Dubi / April 6, 2009 3:15 AM

I don't understand why it had to be bundled with public housing.

flange / April 6, 2009 9:05 AM

it's no less stupid than it's ever been.

CVAL / April 6, 2009 9:43 AM

In response to Dubi "I don't understand why it had to be bundled with public housing."

The area proposed to have the olympic village built and other venues erected "will" cause displacement of local residents, many of whom are low-income. In order to fulfill some agenda of social justice public housing, for the displaced, had to be part of the post-olympic plan.

I believe it is a win-win because city residents who would not have the opportunity to live in better housing will now have that opportunity and the city will (hopefully) have the Olympics without leaving a bad-taste in the mouths of the citizens being asked to uproot their lives for the event.

If you were asked to leave your home so someone could build a city property and offered nothing for it you would be pretty pissed. It is just fair that the people with the most to loose receive something for their trouble.

Spook / April 6, 2009 9:48 AM

Now that we are in a Depression, the 5th Floor Crime Crew needs a new troff in which to feed. If the taxpayers are stupid enough to give them yet another one, then Bon Appetit!

DaveDave / April 6, 2009 10:31 AM

As I've stated before, I see too many other problems here that should take precedence. Yes, i know that the situation here will never be perfect, so why should that be a prerequisite for hosting the Olympics. And I agree, slightly, if the problems were only minor. But a murder rate that is near or at the top in the nation? Rampant political corruption in hiring and city contracts? A city budget that is so bad we're selling off civic assets like Crazy Eddie? C'mon, who can ignore that? And I agree with Mr. Spook: Giving the city control of all that cash and trusting them to do the right thing with it is like going to the Bunny Ranch in Nevada: You're basically asking to be fucked (hey-ooooo!). Nope, not the right time, the right mayor, etc. But if they could promise us that they will cut the city murder rate in half this year, just half, I might get on board.

charlie / April 6, 2009 10:47 AM

I'm cool with it warts and all.

Mucky Fingers / April 6, 2009 11:27 AM

I agree with Spook and with Dave.

I would love to see the world come here for that kind of thing, I just don't want it handled by Daley and his greasy ilk. We are already suffering the combined efforts of a horribly mismanaged city government, run by a mayor who is selling off the city piece-by-piece to keep his cronies and other useless idiots in deep pockets. The last thing we need is a worldwide event like the Olympics handled by da guys. Having the Olympics here would only justify Daley's god-awful type of government.

Besides, Latin America has only hosted the Olympics once, so I'm rooting for Rio. I'm sure if that happens the Brazilian government will be conscious of all us Olympic tourists and get their hookers tested.

dragonslayer / April 6, 2009 11:32 AM

I was real supportive until this weekend when I read about the disruptions this will cause on the Lakefront.

David / April 6, 2009 11:40 AM

If we can get Blair Kamin to act as Architecture czar and Patrick Fitzgerald to hold the purse strings, then I'm down with it.

Otherwise, the opportunity for fiscal and architectural rape grows exponentially.

V / April 6, 2009 12:30 PM

I'd like to see Olympic games played here.

annie / April 6, 2009 12:34 PM

I would love to see some of the posters here come up with better ideas on how to fix the city's budget....

maardvark / April 6, 2009 1:12 PM

My point of view: Who cares what I think? What matters is what the Olympic committee thinks. And as it happens, I don't think we have even a sliver of a chance with them.

The Tokyo bid is technically better. The Rio bid is politically better (because the Olympics have never been to South America, and because Rio has narrowly missed out twice before). Plus, Chicago still has an Al Capone mixed with Upton Sinclair image abroad--a big, dirty, unsafe city (of course that perception is a half-century behind the times, which really is the one plus that comes from this bid). Combine all that with the fact that the Olympic committee chose to come here during early April when it's still winter, and I really think we haven't a ghost of a chance.

Probably right now we're in third, ahead of only Madrid (politically inexpedient given London 2012--the last time the summer Olympics graced the same continent twice in a row was 1948-1952).

DaveDave / April 6, 2009 1:26 PM

I would love to see some of the posters here come up with better ideas on how to fix the city's budget....

I have one. It's called "Getting Rid of Daley". Do you how much money is tied up in corruption, in the whole shady city contracting program, the payout for police brutality charges (that the city usually just pays out to get it out of the), the lawsuits filed and won by people wrongly fired for political reason who win their cases.

Yeah, I think all of the millions and millions that have been squandered in the past four years alone would go a long way toward getting the budgets in check.

Now let's talk city waste, in particular warehouses full of brand new unused equipment (computers, even vehicles) bought for the CHA or CPS that sits unused...

annie / April 6, 2009 2:14 PM

Wow, Davedave...how do you know so much?

flange / April 6, 2009 2:30 PM

like me, annie, he probably reads the papers. it's worth trying.

DaveDave / April 6, 2009 2:32 PM

Wow, Davedave...how do you know so much?

