The announcement that Chicago, Illinois, will not host the 2016
Olympic Games took the hopeful wind out of many in the Windy City.
Dreams of hosting the 2016 Olympics were dashed for many Chicagoans. But for others, the news was welcome.
But for almost half of the city's dwellers, the International Olympic Committee's decision was winning news.
A spokeswoman for No Games Chicago, a grass-roots organization opposed
to hosting the Olympics, said she was "relieved" by the vote Friday in
Copenhagen, Denmark.
Chicago's Olympic fever, spotty as it was,
broke abruptly when the city was the first of four final contenders to
be knocked out of the running.
The prospective host cities had
been whittled down to four finalists -- Chicago; Rio de Janeiro,
Brazil; Tokyo, Japan; and Madrid, Spain. The bid went to Rio de Janeiro, making it the first South American city to host the Olympic Games.
Chicago
had been seen as a front-runner in recent days, especially after it
sent to Copenhagen America's biggest guns -- President Obama and his
popular wife, Michelle -- for a last-minute sales pitch.
But a
poll taken by the Chicago Tribune and CNN affiliate WGN revealed in
early September that 45 percent of the city residents didn't want the Olympic Games. And 84 percent of Chicagoans objected to the idea of public money being used to support the effort.
Earlier this week, about 250 Olympic-bid protesters gathered in front
of City Hall, WGN reported. A sign in the crowd read: "Have the
audacity of nope."
Many who gathered for the bid slapdown were affiliated with No Games Chicago, which sent three delegates to Copenhagen to state their case.
After the vote, however, spokeswoman Francesca Rodriguez said No Games
Chicago is "in no way taking any pleasure in this" and feels "sympathy"
for those who are disappointed.
"In reality, Chicagoans who were
for the Games and those who were against them were committed to the
same goal: Working hard for what they thought would be best for the
city of Chicago in the coming decades," she said.
"We're glad
that the city won't now be burdened by the distraction of the Olympics
at the expense of improving Chicago's schools, transportation, parks
and the numerous other public policy initiatives on which the city
needs to be focused."
Those who believe the Olympics can bring
lasting change to a city -- beyond the spike in economic activity
during the event -- are often misguided, suggested economist Rob Baade
of Lake Forest College in Lake Forest, Illinois.
"There is no
reason to expect that the Olympics, or any mega-event, is going to
induce a sustainable boost in the economy," he said. "The cost overruns
are pretty legendary. Costs are generally understated and the gains
overstated."
One Web site set up to rally against bringing the Olympic Games to town relied as much on humor as it did reason. Its name: Chicagoans for Rio 2016.
The site showcased unflattering head-to-head comparisons, such as
"Naked people dancing" vs. "Chubby people eating." The increasing
budget deficit in Chicago was contrasted with a $0 total for Rio.
"If you're a Chicagoan, Rio's budget deficit does not matter," the site said.
"It would be exciting to host the Olympics here in Chicago. But you
know what would be even better? Rio de Janeiro," the site announced.
"Just let Rio host the 2016 Olympics. We don't mind. Honest."