Hey, there! Log in / Register

Olympic group walks back public financing - with an asterisk

The Globe reports Boston 2024 will no longer seek public financing of a temporary Olympic stadium in Widett Circle - and the luxury mega-project that would replace it.

But the group could seek public money for infrastructure improvements - which both the governor and mayor are on board with - something that could prove much pricier than earlier estimates if Boston 2024 makes the proposed games less walkable and more spread out around the state.

Free tagging: 

Ad:
Like the job UHub is doing? Consider a contribution. Thanks!

Comments

Yeah, that looks pretty, pretty bad. Attn: Politicians - RUN as fast as you can away from the Olympic fiasco.

up
Voting closed 0

The ever astute Hester Prynne posted another shrewd examination of how the legislature is handling this thing over in the senate.

http://hesterprynne.net/2015/05/23/glass-half-full-state-senate-on-olymp...

The DeLeo side seems to be wishing it will all go away.

up
Voting closed 0

At this point, how do they expect anyone to believe their new claims?

up
Voting closed 0

What's with all this continued talk of anything at Widett Circle? The owners of that property have said they're not selling, period, and Mahty has said he won't use eminent domain to try and take it. So what scheme to acquire WC do they have up their sleeve?

up
Voting closed 0

If they can get the legislature to create a quasi-public agency or use an existing one, the agency will acquire the property-- this is a public authority acquiring public & private land for private purpose and the profit it brings.

They'll finance the purchase of the property using taxpayers funds from future taxes collected on developments built after the Olympics on this land (so not until the late 2020s.) Taxpayers and the City of Boston carry the risk of the debt.

It's a big scam on taxpayers. There is no reason the public should have to finance any of it. In fact TIF is supposed to be for attracting financing to low-income areas with blight not Olympic stadiums and luxury housing developments.

up
Voting closed 0

With or without the Olympics. People are desperate for new housing close to the inner city. This could be a great asset for the city (and it could use the proceeds to pay down hundreds of millions or even billions in debt).

I think the Olympic movement just stabbed themselves in the foot - or worse - with this revelation - but as some have said, the process causes us to ask some questions and finding a new home for all the Widett Circle operations and developing a large mixed use development might not be such a bad idea.

Let's not throw the baby out with the bathwater.

up
Voting closed 0

Joseph Giglio, who teaches corporate strategy at Northeastern University, said, “What’s transpired this week is just validating the public’s suspicions about the motivations and competency of Boston 2024.”

This has been the argument all along. This pack of poohbahs is low grade, whatever their credentials are and their money hoard size is. Thank dog we didn't have a poobah pile that was actually astute. We could have actually been stuck with this thing.

This is the pass that Warren, Baker, DeLeo and others need to begin the job of shuffling it off to Buffalo, (or Hamburg) with public support to offset the risks of hard hat and campaign contributor alienation.

All the remains is the exit kabuki

up
Voting closed 0

Somebody get Shirley Leung at the Globe on the phone, she needs to churn out another "Olympics are good, Boston residents are crybabies" column ASAP or she may loose out on her future job as press secretary to Boston 2024. Although she may already see the handwriting on the wall as she's moved on to seeing if the Kraft family can support her as cheerleader for their new soccer stadium (for the 17 home games they play each year).

up
Voting closed 0

Now that the DOT move fell through, P-3 is looking good for a Revs home. Ruggles is a major transport hub. Do they need a soccer stadium for the Olympics? Twofer for Pom-Pom.

up
Voting closed 0

Remember Marjorie Arons-Baron? She used to work for Channel 5? She writes a blog that I stumbled upon this morning. She has a good post about the Globe's coverage of the Olympic bid including Shirley being a bit too enthusiastic.

http://marjoriearonsbarron.com/2015/05/28/globe-struggles-to-balance-oly...

If this has already been posted, my apologies.

up
Voting closed 0

After fawning over Leung, that post says:

We need a Snopes.com for fact-checking what’s being said about the Boston Olympics bid. Independent vetting of competing claims could go far to dialing back the venomous characterizations of pros and cons as self-serving fat cat elites versus two-year-olds having tantrums.

