Boston?" If the USOC "can't convince Boston's bid leaders to withdraw gracefully, it should do the job for them." After "telling Boston 'yes,' it must go back and tell Boston 'no'" (USA TODAY, 4/17).
LOOKING THE OTHER WAY? In a special to the BOSTON GLOBE, sports economist Andrew Zimbalist writes the '24 bid group "seems to have a new mantra: American exceptionalism." Other countries "lose money on the Olympics ... but when a US city hosts, it runs a surplus." Zimbalist: "Somehow American ingenuity and efficiency lead to a different budgetary outcome, and Boston 2024 will emulate its compatriots." However, there are "many problems with this picture." It "ignores the experience of Lake Placid in 1980," which suffered the "largest cost overrun in the history of the Winter Olympics prior to Sochi." Also when the local organizing committees "report their final budgets, they include only the operating costs of the 17 days of the Games and exclude venue construction and infrastructure expenses" (BOSTON GLOBE, 4/17).
