i

THE INTERPLAY OF TRANSPORTATION, PUBLIC OPINION, AND

EFFICACY REGARDING THE BOSTON 2024 OLYMPICS BID

ANTHONY LOMBARDI (786667) — SPRING, 2015 — HARVARD LAW SCHOOL PROFESSOR CHARLES J. OGLETREE — REVITALIZING AMERICA’S CITIES

Mega-Events and Revitalization  

i

Abstract

As the United States bid candidate for the 2024 Olympics, Boston is in a unique

position to implement urban revitalization and redevelopment plans. A successful bid

imposes a deadline for public works projects that state and local officials would not have

otherwise. However, increasing negative public opinion may influence the viability of the

bid to the International Olympic Committee. While the worry about cost overruns is

undoubtedly valid, the negative opinion stemming from discontent with public

transportation infrastructure is unfounded. Many improvements to Boston’s subway

system are already funded through government initiatives, and a successful bid only

serves to facilitate their implementation. The current negative atmosphere surrounding

the Olympics indicates fundamental issues of transparency, communication, and efficacy

that need to be addressed to expedite revitalization projects.

1

Introduction

On January 8, 2015, The United States Olympic Committee (“USOC”) announced that it

had chosen Boston as its bid to the International Olympic Committee (“IOC”) for the 2024

Summer Olympic Games.1 Citing the city’s historical connection with competitive sports and the

strength of its presentation as rationales behind its decision, the USOC selected Boston over

competing bids from Los Angeles, San Francisco, and Washington, D.C.2 City residents have

been increasingly critical in recent months, especially in the wake of the historic winter. While

the Boston 2024 planning committee and government officials alike expect and welcome this

criticism,3 a lack of public support could endanger the feasibility of the bid itself.4 This piece will

analyze the intertwining subjects of opinion, transportation, and the Olympic bid to determine

sources of criticism and methods to renovate infrastructure. Despite the precarious precedent it

may set, a Mega-event is a beneficial tool for the revitalization of Boston, and America’s cities.

Boston 2024

The Boston 2024 organizers plan to use the Games to propel the city into its fifth century

of existence.5 Looking forward to Boston’s 400th birthday, the Olympic bid highlights the

1 Arsenault, Mark and Powers, John. “Boston picked to bid for Olympics.” The Boston Globe, January 8, 2015. http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/01/08/olympic-decision-boston-bid-could-come-thursday/6RHRYSTRGgsIlPImafWgRM/story.html 2 Boston was the only bid city among the four finalists without any prior Olympic experience, either in bidding for or in hosting the Games. See id. 3 In its report on the feasibility of hosting the Games, the government’s committee noted, “New Englanders have a well-earned reputation for being slow to embrace new ideas.” The Special Commission Relative to the Feasibility of Hosting the Summer Olympics in the Commonwealth. Understanding a Boston 2024 Olympics. The General Court of Massachusetts (2014): 1–57, 19. https://malegislature.gov/content/documents/newsitems/Special%20Commission%20Final%20Report%202.27.14.pdf 4 John Fish, chair of Boston 2024, openly stated, “If we cannot win a majority bloc in Boston, we don’t want to move forward.” Enwemeka, Zeninjor. “Boston 2024 Seeks Referendum on Olympics Bid.” WBUR News, March 24, 2015. http://www.wbur.org/2015/03/24/boston-olympics-referendum-vote 5 The Boston 2024 proposal to the USOC opined, “there is the opportunity to elevate our thinking about and expedite our execution of urban planning, transportation improvements, infrastructure upgrades and institutional master planning.” See Boston 2024. Boston 2024 Number 1: Overall Games Concept (2014): 1–46, 22–23. http://cdn.2024boston.org/docs/USOC_Submission_1.pdf

2

existing strengths of the city—its mature transportation system, numerous athletic facilities, and

fanatical population—while addressing institutional issues it faces. 6,7 Acknowledging the IOC’s

admiration of “legacy” projects, Boston 2024 argues that it implements projects that benefit the

city even if the bid does not win, at a lower cost and without public funding.8 Recent revisions to

the IOC’s hosting rules suggest that a Boston Olympics could stimulate revitalization without the

monumental costs that accompanied previous Games.

New IOC Rules

The IOC has relaxed candidate requirements in response to diminished interest in

hosting.9 This loosening of standards could be beneficial to Boston in several ways. Primarily,

the IOC’s decision to reduce the Olympic Stadium size from 80,000 seats to 60,000 means that

Boston can cut construction costs.10 The IOC has additionally stated that it prefers the use of

temporary or existing structures to the construction of permanent facilities.11 Per IOC rules, any

temporary structures built for the Games are eligible for funding through the revenue those

Games generate.12 The plan to build a temporary stadium at Widett Circle—a largely vacant area

currently housing the MBTA maintenance facility and some small businesses—could utilize the

