Now that Vancouver has the 2010 Olympics where do we go from here ?
Who will keep an independent eye on the activities of the organising committees, sponsors, environment, contracted workers and many other aspects of the games ?
Phil Le Good (Researcher) writes in response to Patrick Condon's article in The Tyee Online, "Vancouver Blows Its Olympic Village Opportunity", www.thetyee.ca, March 17, 2004:
Remember Mayor Larry Campbell, Jim Green and other 2010 Bid Boosters saying how the Olympics weren't going to cost the city anything? How the Games would be a good deal for the City? Here's what the No Games folks found out during the Vancouver Plebiscite campaign....but no one reported it!
In the last days of NPA dominance in Vancouver's City Hall, in the secrecy of the Mayor's Office, after the electorate had voted to give COPE a chance, city officials and 2010 Bid Corp members were busy signing legal agreements committing the City to 2010 Winter Games financial obligations.
One of these agreements titled, "Games Facility Agreement - Vancouver Athlete's Village", (to be located on the city owned South East False Creek Lands) committed the City of Vancouver to the following estimated costs (2003 dollars):
1. All site remediation costs: $16.3 million
2. Infrastructure: $31 million
3. Finance: $15 million
4. Building Construction: $105 million
The total estimated financial responsibilities for the Vancouver Athlete's
Village: $167.3 million
The Feds and Province, through the Bid Corp, promise to help pay for some of the costs...$30 million...leaving the City of Vancouver to finance a total of $137.3 million!
Section 6.2 of the Vancouver Athlete's Village Agreement states: "Except for the BidCorp Contribution, the City will be responsible to provide all funding for the development and construction of the Permanent Facilities."
The new COPE council was made aware of all of the legal obligations the former NPA council made in regards to the 2010 Winter Games Bid. Despite being aware of the costs of the Athlete's Village and the implications it would have on future development of the City owned SE False Creek Lands, Mayor Campbell, Councillors Green, Louie (not Louis), Stephenson and Cadman
voted to Boost the Games.
Also, Councillor Green and others have consistently stated to the media and public that the 564 unit Athlete's Village will be turned into social housing at the end of the 2010 Games. Here's what the Agreement actually states:
Section 8.2 "City to Provide Non-Market Housing. The City agrees to facilitate the conversion of a portion of the Permanent Facilities into non-market housing as a lasting legacy to the community. The City will make the final determination of the form and nature of the non-market housing and will make reasonable best efforts to deliver the target of approximately 250
units of non-market housing."
It appears that only a "portion" of the Village will be used for "non-market housing". Is non-market housing social housing? The agreement doesn't define the term "non-market housing" so you're guess is as good as mine.
Will the 'Don' of the Downtown Eastside be around to ensure that the City Council of the day makes "reasonable best efforts" to provide "approximately" 250 "non-market" housing units to Vancouver's 50,000 residents in need of affordable housing?
I don't think Section 8.2 guarantees any social housing! What will the cost of a 450 sq.ft. SE False Creek studio be in 2010? It may be non-market but will it be affordable for the tens of thousands of residents who are currently paying over 50% of their gross incomes for substandard housing?
Perhaps some of this explains why the enlightened vision of many Vancouver's residents work on SE False Creek has been scrapped for yet another real estate windfall for the city's development community.
Here's what Frank O'Brien, editor of the Western Investor had to say about the real purpose of hosting the 2010 Games in his Western Perspective column on June 2002:
"When Jack Poole addressed a room full of real estate developers this spring it erased any doubts of what the 2010 Winter Olympics bid for Vancouver-Whistler is really all about.
At the risk of sounding naive, we had understood the bid was aimed at getting the games, raising Vancouver's international profile and welcoming elite athletes to one of the world's best skiing locations.
Wrong. The real purpose of the 2010 Olympics bid is to seduce the provincial and federal governments and long suffering taxpayers into footing a billion dollar bill to pave the path for future real estate sales. Whether the bid is successful or not is actually immaterial.
"If the Olympic bid wasn't happening we would have to invent something." Poole, chair of the 2010 Vancouver Bid Corp. and noted real estate developer, said in a most telling understatement.
It is hard to imagine any fantasy that fits better than the Olympics bid if you are into real estate development."
