The plan to host the 2024 Summer Olympics in Los Angeles depends on extensive cooperation and at least $1.7 billion from third parties who, while willing, caution that little has been decided.
Wasserman Media Group Chair and CEO Casey Wasserman published the private Los Angeles bid committee’s bid book Aug. 25, giving the first detailed look at the city’s plans since the document was submitted to the U.S. Olympic Committee in late 2014.
 |
A rendering of a “re-imagined” Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum (above) illustrates the differences compared to today’s facility (below). Renovations would cost $800 million.
Photo by: LA 2024
|
Those documents are getting a close look in Los Angeles as a Sept. 15 deadline looms for the U.S. to declare its intentions to the International Olympic Committee, a short time frame created when the USOC abandoned Boston’s efforts in July. Los Angeles City Council could vote to approve a working contract between the city and the USOC this week.
Jeffrey Millman, spokesman for the Los Angeles bid and close adviser to L.A. Mayor Eric Garcetti, said the plan is preliminary and subject to extensive revisions before the final vote by the International Olympic Committee in September 2017.
 |
Photo by: GETTY IMAGES
|
However, one reason the Boston plan struggled to win over popular support, critics said, was the long list of unanswered questions about land use and funding. Los Angeles has almost all of its athletic venues in place and an enthusiastic government, but it still has some key challenges. Among them are:
■ THE OLYMPIC VILLAGE: LA 2024 wants to find a private developer to help build a home for 16,500 athletes on a 125-acre plot adjacent to the Los Angeles River, which would later be sold or rented on the open market as part of a vision to redevelop the industrial land.
The committee projects the cost at $1 billion, with the developer contributing $925 million and enjoying the long-term development upside.
Public-private partnerships have been at the heart of some prior Olympics’ biggest cost overruns. The private partners in both London 2012 and Vancouver 2010 encountered severe difficulties that led to public sector cost escalations, and disputes over tax abatements that often come into play can be bogged down in local politics.
Before any details of a partnership are decided, though, the city must control the land, and that appears to pose a key challenge. Its current owner is Union Pacific Railroad, which, executive chairman John Koraleski wrote in a letter to the bid committee last fall, “has no plans to relocate or close this facility and is in fact planning a major modernization.” But, he added: “It is possible that a sale or exchange agreement could be reached, but only if on terms acceptable to Union Pacific management in its sole discretion.”
Union Pacific declined to elaborate on the letter.
Olympic organizers say they are evaluating options for Union Pacific to relocate its operations elsewhere in the city and have recently talked with the railroad. The upside for the bid: The railroad’s parent corporation’s largest shareholder is Philip Anschutz, founder and owner of AEG, which has signed on as an enthusiastic venue partner to the Los Angeles bid.
■ RENOVATIONS TO L.A. MEMORIAL COLISEUM: The centerpiece of the Los Angeles 2024 Games would be a state-of-the-art, fully “re-imagined” Los Angeles Memorial Coliseum with a new roof over seating areas, 80,000 seats, extensive premium seating and hospitality areas with direct views of the field.
Renovations and upgrades would cost $800 million, according to the bid, with the University of Southern California paying more than 60 percent, or $500 million. So far, USC is only committed to $70 million in upgrades as required by a lease with the city.
“USC is currently studying potential renovations of the Coliseum, but no decisions have yet been made as to the scope and cost of those renovations,” said Todd Dickey, USC senior vice president for administration.
■ MAJOR LEAGUE SOCCER, L.A. FOOTBALL CLUB AND THE AQUATICS VENUE: LA 2024 wants to host swimming and diving in a temporary water facility overlaid onto the soccer-specific stadium now planned near the Coliseum for the expansion franchise.
Under this outline, MLS and the new franchise would pay to build the permanent structure, hoped to be ready for the 2018 season, and the local Olympic organizers would spend $100 million on the temporary aquatics aspects closer to the Games.
“We’re absolutely supportive of Los Angeles’ efforts to get the Olympics in 2024,” LAFC President Tom Penn said in an interview. He said the club’s stadium vision aligns with the Olympic plans and they’ll work out details as both projects proceed. LA 2024 organizers have said they’ve spoken with the team in recent weeks.
However, Penn had not heard that the Olympics would force the soccer franchise out of the stadium for upward of a year. According to the bid book, the aquatics adaptation must begin “9-10 months” prior to the Olympics and Paralympics, which last from mid-July to late August.
“I haven’t read it, so I can’t give you a comment on it,” he said.
■ BROADCASTING CENTER: The bid is vague about plans for the International Broadcast Center, a top priority for the International Olympic Committee intent on facilitating positive worldwide media attention.
NBCUniversal is a key partner in this. The center would be built on the company’s studio lot in the San Fernando Valley, land it controls outright. The Games’ budget has set aside $130 million for the facility, with the balance — listed only as TBD in the bid — to be assumed by NBCUniversal, which would own the facility after the Games.
“As a major corporate citizen of the city and county of Los Angeles, we are exploring ways to help bring the 2024 Summer Games to Los Angeles,” said Cindy Gardner, Universal Studios senior vice president.
Ultimately, the IOC’s decision on where to host the 2024 Games rests as much on international politics as the technical details of a plan, veteran Olympic business experts say. But to get to that point, a bid must pass muster with local officials and voters as an acceptable financial risk.
“It’s much more doable than Boston, and the risk is much more absorbable than Boston, but there’s still a lot of questions,” said Smith College economist and Olympics critic Andrew Zimbalist.
