Community Concerns Addressed During Town Hall Meetings

By Dan Kolen | August 2009

Reaching out to local residents, the Chicago 2016 Olympic Committee visited Marshall High School’s auditorium on the West Side on July 14 in a meeting to discuss how the Olympics would affect communities if the City wins the Olympic bid.

The Olympics would provide an indoor track located in Douglass Park on the West Side, an Olympic Village in Bronzeville that would be transformed after the games into housing (around 30% affordable), and a “direct surplus to the City’s budget,” committee members claimed.

Many people who attended the meeting expressed concern about the Olympics, despite committee members’ rosy view. “They didn’t answer the questions, plain and simple,” said Maurice Robinson. “With the Olympics being here, the issues that are ahead of us — and thereare so many problems already — it’s hard to imagine what’s going to happen.”

Public transit

Concerning public transportation, the committee announced officials would arrange an additional bus system specifically for the people going to the games; no parking would be permitted around the games’ sites. Federal aid the City expects to get for transportation would “help immensely” to “permanently improve” the City’s transportation infrastructure, according to committee members.

“Both Atlanta and Salt Lake City benefited very significantly from federal transportation projects in their cities, so they would be ready for the games,” said Doug Arnot, the committee’s director of venues and games operations. “The existing system was improved in time for the games” and had a lasting impact, he noted.

Stephanie Patton, now a Chicago resident, lived in Atlanta in the lead-up to the 1996 games and said Atlanta did see a positive, permanent change in the infrastructure. For example, she noted, express lanes of certain thoroughfares were increased from three to five, although traffic still was massive.

“What happened was, though, during heavy traffic, the people of the city had to learn those back roads” during the games, she said. The 1996 Atlanta Olympics were held in a city growing and expanding, but Chicago is an already built-up city, with public transit plagued by frequent delays, fare hikes, and threats of service cuts. The comments by the committee therefore did not help calm the concerns many residents had about the permanent impact the games would have on public transportation.

“You certainly have your work cut out for you,” Lee Ford, a Garfield Park resident, said to Arnot, who expressed a negative view of “the public transportation access and the public transportation system in the City of Chicago.”

Public funding

On June 17, Mayor Richard M. Daley signed a contract with the International Olympic Committee (IOC) saying the City will take on full, unlimited financial liability for “planning, organization, and staging” the Olympics. The contract and issues pertaining to funding the games drew criticism from several attendees.

The IOC is “in bed with Mayor Daley.” Patton said. “If we get the Olympics, it’s going to be a travesty for Chicago. I feel strongly that with Mayor Daley’s leadership we’re going to have to go deep into our pockets.”

The committee members remained adamant that no taxpayer dollars would be used and that the City has not had to pay so far for planning the games. Despite the contract, the City “will not pay a dime for the games,” committee members asserted.

“No games since 1972 have lost money; all have turned a surplus,” said Lori Healey, president of the committee. “We also have additional insurance protection so we can cover costs on projects.”

Huge price tags are associated with many of the proposed structures: Olympic Village would cost $1 billion, a stadium in Washington Park just under $400 million, and the Douglass Park facility that would be converted into a permanent track and field center after the games would cost $37.1 million. The games’ total cost is estimated at around $4.8 billion.

To cover such massive costs, the City would receive more than one billion dollars from television rights, with private financiers paying the rest, committee members said.

“No taxpayer dollars are included in the budget,” Healey said. “We’re 100% privately financed. In fact, we expect to turn a $450 million surplus.”

Neighborhood impact

From reduced ticket prices for Chicago residents, to favorable vendor deals for locals, to World Sport Chicago’s (WSC) sports program for kids in Chicago, the committee outlined direct, positive effects of the Olympics for the community.

“It’s our commitment that World Sport Chicago grows and continues to grow,” Arnot said about the program that already has enrolled 30,000 of the 300,000 kids in Chicago Public Schools. The committee showed a short documentary during the meeting to highlight a gymnastics class for WSC. Those attending responded with skepticism about how much the program and committee really wanted to help the city.

“We had never heard of World Sport Chicago until today,” Patton said. “And with the games, we’re going to be made to feel like guests or prisoners in our own backyards.”

Some in attendance voiced support for the games, however.