That's the job of the Globe!

When the main newspaper is not doing its job (and might as well be on the take), and city and state law enforcement aren't reining in the corruption, then it's time for the feds to step in. Operation Plunderdome II.

up
Voting closed 0

Isn't doing it's job.... It isn't the main newspaper!

up
Voting closed 0

If not, then what is the main newspaper?

up
Voting closed 0

Uhub.

up
Voting closed 0

and a bunch of more than surprised local poobahs that for once the taxpayers in this state have said enough to their greed. Those in power think that we've forgotten the cost over runs and the hours and hours spent trying to get home through the construction of the last public rip off.

And Walsh. What can I say about Walsh that I haven't already said? That he's nothing more than a balloon headed bag man who only owes his seat to those that are trying to enrich themselves over this boondoggle and not through any type of inspirational leadership ability. Post Mayoral job? Bain? No, no finance degree. Mintz Levin? No, he's not a lawyer. Union lobbyist or do nothing job at Suffolk Construction? There we go.

up
Voting closed 0

According to that article, they might put more venues outside the city, which sounds good to me.

How about putting the stadium at Suffolk Downs or Soldiers field? Either would be less disruptive than Widett. Or just use Gilette.

up
Voting closed 0

Are you smoking crack? I drive east on that every night, 5-6pm. And the westbound traffic is a parking lot from North Harvard to Watertown. That's a complete no-go. Like the rest of this hare-brained greed grab.

up
Voting closed 0

You, my friend, win the internet today.

up
Voting closed 0

count to hrair.

up
Voting closed 0

Not that I support this boondoggle.. but I really don't see why Suffolk Downs or Wonderland Park wouldn't be a great option for the same reasons why a Casino would. Close to the airport. Close to public transit. Lots of land and not near all that much in terms of residential areas (some, but not that much)

If Suffolk isn't avaliable, Wonderland would be a good close second. Even if it wasn't the stadium, they could build the beach volley ball stadium on the parking lots at Wonderland Park (or even the old dog track itself). So then they could say the are having the volleyball tourney there at Revere Beach. Sure it's across the street, but it's *almost* the beach, plus the larger lot (and build to suit) would probably be better in terms of logistics (security, tides, stands, etc etc).

And since the Olympics seem like it's more of a land grab, this area could be redeveloped after to the mix used (as they are proposing Widdet) because it's already pretty much empty (except commuter parking and the track, which is all televised now). They could do some ToD after and build that commuter rail stop they've always talked about and a people mover connecting it to the Blue Line.

Of course I don't support this boondoggle, but it's always amazed me at what choises they picked for venue locations. And like someone said in a previous Olympic thread, it's clear these choices were based on post-Olympic resale value.. not when there's swaths of land (i.e. Wonderland, Suffolk, etc) outside of the city that's ready for such development.

up
Voting closed 0

but it's not called Boston's Cicero for nothing.

up
Voting closed 0

From the Globe article:

"Olympic planners have had “good conversations” with people connected to other possible sites for beach volleyball, Davey said. He would not name them, saying at one point the committee “learned from some of our past mistakes” and wants to be sure “the stakeholders are all informed” before plans become public.

“If we can’t have an iconic backdrop like the State House, we’d love a water backdrop,” he said.

It probably can’t be Revere Beach, he said, an obvious choice, and one the committee investigated. Planners have concluded there is not a proper spot to handle the temporary structure needed for one of the Games’ most popular events, he said."

up
Voting closed 0

"Planners have concluded there is not a proper spot to handle the temporary structure needed for one of the Games’ most popular events"

Roundabout way of saying Revere Beach is a pit.

up
Voting closed 0

Which is what makes Wonderland Park so much more attractive. While the beach's geometry (long and narrow, esp with high tide) may not work for a venue, a large slot of land nearby may!