6 The allure of Mega-events for cities typically centers on long-term, broad-ranging urban revitalization. See, e.g., Digby, Bob. “The Changing World: The London 2012 Olympics.” Geography 93 (2008): 40–47, 40 (stating that the Olympics have “become useful hooks on which to hang concepts such as regeneration, rebranding and sustainability.”); Horne, John and Manzenreiter, Wolfram. “An introduction to the sociology of sport mega-events.” Sports Mega-Events (2006): 1–24, 9 (but warning that “the general academic consensus regarding the impacts of mega-events is that there are both positive and negative outcomes”); Muñoz, Francesc. “Olympic urbanism and Olympic Villages.” In Sports-Mega Events, 175–187, 176 (noting that “urban transformation that results form the organization of the Games can be used as a guideline for the future development of the city.”). 7 See Boston 2024 Number 1, 23. 8 “Our Olympic and Paralympic bid will serve to accelerate improvements to transportation.” Id., 3. 9 Chesto, John. “Here’s why local Olympics organizers switched to a temporary stadium.” Boston Business Journal, October 22, 2014. http://www.bizjournals.com/boston/blog/mass_roundup/2014/10/heres-why-local-olympics-organizers-switched-to-a.html?page=all 10 See Boston 2024. Boston 2024 Number 2: Key Venue Plan (2014): 1–52, 10. http://cdn.2024boston.org/docs/USOC_Submission_2.pdf 11 See Chesto. 12 The IOC additionally forbids the use of Olympic revenue on any permanent construction project that a city may use for the Games. See id.

3

IOC’s new preference for temporary structures and allow Boston to use funds generated from the

Games to circumvent public funding.13

Furthermore, Boston 2024 plans to host a

majority of the Olympic events in existing

structures.14 Using major venues like the TD

Garden and university facilities for events means

that significant construction efforts will not incur new

costs or drastically change the urban landscape. Instead,

Boston 2024 plans to maximize the potential of the Games

to revitalize existing neighborhoods and provide economic

growth that improves, rather than replaces, the community.

Impact: Revitalization and Legacy

Plans for the 2024 Olympics highlight specific renovation projects that spur investment in

neglected areas of the city. Focusing on the area running south from South Station to Widett

Circle, a new pedestrian boulevard along the Fort Point Channel would connect the two locales

with the booming Seaport district.15 Centering the Games in Widett Circle—which Boston 2024

has intriguingly redubbed “Midtown”—is an effort to redefine the area by attracting new

businesses and creating green space.16 Boston 2024 says this will revitalize the area, stating:

Post-Games, the infrastructure improvements delivered as part of the Olympic Stadium development will be the catalyst for development of a new Midtown neighborhood, repairing the scar in urban fabric from the 19th and 20th century rail and highway construction.17

13 See Boston 2024 Number 2, 13. 14 Figure 1 depicts the proposed area for a temporary stadium. See id. Figure 2 depicts potential venue locations throughout the region, See Boston 2024 Number 1, 13. 15 Figure 3 further depicts the planned Olympic Boulevard connecting South Station to Widett Circle. See Boston 2024 Number 2, 10. 16 Id., 16. 17 Id.

Figure 2: Potential Venues

Figure 1: Planned Stadium Location

4

Furthermore, the current plan would overbuild on top of the current MBTA tracks, enabling

development without significantly impacting the existing T

lines.18 The Widett Circle revitalization thus represents an

enticing opportunity for new business investment in an

often-overlooked area of the city. Additionally, the use of a

“temporary” stadium means that significant segments of the

building, like bleachers or stadium seating, can be

deconstructed and donated to local community centers, universities and schools.19 This would

ensure that the structure does not fall into disrepair and cause blight after the Games and

additionally spread the benefit to members of the affected community in the long term.20

The revitalization of the Midtown neighborhood additionally calls for substantial

renovation of the city’s existing transportation system. Boston’s bid benefits from the mature

system already in place, but organizers aim to monopolize on planned renovations to enhance the

Games and expedite the infrastructure upgrades. The committee argues:

Our transportation planning integrates existing and planned infrastructure with a focus on future benefits to the city, its neighborhoods and its urban design planning principles. We have an excellent understanding of costs because many of the proposed infrastructure projects have been planned, reviewed, and/or approved by the appropriate regulatory agencies, the Legislature of the Commonwealth and the Governor of Massachusetts.21

Examples of the reform plans include: expansion of the South Station terminal; extension of the

Green Line from Lechmere Station into Somerville; and renovation of vehicles and signal

systems.22 The bid’s concentration on existing transportation renovation projects suggests that

18 See id., 12. 19 See Chesto. 20 See Boston 2024 Number 2, 16. 21 See Boston 2024. Boston 2024 Number 3: Transportation, Accommodation + Security (2014): 1–74, 7. http://cdn.2024boston.org/docs/USOC_Submission_3.pdf 22 See id., 12–14.

Figure 3 - Planned Developments

5

the future of the city’s infrastructure could benefit from the planning and organization of the

Games.23 The planned renovations may also aid the revitalization of certain communities and

enhance the quality of life for neglected neighborhoods. The Green Line extension into

Somerville opens an entire area to rapid transit that previously relied on multiple bus connections

to provide access to the Red Line, Orange Line, or Lechmere Station. Furthermore, renovations

to the Orange and Red Lines would modernize the commute for individuals travelling into the

city from traditionally neglected neighborhoods like Jamaica Plain, Mattapan, and Dorchester.

Forthcoming analysis of the relationship between the bid and the impending plans suggest that

the Boston 2024 bid will benefit the city through the acceleration of transportation renovations.