Not sure if you were being sarcastic (my Sarcast-O-Meter doesn't get turned on until Tuesday afternoon), but just from reading papers and, in the past, writing for them. And from working at the aforementioned CHA and CPS on different occasions.

Sarah-Ji / April 6, 2009 2:37 PM

I liked the Open Letter in last week's Reader. In short, I--personally and with no pretense to possessing reason--hope the Olympics never see the light of day in Chicago until the city addresses more pressing matters.

I am, however, a wholehearted supporter of The Unlympics.

mucifer / April 6, 2009 2:47 PM

unfortunately, annie represents most of chicago. blind trust in the shadiest mayor and a desire to have a national stage in her backyard. WTF!? the $$ held up in TIFs alone could get us out of the budget crisis, but Daley won't release them. and our schools suck, our crime is the worst, we pay more and more to own property and buy cars and shop ALL THE TIME. and for what? empty high rises and shiny new parks in centralized locations? the olympics would fuck so many people, including annie, but she wants it BAD. i want the infrastructure to prepare for the olympics and then get DENIED. that would be dope. a nice scandal would help too, then maybe we could get out of this Dalegacy mess we've been in my whole damn life.

DaveDave / April 6, 2009 5:02 PM

It's the whole bread-and-circus aspect of it that I don't like. Give them theatrics, give them fireworks and balloons and a party and maybe they won't notice the other stuff. Pretty up Michigan Ave, throw up some flowers, shine up the Bean, etc. and call ourselves a world class city. Hooray. Meanwhile there are some neighborhoods in this city that are truly fucked up. We have one of the highest murder rates in the Nation and probably in the "civilized" world (I'm not counting Rwanda or the Sudan or places like that). I know other cities that are bidding have their fucked up aspects too. But to be honest I don't care about them. I care about US. and if you think that the end result is new housing for the poor you have been (in the words of Malcolm X via Denzell Washington) had, hoodwinked, bamboozled. The plans for the Olympic aftermath will only be a continuance of the lakefront landgrab of the south side that began with the new condos, etc. across from Museum Campus and Soldier field. This is just Daley's way of pushing it further south. If there was truly a concern for housing for the poor, don't you think that it would have been address in all the construction going on south of Roosevelt Road in the past five or six years. Ask yourself where in this city is new housing for the less affluent being build RIGHT NOW. This so-called plan for low income housing in the post Olympic ground will morph into something that no one will recognize from the current plans. Bank on it.

So, yeah, screw the Olympics and all of that... Led them conduct their scam the old fashioned way.

annie / April 6, 2009 5:36 PM

I was being sarcastic. I work for the City. I've been here 14 years and I can assure you Flange and Mucifer that I read the papers plus I work here and I know what is going on. I don't consider myself a loyalist, I don't agree with everything that happens around here, but I do believe that my dept. in particular is working our butts off to make sure every neighborhood is livable.
The CPD is not doing a great job, I'm not sure if it's leadership, my cop friends don't seem to think so...it's really hard to control the crime in this city, I don't have answers for that.

Now, back to the topic at hand, I wasn't sure I wanted the olympics until both my brothers who are in construction can't get much work, it will bring jobs and I think we can all agree that jobs would be a good thing. I wouldn't consider that wanting it BAD! It would help a lot of people.

I'm happy to know that DaveDave has some real city experience under his belt to make such comments.

What I really think is that everyone just hates Daley b/c it's almost fashionable to do so.
Stop believing everything you read

DaveDave / April 6, 2009 11:17 PM

my dept. in particular is working our butts off to make sure every neighborhood is livable.

no one ever criticized the actual workers. And I'm glad you work your butt off. Bujt every neighborhood is NOT livable and it's not your fault. Live everyone who works for the city, you work on what the mayor says you work on. You may work hard, but you still work on what they want and how they want you to. I was at the CHA during the whole Plan for Transformation thing, which was basically a land grab. The rules were set up to get as many people out of public housing (for instance, if someone living in your house had a criminal record, you could be kicked out of public housin permanently, meaning a grandmother who took in her grandson who committed a crime was kicked out of public housing for good.) Was public housing as it was in a shambles and need to be overhauled? sure. But did the Plan result in better housng for low income families? Hell no. But did we "work our butts off" on the entire program? We sure did.

Bottom line, just because they people in the middle have good intentions, it's the one at the top that calls the shots regardless.

The things I believe about Daley are based on facts and results that are clear to anybody with eyes, even if you don't read the paper. i admire your loyalty, but don't let it blind you. Look around. The city budget and corruption is not a myth created by the press...

