The 2016 Olympic Games

Tuesday, July 11, 2006 at 3:07pm 3 comments (last by AF)

San Francisco is one of the cities looking to host the 2016 Olympic Games and a Chronicle story today has some of the details which include a new stadium and building the Olympic Village in the former Hunter's Point Naval shipyard.

There's a poll along with the story asking if SF should be making a serious bid and I'm disappointed the majority voted "No, it's a huge waste of money". I don't think this should just be about money, because there's prestige that comes with hosting the olympics. For two weeks the entire world would focus on San Francisco.

Yes it will cost a lot of money, but the infrastructure built won't just disappear overnight. The Olympic Village will become housing, the press center would be housing in a new SF State complex already being considered and maybe we'd even see some Muni improvements along the way.

Aren't we supposed to be the city that knows how? This is an opportunity to make some major and lasting improvements (detoxing Hunters Point for starters) to our city and add to San Francisco's amazing history. I know Ydnar would like to see a velodrome too.

3 Comments

will' Wednesday, July 19, 2006 at 5:54am

Ola Jamison,

Interesting...didn't know that SF is also in the running for hosting the 2016 games.

Durban (SA's version of Rio) is apparently also in the running. The same attitude is being exhibited on this side towards the hosting of the games...VERY negative! It seems as if people just can't see the bigger picture! Sad!

http://iafrica.com/news/sa/933711.htm

Hope you are well!

Regards!

will'

Jamison Wednesday, July 19, 2006 at 6:24pm

I think, especially in our case, there's been a rush to condemn the San Francisco bid as too expensive without taking a real looking at what we'd get out of it.

A key part of our bid, is supposed to be a rebuilt stadium at Candlestick Point. Just yesterday the 49er's gave a peak at the new stadium and went so far as to vow not to accept the $100 million in bond money San Franciscan's already voted for and fund it entirely privately.

That isn't altruistic, there are legal issues around whether the plan (which generates most the money through development of the surrounding area) varies too much from what was voted on they even still can take the money.

The fact remains one of the key venues won't even cost the city money.

AF Tuesday, July 25, 2006 at 5:46am

If it creates the political will to create a real transportation system, it will pay off in spades.