Pursuing the bid may also provide economic investment and job growth to the

Commonwealth. A recent report on economic impact suggests that the planning, organizing, and

execution of the Games would pump billions of dollars into the economy leading up to 2024.24

Construction projects would create over approximately 4,100 jobs annually leading up to the

games.25 Further, $3.7 billion of the nearly $5.3 billion in operating expenses would go directly

into the Massachusetts economy.26 The report states that approximately $2.9 billion of those

operating expenses would benefit Massachusetts as net economic gains.27 Local spending during

the year of the Olympics would further support $2.5 billion in economic activity in the state, and

tourism during the year of the game could provide additional boosts to the local economy.28 This

potential economic windfall, when paired with the likely legacy of improved infrastructure that

23 This concept is discussed in full in later sections. 24 The Boston Foundation is the region’s independent community foundation. They determine that the Games could be a net positive with smart budgeting and strategic planning. See Boston Foundation and UMass Donahue Institute. “Assessing the Olympics: Preliminary Economic Analysis of a Boston 2024 Games – Impacts, Opportunities and Risks.” Understanding Boston (2015): 1–48, 5, 11. http://www.tbf.org/~/media/TBFOrg/Files/Reports/Boston%20Olympics%20Report.pdf 25 Put another way, the Games would add over 24,000 total construction jobs to the Commonwealth. See id., 12. 26 See id., 26–27. 27 When accounting for the spending coming from within Massachusetts compared to outside spending. See id. 28 Id.

6

the Games would expedite, suggests that the bid for the 2024 Summer Olympic Games could aid

the revitalization of Boston, especially in terms of public transportation.

The T: An Aging Boston Staple

With the nation’s oldest subway system, Boston has a storied history of public

transportation. As the fourth-largest transit system in the United States, the Massachusetts Bay

Transportation Authority (“MBTA”) serves a community of nearly three million individuals who

take approximately 165 million rides per year.29 The

fleet of 2,660 vehicles transports over a million people

daily, swelling the population of Boston well beyond

its residential population during a normal workday.30

The Boston 2024 bid references the transit system

extensively in its plan, suggesting necessary

expansions to the heavy-rail Red and Orange Lines.31

By far the most congested of the entire T, these two lines serve over half a million individuals

daily, and several stations endure the most foot traffic in the city on a daily basis.32 Many Red

and Orange Line vehicles have been in service for decades.33 Plans to modernize struggle

politically, and the MBTA is saddled with debt from the Big Dig highway project.34 The extreme

weather of the past winter illustrated and amplified the ramifications of the delays in renovation.

29 The population of the MBTA service district is 2,812,658 individuals. Total trips in 2013 were 165,365,009. Massachusetts Bay Transportation Authority. Ridership and Service Statistics, Fourteenth Edition (2014): 1–114, 5–6. http://www.mbta.com/uploadedfiles/documents/2014%20BLUEBOOK%2014th%20Edition.pdf 30 Id., 7. 31 See Boston 2024 Number 3, 13. 32 Total heavy rail daily ridership is 539,315 individuals. Ridership per station, as well as a detailed map of the MBTA subway system, is recreated in Figure 4. See MBTA, 5. 33 Levenson, Michael. “Planned Olympic transit project pose funding challenge.” The Boston Globe, February 24, 2015. http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/02/24/olympic-organizers-acknowledge-mixed-message-transportation-projects/cTNpYRGRSgAoyqdmlr7EsL/story.html 34 Swasey, Benjamin. “MBTA GM Beverly Scott Resigns.” WBUR News, February 11, 2015. http://www.wbur.org/2015/02/11/mbta-gm-scott-resigns

Figure 4 - T Ridership

7

Historic Winter

Boston was struck this past winter with record-breaking snowfall concentrated in the

early weeks of February. The unexpected precipitation strained the T to a breaking point, leading

to several cancellations throughout the winter. Extensive snow damage ensured delays and

cancellations of several branches of the T for weeks after the snow subsided, including the

prominent Braintree extension of the Red Line.35 The individual station cancellations left nearly

200,000 commuters stranded on a daily basis.36 Many prominent officials and community

members lambasted the beleaguered MBTA for its inefficient and disjointed response to the

extreme weather.37 Following pressure from the Governor, the General Manager of the MBTA

resigned, stepping down in mid-April of 2015.38 Although the T has resumed full service in

recent weeks, the historic winter undoubtedly exposed substantial public transportation issues.

Many of the flaws in the system—including aging railcars and outdated signaling systems—are

the current objects of scrutiny for both the Legislature and the Boston 2024 planning community.

Planned Improvements

Recent legislation suggests that the long-awaited improvements to the T are imminent,

regardless of the Boston 2024 Olympic bid. The Massachusetts legislature passed a

Transportation Bond Bill in 2014 to fund various improvements to the MBTA public

transportation system.39 The Bill authorized over twelve billion dollars to finance an overhaul,40

including: expansions of the Green Line into Somerville; acquisition of the US Postal building to