Steven / April 7, 2009 2:15 AM

While it would certainly put Chicago in the spotlight, I don't think it's a good idea. The Olympic Games happen during what, a two week period? Let's see... that's three kids murdered, another two kids dropped out of the third story of a burning building, one train derailment, two pedestrians killed by a train, one indictment of a "top advisor" to Daley, another indictment of an alderman, one sink-hole swallowing a car, half a dozen beach closings and at least three more accusations of sexual abuse by Catholic clergy. No, I don't think a spotlight on Chicago is a good idea. Not unless the Olympics are broadcast on E! or MTV2.

flange / April 7, 2009 9:11 AM

i hope your brothers get jobs, annie. but there's a greater good and i don't want their jobs to be at the price the olympics would exert on the city.

i resent the "fashionable" comment. shortly after i moved here, there was a city election i wasn't eligible to vote in, so i waited until after it to register. when i reached the counter, the woman asked if it was a new or changed registration, and i told her i hadn't voted here yet. she typed my name in and corrected me that i had voted in the recent city election. and, you know, what we read about what's going on in the city is pretty well-documented. i'm not accusing you of getting your city job through patronage; let's have the same good-faith effort from you, ok?

JZ / April 7, 2009 11:03 AM

I'm not pro games, but if we get them, we'll have to start an even bigger fight - the fight for the citizens of the city to gain something from the Olympics.

Cheryl / April 7, 2009 12:44 PM

I still see it as another way Daley gets to stick it to poor people.

Oh, I'm against that.

Cheryl / April 7, 2009 12:52 PM

no one ever criticized the actual workers.

Except the Mayor.

Joe / April 7, 2009 4:03 PM

I'd love to have the Olympics here. I'm immensely proud of this city and I'd love it if the world came together here for a summer. I'd love the chance to get out and meet people from the world community, not to mention, the chance to see world-class sporting events for two months and be able to take the train home afterwords.

It would be great for the city to have the construction projects for the next few years. With the condo bubble petering out, there a a ton of workers who are out of steady work. The construction of the olympic venues will give them the much needed income in the coming years.

Not to mention that the runoff from the olympics will help some the of the outstanding projects out there. Developments like Roosevelt Square have been slow in the current market, but with its proximity to the olympic venues, it may pick back up if we get the games. Hotels like the waldorf=astoria and shangi-la may pull their projects back online to meet the demand of the games and runup.

And for the detractors that point to millennium park budget overruns; haven't you been to the park recently? When I first moved here, the rail yards were a gaping hole in the downtown city flow. Since the park has opened, the east side of the loop has become a lively area. Let's say that the entire budget of the park added up to around $90 per resident of the city ($270m of public money, 3m residents). I feel like I've gotten more than my money's worth. I can't count the times I've dropped by to see a free concert, show visitors around or just sit on the grass. If it were to personally cost me another $90 to have the olympics next door, I'd be just fine with that.

I understand that some people just don't want the games here, but I chalk it up to selfishness. People just don't want to be inconvenienced with a bunch of tourists. I don't buy that people are so concerned about things like the homeless or public housing or else they'd be out there helping those people instead of holding up silly signs around town.

Cheryl / April 7, 2009 5:08 PM

Oh that's right Joe, thanks for reminding me--I'm a liar. It's not that I'm sick of King Richard and his willingness to ignore what the voters want. It's not that I'm concerned that the 'mixed income' housing will be unaffordable (and temporary anyway, don't forget that part). It's just that as a person who works right off the Mag Mile, I feel I may be inconvenienced by the tourists.

DaveDave / April 7, 2009 5:31 PM

I'm immensely proud of this city and I'd love it if the world came together here for a summer.

They can come here now. In fact they'd probably like it more without the crush of an Olympic crowd. The rest of the world knows about Chicago, and no, it's not about Al Capone all the time. If anything it's about Michael Jordan and Oprah. In fact, I'd rather they visit our city now than during an Olympics when the chance of reading about some visitor who wanders off the beaten path and is greeted by thugs who smell Olympic cash and clueless tourists.

I understand that some people just don't want the games here, but I chalk it up to selfishness.

Selfishness? Read the posts of the people against it again. I see things about the city's budget, housing for the poor, the chance for rampant corruption, etc. tons of other issues that affect EVERYONE not just them.

People just don't want to be inconvenienced with a bunch of tourists. I don't buy that people are so concerned about things like the homeless or public housing or else they'd be out there helping those people instead of holding up silly signs around town.

How do you know they aren’t? What, because they took an afternoon off to protest for an hour against the Olympics, that means they don’t care or are insincere? If you take an hour off for lunch (which I assume you do) does that mean you don’t care about your job? Guess what, Joe: you can care about what happens to the homeless and still attend a one hour rally. In fact, I'd say they care more than you do since they took the time go downtown to have their voices heard. BTW, how many PRO Olympic rallys have you been to? Or don't you really care as much as you say you do? We're going to require proof of your sincerity, since you seem to require it of all others.

http://blogs.chicagoreader.com/politics/2009/04/02/editorial-boards-speak/#comments

Spook / April 7, 2009 7:51 PM

DaveDave, you should get some sort of humanitarian
award for trying to educate these as, Ward Churchill coined the term ""Little Eichmanns"