- Read Full Article

Inside the 2nd Ward Olympic Forum

No Games Chicago is a no show

by Bernard Ramos

After Mayor Daley remarked that he will sign the standard city contract guaranteeing the games’ finances in Switzerland last month, Chicago 2016 decided to hold several community forums for all Chicago’s fifty wards in fifty days. The Committee had to not only drum up support from the residents but they also had to quell any concerns that taxpayers’ money might be used to fund the games. The Second Ward, led by Alderman Bob Fioretti and one of the big downtown wards that would be affected by the Olympic Games had its chance to voice out their concerns at the UIC Forum in the University Village on Tuesday.

The most important topic of the meeting was the financial guarantees, which Lori Healey, the Chicago 2016 president, delved into the details right away.  She reassured the audience that the city’s commitment of up to $500 million, the state’s $250 million share and the additional $1 billion insurance guarantees would never be touched because of the assumption that no recent US Olympic games have lost money, and revenues would be pouring in from ticket sales and many major sponsors would pay to have a piece of the pie, and Ms. Healey touting the Central Time Zone as the most lucrative TV market in the world. The Chicago 2016’s $3-plus billion conservative budget also included the premiums to pay for the insurance guarantees.

Almost a full hour was designated for questions and the first concern that was brought up used the Athens games as an example of excessive cost overruns and white elephants. Ms. Healey defended the Chicago games that it would not be similar to the Athens games because most of the city’s venues and infrastructures are already in place and the fact that Athens had to build an international airport.

One local business owner asked the committee how small businesses can participate in the business aspect of the games without being trumped by the big-time sponsors. Another attendee raised some concerns about the possible displacement of local residents when the Olympics come to town and quickly drew Mr. Fioretti’s attention and countered the notion of displacement as unfounded. The Committee explained that the planned Olympic Village will be located in what is now the shuttered-Michael Reese Hospital and provided the prospects of additional housing, especially senior housing, possible students dorms, apartments and retail development in the underserved area.

Another issue the Committee tackled was the fact that these future housing units would not flood the current real estate market until 2017. Furthermore, the Committee reassured one South Loop woman who inquired how local residents will be affected with the influx of tourists and spectators within the immediate venues in the Near South Side. Part of the plan is to have spectators use their venue/event tickets as passes for free transportation so that car traffic would be limited to local residents. Venue parking garages and lots would not be used to guarantee minimal disruption in the local area and promote public transportation and foot traffic.

Ms. Healey quipped that the largest possible event would most likely be the opening ceremonies and that alone would attract about 80,000 spectators which pales in comparison with the 4th of July Fireworks during the Taste of Chicago—which attracts at least a million people without so much incident. A woman who was involved with a youth track and field program drew applause from the audience after raising the prospects of leaving several sports facilities after the games for the underserved kids in the area, especially the obvious lack of track and field venues.

One big surprise was the lack of anti-games questions or concerns that were expected to cloud such community meetings, especially from the diverse and dense Second Ward.  But what the audience unexpectedly heard were the gung-ho attitude of one downtown worker asking for more visionary developments beyond the games and another man quoting the clichéd Burnham mantra “make no small plans.” Another attendee, who apparently attended the other previous meetings, commended the Chicago 2016’s consistency in delivering the facts and information for not just telling the neighborhood what they want to hear, but also what they need to hear. Being a former chief-of-staff of the mayor, Ms. Healey certainly controlled the discussion and seemed to calm any doubts on the Committee’s delivering the Games. This community forum’s views may be different from the rest of the forty-nine wards, but it was definitely a major win for the Chicago 2016 Committee.

-

Skeptics and supporters

By MICAH MAIDENBERG

Chicago 2016, the group organizing the city’s bid to host the Olympic Games seven years from now, brought its traveling road show to the Near West Side on Tuesday night, and was greeted by a crowd that included both supporters and skeptics.

Proposed Chicago 2016 Olympic Village
-

Lori Healy, president of the bid organization and Mayor Daley’s former chief of staff, cast the chance to host the Olympics as a singular event that would create jobs, boost the number of international tourists visiting Chicago and jumpstart development.

“People are losing jobs. Businesses are closing. Tourism is down, and tax revenues — very, very importantly — tax revenues coming into local municipal government are shrinking,” Healy told the audience. “The Games provides a unique opportunity to spur new economic growth.”

The forum lacked some of the critics who have bird-dogged Chicago 2016 from the city’s neighborhoods to Lausanne, Switzerland, where the International Olympic Committee met with Chicago’s bid team last month. But residents — many of whom support the bid — had their own concerns about the Olympics in Chicago, peppering Healy and other bid leaders about cost overruns, the impact on homeowners and possible displacement of low-income renters.