35 Morrison, Sara. “When the T Map Looks Like This, 200k Riders are Stranded.” BostInno, February 17, 2015. http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2015/02/17/mbta-delays-map-of-stations-open-closed-due-to-snow-by-sara-morrison/ 36 Id. 37 See Swasey. 38 DeLuca, Nick. “Gov. Baker Rips the MBTA for Unacceptable Performance.” BostInno, February 9, 2015. http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2015/02/09/mbta-snow-delays-charlie-baker-feb-9-statements-on-t-service/ 39 See An Act financing improvements to the Commonwealth’s transportation system. Mass. Bill H.4046. §§ 6622-1381–86 (passed Apr. 18, 2014). 40 FY 015-2019 Five Year Capital Investment Plan. Commonwealth of Massachusetts (2014): 1–94, 62. http://www.mass.gov/bb/cap/fy2015/dnld/fy15capitalplanma.pdf

8

facilitate the expansion of South Station; modernization of the Red Line and Orange Line signal

systems; and construction of new heavy-rail vehicles for the Red and Orange Lines.41 The

Olympic bid references all of these projects.42 While the Bond Bill does not mandate the

implementation of the improvements, it does authorize funding for the Governor to do so.43 The

Governor’s office has sanctioned these efforts. Approved funds for 2015 alone include over $320

million for the Green Line extension and $72.8 million for the revitalization of the Red and

Orange Lines.44 The Five Year Capital Investment Plan notes that the revitalization is necessary

because it will expedite construction and save the Commonwealth money by “avoiding costly

maintenance and price inflation . . . for long awaited projects.”45 The new cars for the Red and

Orange Lines are under construction with a 2018 deadline, and the Green Line extension has

received substantial federal funding to finish construct and open to the public in 2021. 46

While it appears that the infrastructure improvements will occur regardless of the

Olympic bid, it is possible that a successful bid will augment the projects and expedite the entire

process. If so, the potential for negative public opinion to cripple the vitality of the bid would

similarly delay the plans to improve the infrastructure of Boston’s public transportation system.

The Role of Public Opinion

Negative criticisms about the feasibility of the Games could have a controlling impact on

the future of the Boston 2024 bid. Vocal opposition is expected in any democratic society.47 This

41 Mass. Bill H.4046 § 6621-1308. 42 See Boston 2024. Boston 2024 Number 3, supra note 22. 43 See Levenson, Michael and Dungca, Nicoel. “Revenue to dictate difficult choices on Olympic transit projects. The Boston Globe, January 10, 2015. http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/01/10/devil-details-transportation-projects/UsoQd8f7gXQp6JW0BJcleI/story.html 44 See Five Year Capital Investment Plan, 93–94. 45 See id., 75. 46 See Boston Foundation, 38. 47 In a recent interview with The New York Times, an anonymous Olympic consultant stated doubts that public support could ever exceed 70 percent in a North American city because “there will always be a hard core that is opposed.” Seeyle, Katharine Q. “Anemic Support Greets Potential Olympic Bid in Boston.” The New York Times,

9

tenet of American political philosophy, though commendable, can be detrimental to the planning

and execution of public works projects. A project’s original intent will derail once a negative

minority gains enough traction in the media discourse to reframe the discussion. Even if attention

to that negativity eventually fades, the memory of that criticism will persist and taint the object

of that criticism.48 Public opinion therefore poses an imperative role when a democratic society

places a bid to host the Olympics. Although the IOC has expressed a strong interest in an

American host city,49 it has also stated that it will evaluate public opinion with strict scrutiny.50

The IOC values public opinion so highly that it will conduct its own public opinion polling in

candidate cities before selecting the host city in 2017.51

Mounting Negative Opinion

Recent reports on the growing lack of support for the Boston Olympic bid are troubling

given the significance that the IOC gives to public opinion. Only 36% of the public in the Boston

Area supports the prospect of Boston 2024 according to a recent poll.52 That support has

plummeted 15% since the start of January.53 Furthermore, the percentage of the public that

opposes the bid outright has grown nearly 20% to comprise a small majority of the population.54

March 19, 2015. http://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/20/sports/olympics/potential-olympic-bid-in-boston-is-greeted-by-anemic-support.html?mwrsm=Email 48 The campaign for a referendum in Vancouver “created battle lines which extended past the referendum into the Games preparation period and ensured that the Olympics were viewed as controversial.” See Hiller, Harry H. and Wanner, Richard A. “Public Opinion in Host Olympic Cities: The Case of the 210 Vancouver Winter Games.” Sociology 45 (2011): 883–899, 887–88. 49 Thomas Bach, President of the IOC, has stated, “I think it’s time for the United States to present a strong bid.” Understanding a Boston 2024 Olympics, 8. 50 “An Olympic bid needs strong public backing to win a vote of the IOC.” Arsenault, Mark. “Olympics group won’t continue without public’s backing.” The Boston Globe, March 23, 2015. http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/03/22/boston-vows-not-move-forward-without-majority-support/sy71VhxrPzwylapxRilEaM/story.html 51 Id. 52 The results of the survey are recreated in Figure 5. Nickisch, Curt. “Support For Boston Olympics Falls Further, WBUR Poll Finds.” WBUR News, March 20, 2015. http://www.wbur.org/2015/03/19/wbur-boston-olympics-poll-march 53 Id. 54 Id.

10

It is unlikely that the IOC would choose Boston as a host city based upon this current and

mounting level of opposition.