So yes USOC could still say the Volleyball Venue is at the "Wonderland Park @ Revere Beach", even though its not right ON the beach. It's close enough. And build the structure high enough (i.e. w/ parking/services underneath) it should be high enough for TV camera's to get a 'ocean view' from the venue. (think boom cam)

up
Voting closed 0

Lots of existing, underused structures and athletic fields; room for more structures; rail access; highway access. There's even an airfield. No need to cut down mature trees in parks; little-to-no effect on metro commuters. There's a river that could be dammed for rowing events.

Plus, it's far away from me.

up
Voting closed 0

At least you are plausible with your ideas, but I seriously wonder if the small towns nearby would want all the disruption either. But I also wonder if Boston 2024 has discovered Devens and will make similar proposals when the release their revised plans.

up
Voting closed 0

I can't speak for the residents of Ayer, Harvard, et al, but the place was an active Army base for decades, with frequent artillery practice you could hear as far away as Littleton*. The Olympic circus probably would have a much more focused impact. Road access to Devens doesn't pass through any residential areas; in fact there is a dedicated exit from Rte2 into the complex, and another could be built farther east, where Devens abuts the highway.

* Possible new Olympic event: Unexploded Round Disarming

up
Voting closed 0

How about putting the stadium in Rome or Los Angeles? And then Boston 2024 can screw off and die like everyone wants?

up
Voting closed 0

So when is the press going to take the mayor to task for supporting these habitual liars? Where's the level of skepticism from our elected executive to protect the public from malfeasance?

up
Voting closed 0

...the more it sounds like Hedley Lamarr's plot in Blazing Saddles.

[warning: objectionable language]

up
Voting closed 0

They got caught trying to scam. They should be looking at criminal charges, not at refining their scam. The people are sick of having this hang over them, while the corrupt operate with impunity.

up
Voting closed 0

Trying to steal millions is fine as long as you are a rich white male. Prison is for minorities who sell a little weed.

up
Voting closed 0

Even if you're a RWM, you have to be careful who you steal the millions from, as Bernie Madoff can attest. Ripping off other RW people will get you in trouble. Of course, if you rip them off and are not a RWM, you're completely screwed.

If you're a big corporation, like BP or BoA or Bear-Stearns, it's open season -- you can rip off anyone with relative impunity.

up
Voting closed 0

1. By increasing the property tax rate. I will join everyone else in the quaint practice called tar and feathering and riding out on a rail if the City Councilors were foolish enough to do this.

2. A Commonwealth wide surcharge. Again tar and feathering time.

3. A surcharge on every possible transaction.

Why the 3rd item? Because when I rented a Uhaul van today and discovered nearly 25% of the bill went to rental tax and the Boston CCF (wonder what the F stands for? An action against Boston residents?) So baring the citizens of Boston and Mass suddenly having a Olympic religious experience and seeing God in the 5 rings of greed the hundreds of millions - or will it be a billion? - will result in the Commonwealth finding insidious and backdoor ways to pump in the cash.

Plus if the current governor is actually waiting on the political wind (or monetary contributions) to change his attitude toward Convention Center 2.0 then we might wind up with a zillion new fees. There will be fees for growing trees, fees for walking on the sidewalk, fees for riding elevators. Once enough promises of campaign funds and retirement plans are made to our local leeches, I mean leaders, there may wind up being a naughtiness fee for bad mouthing the Olympics (the Mayor already tried that on city employees (boiler plate? Do we look that naive?).

When something which has the ostensible purpose of bringing people together is creating so much acrimony, distrust and painting a picture of out right lies, hubris (because Mr. Fish, et al. are beyond arrogant - volleyball on the Common? Tear up Franklin Park for the horsey set (we promise a new swimming pool - are, right) and deception maybe the Olympian gods are saying DON'T DO THIS!

up
Voting closed 0

They love their fees. Cholly Baker will surely be Feemeister during his brief tenure.

It's a weasel word way of confiscating money from the mid and lower income side in order to protect sacred cow rich assholes from paying appropriate taxes for their various looting and filching schemes as they don't add value to anything.

They just declare it is magically worth more.

It is a common practice in New Hampshire where they never shut up about low taxes,(except for your house).

up
Voting closed 0

NH meals tax: 9%.

At least they repealed the campsite tax. (Cabins have a 9% tax, though.)

up
Voting closed 0