Would Boston Olympics really be gold for Bay State?

Date: 1/15/2015

I love Boston. In my eyes, it is a world-class city and a true melting pot of cultures.

I love the Olympics. The pageantry of the games is second to none.

With both of those said, I approach the idea of a Boston Olympic Games as a winner, especially for us here in Western Massachusetts with a heavy amount of skepticism.

I don’t necessarily doubt that the pro-Boston Olympics folks put on a great show for the U.S. Olympic Committee. I also would not be surprised if Boston is selected over cities like Rome, Paris and Berlin to host the Games.

The questions I have all revolve around one thing, and it’s one thing that has never been evenly distributed in this state – the almighty dollar.

It’s been sold that the Olympic Games could be hosted for approximately $4 billion. With adjustments made by the International Olympic Committee, the Games are supposed to be much more economical than some of the most recent spectacles, like the Sochi games, which topped $50 billion. That makes sense, as cities were unwilling to even compete for a bid with the price of the Games skyrocketing.

But we still live in a world where overages are so common, they are to be expected, especially when it comes a government-involved projects.

But for a moment, let’s assume this Olympics comes together at exactly the price quoted. And, taking the media market into account, let’s also say that a large portion of the cost is offset by corporate sponsorship.

In all likelihood, a bill of hundreds of millions of dollars would be handed to the state of Massachusetts, a state that is currently facing a $700 million shortfall that has prompted new Gov. Charlie Baker to implement a hiring freeze for public safety personnel, including what was to be the newest Massachusetts State Police Academy, social workers and nurses, many of whom surely work with the elderly and mentally or physically disabled.

Even with these freezes, which severely hamper organizations that serve the public from being able to deal with attrition, only about $6.5 million is likely to be saved, according to the Baker Administration. Surely more spending cuts are to come.

So where would the money the state would have to come up with for the Games come from?  Obviously from our tax dollars, which, especially in this end of the state, have already been siphoned off in the past never to be seen again. And what will that mean? More cuts.

Lest we forget that it was another substantial project out east, the Big Dig, which not only cost Western Massachusetts taxpayers substantially more than initially quoted, but it also led directly to negligence in the care of the infrastructure west of Interstate 495.

How long did we have to wait for any concrete plans for the Interstate 91 viaduct repairs? Until concrete literally started falling.

And even with that, what we’ve gotten is a $220 million Band-Aid, with the promise of a bigger, better project down the line. I have been skeptical that this alleged second phase is anything more than an empty promise meant to appease “those folks out there” but if major projects that will be seen by the entire world were on the docket, I would say the odds of a complete viaduct reclamation, and perhaps even completion of the initial project, would shrink faster than a snowball dropped on top of the Olympic torch.

Western Massachusetts schools are faced with cuts seemingly every year due to a combination of mandates handed down from the state that the Commonwealth then neglects to fund, and the promise monies that the state never made good on.

For example, regional school districts were promised 100 percent reimbursement of their transportation costs by the state. In fiscal year 2014, the state offered 66 percent reimbursement, its highest level in years, leaving districts in Massachusetts to find more than $25 million to offset costs that were supposed to be accounted for by the state. How are those unreimbursed costs remedied? Cuts.

Even if the games are a moneymaker for the state, given the well-documented history of eastern money hoarding, what makes us think this would be any different?

Would the Games bring attractions to Western Massachusetts that could generate their own revenue for the area if we can’t count on the state? I’m not holding my breath.

Folks at the Basketball Hall of Fame, for example, are on record in the media as being ready to host basketball-related events. However, given the fact that Boston Mayor Marty Walsh was on a Boston radio station touting it as a “walkable city” that will allow spectators to move from event to event with relative ease, the prospect of something significant taking place 80 miles from the state capital would appear far-fetched, especially since Boston politicians act as if the ride out here is 800 miles across a forsaken desert.

It appears that the Boston 2024 Organizing Committee did a great job considering what they think would be best for a Boston event. That was their job.

Now it’s our job as citizens to consider whether what’s best for Boston would truly be what’s best for the state.