The recent data is by no means dispositive in determining the fate of the Boston Olympic

bid, and its jarring, headline-generating conclusion should not cause a stirring media response.55

Primarily, the relatively small sample size of the

survey population suggests that the results may

not fully indicate the general population’s

support.56 Less than half of the surveyed

individuals were Boston residents, and the support for the Olympics increases by 5% when

viewing those residents in isolation.57 Additionally, the methodology gathered data solely

through live telephone calls. This suggests that the poll overlooked individuals without a

landline, including the younger residents that comprise a large part of the city’s population and

that may rely on mobile phones over traditional landlines.58 Finally, the high margin of error

suggests that support could fluctuate widely.59 Despite these methodological flaws, the most

recent survey demonstrates that public opinion is turning against the Boston 2024 Olympic bid.

Fuel for Criticism

At first it appeared that the recent public transportation collapse bred criticism.60

However, the drop in public support since January does not perfectly coincide with the

55 Despite the limitations of the survey, journalists from The Boston Globe and The New York Times have cited the poll as the bellwether of the bid’s demise. See Arsenault; Seeyle. 56 The survey polled only 504 individuals living inside and along Route 128 in Massachusetts. See Nickisch. 57 Only 229 of the 504 respondents were Boston residents. The poll defined the “Boston area” as the area within the confines of Route 128. Thus, an individual living 11 miles away from Boston in places like Woburn participated in the survey. See id. 58 The median age in Boston is 31.1 years, over six years lower than the median age of the United States population. Furthermore, 56.4% of the population is under the age of 35. See U.S. Census Bureau, 2009-2013 5-Year American Community Survey. http://factfinder.census.gov/faces/tableservices/jsf/pages/productview.xhtml?src=CF 59 The survey reported a margin of error of 6.5% for Boston statistics. See Nickisch. 60 See Seeyle.

Figure 5 - Public Support

11

difficulties of the T. Public support in the Boston Area continued to drop even as the T resumed

its normal operations.61 Recent research suggests that the weather “highlighted the incredible

backlog of needed maintenance on the public transit system.”62 Although the historic winter

weather would obviously have no impact on a Summer Games, the T shutdown alerted citizens

and authorities alike to the system’s instabilities, and to the necessary costs it would take to

upgrade and modernize the system.63 It is perhaps fear of those costs that fuels criticism.

Concerns about cost overruns are without doubt meritorious. The final cost of hosting an

Olympic games is always higher than the initial estimate, and the most recent report places the

actual operating costs of Boston 2024 at $9.1 billion.64 Unexpected increases to the budget could

be a liability for the general public that the IOC will not cover.65 Furthermore, while the Boston

2024 committee has repeatedly stated that it will not use public funds to pay for the Games,

several of the proposed infrastructure projects have not yet received full funding or backing from

the private sector.66 Some projects receive only partial funding through the Transportation Bond

Bill and the Governor’s five-year investment plan.67 The proposed expansion to the South

Station terminal has a $1 billion estimated price tag, yet the $325 million allocation only finances

the acquisition of the adjacent US Postal Service building.68 Few of the infrastructure projects

are indispensable for the execution of the Games, but estimates suggest that $4 billion of

taxpayer funding would be necessary if the USOC or IOC pushed for all of the enhancements.69

Concerns about costs could thus substantiate the present negative opinion about the bid.

61 See Nickisch. 62 See Boston Foundation, 15. 63 See id. 64 See id.,12, 16. 65 Id., 12. 66 Id., 39. 67 Id. 68 Id., 40. 69 See Levenson.

12

Exogenous factors may fuel discontent toward the Olympic bid, or toward the Olympic

planning committee generally. Negative media attention beleaguers the planning committee.

Residents were outraged when it was announced that Boston 2024 would compensate former

Governor Deval Patrick $7,500 daily for consultancy and Games promotion.70 Only 19% of the

Boston public sees the Boston 2024 planning committee favorably, while 34% view the

organization unfavorably.71 This suggests that backlash from negative media and lack of

transparency about costs may fuel the current public criticism. Finally, affinity groups like No

Boston Olympics believe that other issues deserve the funding that the Games would employ.

These groups and residents of minority-dominated neighborhoods argue that jobs, housing,

education and economic development could benefit from the funding that the Olympic Games

would receive.72 Boston 2024 has announced plans to hold over twenty public meetings during

the course of 2015 to hear all of the individual concerns residents may have about the Games.73

Potential costs and the public burden are two certain complaints.

Calls for a Referendum

Many residents have called for a referendum in order to put the future of the bid to a

public vote. Both proponents and critics have agreed to hold a statewide referendum in

November of 2016. With the backing of the Baker administration, Boston 2024 and No Boston

Olympics will formulate a ballot initiative for the voting population to decide the bid’s fate.74

70 Patrick has since said that he “would continue to promote the Olympics” but would not accept compensation for the work. See Seeyle. 71 See Nickisch. 72 McCabe, Kathy. “Residents in Roxbury voice Olympics concerns.” The Boston Globe, February 23, 2015. http://www.bostonglobe.com/metro/2015/02/23/first-community-meeting-boston-olympics-scheduled-monday/sp4fg6ZeLc9oBDbjz7FanM/story.html 73 See id. 74 The Baker administration has said “the bid process for Boston 2024 should remain as open and transparent as possible” in its endorsement of the referendum. See Enwemeka.

