The city is abuzz with discussions about the summer Olympics coming to Boston in 2024. Pundits have suggested that this would be an economic and cultural boon for the city. In particular, many have suggested that the Olympics will provide the impetus to repair and expand our ailing transportation system. Before jumping headfirst into this, we should reflect on the historical costs of hosting the games, the true scope of what would be necessary for Boston to host, and the likelihood of receiving the necessary funding assistance from taxpayers.
A review of historical costs for cities in the United States that have hosted the Olympics is a great place to start. The Lake Placid Olympics in 1980 cost roughly $169 million to host with no taxpayer subsidy. The Los Angeles Olympics in 1984 cost roughly $413 million to host, with a $75 million taxpayer subsidy. The Atlanta Olympics in 1996 cost $1.8 billion to host, with a $609 million taxpayer subsidy. Finally, the Salt Lake City Olympics in 2002 cost $2 billion to host, with a taxpayer subsidy of $650 million. These are some staggering numbers.
A quick review of the trends shows that the overall cost of the Olympics accelerated rapidly between the Lake Placid Olympics and the Atlanta Olympics, with a growth rate of 66 percent per year. However, the Salt Lake City Olympics were only 11 percent more expensive than the Atlanta Olympics six years earlier, for a growth rate of only 1.8 percent per year. The Atlanta and Salt Lake games had a taxpayer subsidy between 30 percent and 35 percent. The good news is that the growth in overall costs and taxpayer subsidies seems to be leveling out.
Assuming arguendo that the cost to host the Olympic Games in the United States rises at a rate of 1.8 percent per year, in 2024 it would cost Boston 44 percent more to host the Olympics than it cost Salt Lake City in 2002. That would represent a total cost of just under $3 billion to host the games. With a 30 to 35 percent taxpayer subsidy, that would represent $865 million to $1 billion in taxpayer subsidies. This level of taxpayer contribution is not insignificant, but is within the realm of what could be imagined, given our historical expenditures on transportation infrastructure in Greater Boston.
Unfortunately, this number is simply not a credible amount of public funding as compared to the the total cost to prepare our transportation infrastructure to host an Olympic games. The MBTA has an approximately $2.7 billion maintenance backlog. Before a single capacity expansion project is considered, the historical taxpayer subsidy level would be exceeded by our maintenance backlog alone.
Let’s Try Some Forethought
Hosting the Olympics will certainly require expansions of our highway and transit systems. These projects are expensive. The current Green Line Extension project is projected to cost $1.6 billion and extends the Green Line a modest 4.3 miles. Projects such as this would need to be considered for access to every venue where Olympic events would be held.
Which brings us to the crux of the issue: Can we host the Olympics on a very modest budget that fixes our transit system and makes very modest transportation capacity improvements, but relies heavily on our existing routes to serve the needs of the games? Can we creatively stage the games on existing transit and highway lines to minimize costly expansion projects and focus on eliminating our maintenance backlog, which in and of itself will improve capacity?
Let’s use an example to illustrate this point. Imagine a scenario where a soccer stadium is built in the Inner Belt area of Somerville. Transit access is achieved by the Green Line station at Washington Street, which will have opened four years earlier. This would be superb planning indeed.
Hosting the Olympics is a tantalizing goal, especially for those of us who are strong advocates of our transportation system. However, we must have realistic expectations about what taxpayers are willing to spend to subsidize the games. Extravagant new infrastructure, such as was on display in Sochi at the last winter Olympics, is simply outside of the realm of feasibility for Boston. Our task, if an Olympic bid is successful, is to identify a modest transportation infrastructure plan that can be sold to the legislature and the taxpayers and will have enduring impacts on the vitality of the system after the three weeks of the games. Any other plan jeopardizes our credibility with the taxpayer.
William F. Lyons Jr. is president of Fort Hill Cos. of Boston.
