Olympics-sized event no big deal
L.A. can readily handle games on an international scale
I get it. The Olympics, and the opportunity to host the games, can be a tough sell. Not everybody wants to. Not everybody can. And I totally identify with taxpayers scared off by infrastructure costs, security concerns and the like.
(Hey, I live in a region that went 20 years without the NFL because it refused to build a stadium at taxpayer expense for a private owner. Stan Kroenke’s footing the bill for the Inglewood home of the Rams and Chargers himself, as part of a larger entertainment development. It continues a trend in L.A. of privately built stadiums and arenas.)
That said, the Summer Olympics work in L.A.
Much of that is because of those privately built and owned facilities. When the extravaganza returns in 2028 for its third visit to Southern California, venues such as Staples Center and Kroenke’s stadium will be involved, as will such familiar settings as the Coliseum, the Rose Bowl, UCLA’s Pauley Pavilion and USC’s Galen Center.
That’s what makes the Olympics work: Maybe more than any city, L.A. has a cornucopia of existing facilities and has far less in (a) construction costs and (b) buildings projected to be white elephants after the circus leaves. Even the Olympic Villages are placed on the campuses of USC and UCLA, as they were in 1984, reducing the taxpayers’ commitment.
And there is this: Before the ’84 Games, forecasts were that Southern California’s notorious traffic would reach a choking point because of Olympic events and spectator/athlete travel. Instead, employers and their workers adjusted schedules and freeway traffic was actually smoother during the Olympics than before or after. (And that was before L.A.’s current Metro subway system was built.)
Simply put, L.A. can handle big events. The Olympics are merely the biggest of the big.