13

Boston 2024 has announced that it will not continue without a majority of the public’s support,75

and the USOC states it will respect the result of the vote.76 This commitment to a referendum

demonstrates the significance of public opinion and the extent to which it can influence public

works projects. This could have far-reaching implications for the future of the T.

Discussion and Policy Recommendations

Although many of the improvements to the T may continue regardless of Boston 2024,

the Olympic bid can serve as a deadline to expedite the construction process.77 Since public

opinion about the Olympic Games will determine whether Boston 2024 continues with its

planning, one can correlate the success of the Olympic bid to the future success of the T’s

transformation. This, along with the revitalization that will result from the Games, means that the

future of Boston’s urban landscape rests in the hands of city residents. It is crucial to remember

that pursuing the Boston 2024 bid does not mean that Boston must host the Summer Olympics.78

Furthermore, the organization of an Olympic bid has helped catalyze revitalization projects even

when those bids ultimately fail.79 There is therefore little to lose in pursuing the bid, since

research suggests the Games will likely lead to positive outcomes anyway.80 The positive

benefits stemming from the bid—the acceleration of impending T renovations, the urban

75 See id. 76 Patrick D. Sandusky, chief communications and public affairs officer for the USOC stated the organization “supports any and all steps that Boston 2024 believes necessary to demonstrate the public’s support for Boston’s bid.” See Arsenault. 77 Richard Davey, CEO of Boston 2024 and former MA Secretary of Transportation, said, “we feel like the Olympics gives government a deadline, and there’s nothing like a deadline to get government to build big projects.” Bader, Emily. “Boston may need the Olympics to fix its problems, which is bad news for all of us.” The Washington Post, February 11, 2015. http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog/wp/2015/02/11/boston-may-need-the-olympics-to-fix-its-problems-which-is-bad-news-for-the-rest-of-us/ 78 With candidates including previous host cities like Rome and Paris, the 2024 Summer Olympics pool is remarkably competitive. Zaccardi, Nick. “Paris city council approves 2024 Olympic bid.” NBC OlympicTalk, April 13, 2015. http://olympictalk.nbcsports.com/2015/04/13/paris-2024-olympic-bid-city-council-vote/ 79 The recent feasibility report looks to New York to demonstrate that failed Olympic bids “opened pathways and initiatives, including the first subway extension in fifty years.” Further, the report argues, “the planning and organization that goes into the bid process encourages stakeholder, civic leaders, and government involvement in visioning a long range plan.” See Boston Foundation, 32. 80 The impact of the Games in 2024 alone would amount to over $5 billion to the local economy. See id., 26.

14

revitalization of Widett Circle, and the economic boost from construction jobs added in the years

leading to the Games—should outweigh the perils of hosting the Games. Boston should pursue

the bid, and thus must garner public support to survive the forthcoming referendum in 2016.

A Caveat on Mega-Events: Beneficial, but a Double-Edged Sword

It is necessary to address a significant critique before discussing specific policy

recommendations that would improve public opinion and propel Boston 2024 forward. Although

utilizing so-called “Mega-events” can provide an effective means to transform urban cityscapes

and stimulate economic growth, some believe that the outcomes disproportionately benefit civic

and regional elites while placing substantial opportunity costs on poorer residents.81 Even if the

Mega-event is economically successful, there remains the risk of an overall loss in the sense that

residents may be displaced, social programs lose funding, and the behemoth structures erected lie

fallow.82 Further, Mega-events like the Olympics lack accountability without consultation with

the public about social, environmental, and economical impacts.83 These vocal critics urge

reform both from the monolithic institutions that organize Mega-events and from the local

residents that allow their land to be redeveloped for white elephants.84

The concern that these academics voice about the efficacy of Mega-Events is well

founded, and doubtless deserves attention. Individuals may worry that the Mega-event creates a

slippery slope for revitalization: if the only way to instigate the public works projects necessary

81 See Whitson, David and Horne, John. “Underestimated costs and overestimated benefits?” In Sports-Mega Events, 75–89, 77. 82 Mega-events furthermore can “contribute to the naturalization of social inequalities” through the redistribution of marginalized populations to build sites, and through the hierarchy of nationalism. See Horne and Manzenreiter, 17–18. 83 See Whitson and Horne, 87. 84Zimbalist’s academic research analyzing the pitfalls of Mega-Events is the most recent work addressing these issues. His extensive analysis of the London, Sochi, and Rio games describes the short-term and overstated economic benefits of Mega-events, and suggests various reform movements to democratize the entire process. The piece merits study in it of itself that is beyond the scope of this work. See Zimbalist, Andrew. Circus Maximus: The Economic Gamble Behind Hosting the Olympics and the World Cup (2015): 5, 131, 133.

15

to keep a city running is through massive international pageants, what precedent does that set for

future development, and what does that say about the state of local government in democratic

societies?85 Additional study would analyze the impact of the Boston 2024 bid over several years

in order to gauge if its approach to Mega-events is distinctive.

Recent developments suggest that the previous statement is true, and that Boston’s bid is

different from the failures of the past. Primarily, institutional reform on the part of the IOC

suggests that the organization is attempting to modernize to lower costs and make the Games

more accessible to democratic societies.86 The decision to hold multiple public hearings

furthermore suggests that the organizing committee is internalizing the critique that Mega-events

lack transparency and public input. Finally, the plan to utilize existing structures and construct

temporary buildings means that no substantial public funding should go into massive

construction projects that will serve little purpose in the future. Perhaps this approach will

succeed in creating a democratically accessible model to the planning of the Olympic Games.

