Now that the Olympic cauldron in Vancouver is about to be extinguished, it’s time to get serious about bringing the torch, and the Winter Games, to Colorado.
Gold in the hills spurred our first boom, and the allure of gold medals could usher in the next.
Denver in 2022!
The Mile High City is one of two cities, along with Reno-Tahoe, prominently mentioned as possible U.S. cities to host the 2022 Winter Games — should the U.S. Olympic Committee choose to go after a bid. “We’re definitely serious and willing to talk when [the USOC] is interested in a winter bid,” Rob Cohen, founder of the Metro Denver Sports Commission, told me last week from Vancouver.
So why would Denver, a city with a huge budget shortfall, and Colorado, a state that’s letting prisoners out of jail early to make ends meet, consider hosting the Games?
Money. And because it would be a heckuva lot more fun to watch a gold medal hockey game at Pepsi Center in February than lacrosse. (No offense, Mammoth.)
The state has a revenue problem, and many suspect we’ll need some kind of tax hike, along with another Referendum C-type vote to free the state of TABOR restrictions, to fully recover. In Colorado, tax hikes must be approved by voters, and that can be a risky proposition.
But what if an increase was sold as an investment to bring the Olympics here? We would be investing in infrastructure we need anyway, but also would be bringing a money-making venture to Colorado.
Consider this: RTD’s FasTracks needs to double its existing 0.4 percent sales tax just to finish the project. What if that hike was sold as part of an Olympics package to, say, connect the Olympic Village to Denver and other events via rail?
The state’s highway network also is chronically under-funded. An Olympic tax could not only improve Interstate 70 as it chugs west into the mountains, it also would force planners to come up with a better way to move people up I-70. Is it via rail? Maybe it’s some type of 21st century people- mover that could be used every weekend in the summer and winter, long after the Olympics are gone, when I-70 is clogged.
By 2022, Pepsi Center will be 23 years old. McNichols Arena lasted 24 years. This could be an opportunity to build a new sports arena in partnership with the teams that use Pepsi Center.
Tax-shy Republicans might even find themselves backing a tax hike to pay for infrastructure upgrades. It’s for the hockey, eh.
Of course, Colorado has some serious hurdles to clear.
Denver is the only city to ever turn down the Games, and the International Olympic Committee is said to have a long memory.
Denver was awarded the 1976 games, but voters in 1972 rejected them by saying no taxpayer money could be used to host them. Voters questioned whether Colorado could afford the Games or the crowds. Did we want the crush of growth that would follow?
Well, the growth came anyway, and we didn’t benefit from the infrastructure that would have come along with the Games.
This could be Colorado’s chance to get it right.
Unlike China, which built amazing 21st century arenas that now sit largely empty, Colorado could build only what’s functional and what would be used long after the torch leaves town.
And with corporate sponsors dominating the Olympics, the Games can generate a surplus. The 2002 Games in Salt Lake City netted a profit of about $100 million.
Vancouver, however, is having some financial troubles, partly due to the global recession and the city’s financial bailout of the Olympic Village, which was hampered by cost overruns and the credit crisis.
It’s a long way to 2022, and the economy will fluctuate in the coming years, but if Denver plays it smart, the Olympics could be the boon we’re looking for.
If Salt Lake City can do it, so can we.
Editorial page editor Dan Haley can be reached at dhaley@denverpost.com.