Turning to public transportation, the use of the Boston 2024 bid to instigate reform

exemplifies a beneficial use of the Mega-event. The recent winter exposed the reality of the T’s

fundamental shortcomings to many Bostonians. While it is true that the projects to modernize

and revitalize the T have passed the legislature and received funding, it is also true that many of

those projects were shackled to political debate and bureaucratic dispute for years of delay.87 The

specter of the Olympics incentivizes local government officials to expedite the planning and

construction process, with the fear of catastrophe hanging like the Sword of Damocles over their

85 “At a time when the US can get seemingly so little built . . . do American cities need to take on an Olympic Games just to get big things done?” See Badger. 86 This reform would both validate and satisfy Zimablist’s policy recommendation to increase transparency. See Zimbalist, 131. 87 For example, the US Postal acquisition for the South Station expansion has been in negotiations for 10 years. See Levenson and Dungca.

16

elected seats in the State House. The Boston 2024 bid could thus represent a watershed moment

for the future of Boston’s infrastructure and planning methodology. It may break through

political gridlock to catalyze revitalization projects, but its vitality hinges on the support of the

public. The following recommendations propose methods to propagate that support.

I. Implement a National Survey to Reach Historically-Analogous Conclusions

Surveying a nation’s population can be an effective means to predict the trajectory of

support within a host city. Recent research suggests that public opinion among host city residents

is prone to fluctuation in comparison to national support.88 An in depth analysis of residential

opinion of the 2010 Vancouver Olympics suggests that common reservations are shared among

all host cities. The report notes that “[w]hen questions were asked before and after the Games,

reticence was often expressed over concerns about debt, costs or fears of inconvenience before

the games.”89 This reticence echoes the criticisms Bostonians have leveled at Boston 2024 for its

lack of transparency and susceptibility to cost overruns. Although this finding appears worrisome

at face value, in reality it suggests that Boston is following a natural progression toward net

support. The Vancouver analysis finds that “there was an overwhelmingly strong belief” that the

Games benefitted the city both as an experience and as a marketing opportunity, despite initial

opposition.90 These findings suggest that the negative opinions that host residents voice prior to

the Games will fade as the Opening Ceremony approaches.91

National opinion could validate the suggestion that Boston is following a normal

trajectory of public opinion. Research suggests that support that is significantly higher on the 88 See Hiller, 886. 89 Id. 90 Id., 886. 91 Surveys administered throughout the bidding and Games periods suggest that Vancouver residents increased their support as the Games progressed. Prior to the Games, only 29% of residents planned to follow the Games “very closely,” but that number increased to 59% during the Olympics. Further, while 30% thought that the Games were “not worth it” from the outset, that number dwindled to 18%. Finally, Those reporting that the Games were a waste of money declined from 31% at the beginning of the survey period to 17% after the Games were over. See id., 891.

17

national stage in comparison to the host city will correspond with the eventual growth in the host

city’s level of support. Public support for the Vancouver Games neared 80% among all

Canadians, while only half of British Columbians thought the Games would have a positive

impact.92 Although the residents of the host city were undoubtedly less keen to host the Games,

the research demonstrates that their support significantly increased as the Games approached.

Given the correlation between national support and the eventual growth in support

leading up to the Games, it would behoove the Boston 2024 organization committee to

administer a national survey to assess the state of negativity in Boston. If there is a significantly

higher level of support for Boston 2024 nationally in comparison to local support, then the

committee could likely conclude that host city negativity is a natural occurrence on par with

previous Olympic games. Such a finding would provide an academically validated assessment

that the negativity is not unique to Boston and will subside with the passage of time. Using that

information, Boston 2024 could effectively plan a public relations campaign to reframe the

current debate about the Olympic bid in terms of revitalization. As the Vancouver report notes:

Games must be viewed as a public policy initiative for which opposition is a natural response for those who advocate other policy options or who hold different political affiliations . . . [T]he Olympics can be caught in local political debates that reflect criticisms and differences in policy priorities, party ideology, and leadership preferences which result in public conflict, opposition, or suspicion about the Games.93

The national survey can elucidate which, if any, policy issues are currently plaguing the

discourse about the Olympic games. If national support is not significantly higher and thus does

not reflect the academic research, then it is possible that the negative opinion is indicative of

endemic disapproval of the Olympics as a whole. Once the organizing committee obtains this

information, it can organize to administer the policy recommendations enumerated below.

92 Id., 888. 93 Id., 896.

18

II. Implement an Effective Public Relations Campaign

Boston 2024 should formulate a public relations campaign that clarifies information

about the bid in such a way that both increases transparency and allays fears about the potential

public burden of hosting a Mega-event like the Olympic Games. Luckily, Boston 2024 may not

face the same cost overruns that colored past Games. By monopolizing on the new IOC reform

rules, Boston could cut costs and construct temporary structures to access Olympic revenue for

funding and simultaneously avoid expensive new construction.94 It is imperative that the public

understands this crucial difference between Boston 2024 and all previous Olympic Games.

Furthermore, Boston 2024 should reemphasize that the strength of its bid lies in Boston’s

preexisting infrastructure and event readiness – Boston would not need to waste money to erect

what was required for the most recent Olympic Games in Sochi because Boston already has

substantial athletic facilities and public transportation infrastructure.95

Another significant asset is the vast experience in hosting events on par with the

Olympics. Boston has hosted 119 world-class events, and will host the World Figure Skating

Championship in 2016.96 Boston successfully hosted the 2004 Democratic National Convention,

a major political event with extremely high security protocols.97 Additionally, the city is well

accustomed to accommodating massive crowds. The Boston Marathon draws over half a million

spectators to the city each year, and the celebration parades for Boston’s major sports teams

typically draw between one and three million spectators to the city.98,99 This well-established

precedent of hosting sporting events, coupled with the planned improvements to the T, should 94 See Boston 2024 Number 2, supra note 13. 95 See Boston Foundation, 34. 96 See Understanding a Boston 2024 Olympics, 19. 97 Id., 16. 98 Over a million people entered Boston for Patriots and Bruins victory parades, and three million attended the 2007 Red Sox World Series Parade. See id., 57. 99 Interestingly, the IOC only requires the city to provide 45,000 hotel rooms for visitors, suggesting that a city like Boston could handle the influx of spectators given its experience with large events. See id., 9.

19

assuage concerns about the carrying capacity of the city. Boston 2024 should thus accentuate the

city’s familiarity with Mega-events and frame the Olympics as the continuation of reputable

tradition.

Boston 2024 can also point to historical precedent and future forecasts to reframe the

discussion about cost overruns. In particular, it should remind the public that the past three

Olympic Games hosted in the United States were all cash positive, a feat in comparison to most

events.100 Research suggests that even the 1996 Atlanta Games, widely considered a flop,

benefitted the region. Studies show that employment during and after the Atlanta Games

increased by 17% in the regions hosting Olympic events.101 Boston 2024 should pair this

information with the forecast that the Games would pump billions of dollars into the economy.

Doing so may dispel concerns that the Olympics could cripple the local economy.

Perhaps most importantly, Boston 2024 should educate local residents about the potential

for the Games to revitalize neighborhoods and expedite planned renovations to the public

transportation system. In particular, it could notify citizens that many of the proposed

transportation improvements are already partially funded and/or underway, and that a well-

executed bid only serves to expedite their implementation. The correlation between the planning

of an Olympic bid and the resulting acceleration of public works projects suggests that the public

would benefit from the bid. Transportation is undoubtedly a necessary public service that

benefits city residents. The bid could mean better transportation, sooner. Even if the bid is

unsuccessful, the public could still enjoy the expedited construction to the T that the bid would

catalyze. Explaining this correlation in detail would garner more public support for the Games.

100 The 1984 Los Angeles Games returned a $232.5 million profit, the 1996 Atlanta Games returned $10 million, and the 2002 Salt Lake City Games returned $40 million. See Boston Foundation, 34. 101 Furthermore, employment in the hosting regions grew 11% more than it did “in other similar metropolitan areas in the south.” See Hotchkiss, Julie L., Moore, Robert E. and Zobay, Stephanie M. “Impact of the 1996 Summer Olympic Games on Employment and Wages in Georgia.” Southern Economic Journal 69 (2003): 691–704, 692.

20

III. Execute the Statewide Referendum

A statewide referendum is an intelligent method to engender public trust. Boston 2024

should continue to coordinate its planning with opposition groups in order to craft referendum

language. Doing so ensures that the outcome of the referendum will have the public’s support

and respect because of the increased transparency and bipartisanship. That transparency will

furthermore legitimize the authority of Boston 2024 and its plans for the city. Pursuing a

referendum attaches the public’s input to the design of the Games – the public input would

therefore apply to the beneficial outcomes to the T as well. Dialogue should strengthen the entire

community by connecting a specific revitalization project to the public’s participation.

Conclusion

Boston should celebrate its appointment as the US bid for the 2024 Summer Olympic

Games. The selection is a testament to the city’s historical significance in American society and

in the world of athletics. Furthermore, the potential to host the Games puts Boston in the position

to implement or expedite substantial infrastructure projects. Besides the economic impact, the

anticipation for the Games could incentivize revitalizing construction projects in neglected areas,

and additionally push planned transportation improvements to the forefront of the city’s agenda.

That the city’s residents will decide the fate of the bid should additionally signal celebration,

rather than concern. While it is true that negative opinion would preclude Boston from

continuing the planning efforts, the fact that city residents have that power suggests that

democratic accountability will help determine the future of local government and revitalization.

Boston 2024 should embrace this democratic spirit and engender trust in its plans to provide a

comprehensive Games that would breathe new life into Boston. The Mega-event that Boston is

designing may deliver an effective tool to provide democratic revitalization to America’s cities.

21

Appendix A Artist Renderings of Boston 2024 Venues102*

102 Artist renderings are from the Boston 2024 bid to the IOC, but have not yet been uploaded to the planning committee’s website. See Bird, Hayden. “Here is Every Boston 2024 Olympic Rendering From the Bid.” BostInno, January 21, 2015. http://bostinno.streetwise.co/2015/01/21/boston-2024-olympic-renderings-released-with-bid-in-new-presentation-photos/ *Several of these images are also used for the cover page of this document.

22

23