There was plenty of praise, too.

“It’s time for us to start being visionary and not being scared about spending money. Because it’s an investment. You would invest in your home. It’s time to invest in your city,” said Butler Adams, an architectural tour guide who lives in Woodlawn, to applause.

“I just think that Chicago is a great city. It needs to be on the map. It needs to be international. Even in this country, people don’t think of Chicago,” said Eileen Kaplan, of the South Loop, explaining her support before the meeting started.

Healy walked through Chicago 2016’s budget assumptions during her presentation, which project $3.3 billion in costs and $3.8 billion in revenues brought in by sponsorships, ticket sales and broadcast rights, for a net profit in operations of about $450 million.

A so-called safety net for cost overruns includes the $450 million profit; $500 million and $250 million in non-appropriated commitments from the City of Chicago and state government, respectively; and a $1 billion dollar private insurance policy that Chicago 2016 hasn’t purchased yet.

In June, Mayor Richard Daley made a verbal commitment to sign the standard host city contract should Chicago be chosen for the games; the contract opens the prospect of unlimited taxpayer liability for the games.

Cost of the Games — and cost overruns — were on the minds of more than a few people Tuesday.

“I like the idea of the Olympics, but I have some reservations and concerns. One of them is there’s a lot of cost overruns with the Olympics,” Peter Antonopoulos, who attended the 2004 games in Athens, said during the question-and-answer sessions. “In Athens and in Greece, they’re paying for the Olympics for the next 30 years.”

May Toy, the West Loop-based parks activist, said after the meeting that being involved in local park issues made her skeptical of the Chicago 2016’s budget.

“I’m not saying these improvements are not good,” she said. “Millennium Park is beautiful. But the cost overruns were astronomical.”

Fred Ash, a South Loop homeowner, worried the legacy of the Olympic Village’s conversion into condo units would hammer Near South homeowners, actually stripping them of real estate-based wealth.
“We currently have a very depressed market because supply vastly exceeds demand. We have a wave of more units yet to come online, that are under construction now,” he said. “We could have a tsunami with what the Olympic Village is going to dump on the market.”

Healy and other panelists took the critical questions in stride, promising no displacement of the poor and ample chances for jobs and contracts for Chicago workers and small business operators.

To Ash’s question, Healy said more people are expected to move to downtown Chicago, creating demand, and the Olympic Village units wouldn’t be coming on the market until 2017.

Healy told Antonopoulos that Chicago’s Games would not be like Greece’s because “we don’t have to build venues and infrastructure like many of the past cities have done.” The roads and airports and most of the stadiums — McCormick Place, United Center, the UIC Pavilion, among them — are already in place.

-

Read Full Article

Numbers game: IOC would be taxed without NBC revenues

By Philip Hersh – Tribune Reporter

Want to know why the International Olympic Committee is backing NBC in its dispute with the U.S. Olympic Committee over the U.S. Olympic Network?

It is pretty clear from the numbers in the IOC’s 2008 tax filing.

Tripp Mickle of Sports Business Journal first posted information about the filing Tuesday. His story emphasized the IOC’s $383.3 million profit on a record $2.4 billion revenue for the fiscal year that ended Dec. 31, 2008, noting it was 68 percent greater than the $228.6 million profit from the previous Summer Olympic year, 2004.

The revenue figure that struck me was $1.73 billion in global TV rights for the Beijing Olympics.

What the filing wasn’t required to say is NBC paid $894 million of that — a little more than half the total.

So the IOC reacted quickly when NBC told top international Olympic officials it was upset that the USOC had shunned a partnership deal with NBC-owned Universal Sports and announced last week it was creating its own network in partnership with cable operator Comcast.

I detailed the IOC’s point of view in both Blogs and stories last week.  Its reaction included a strongly-worded statement criticizing the USOC’s action after the IOC had sent it a cease-and-desist letter, asking the USOC to delay the announcement until some contractual and rights issues could be resolved.

IOC executive board member Richard Carrion of Puerto Rico blasted the USOC what he characterized as an arrogant, unilateral approach to the situation.  NBC sports chairman Dick Ebersol told me the Chicago 2016 Olympic bid would be badly damaged unless the IOC and USOC worked out a solution to its latest imbroglio.

Top USOC officials, including former chairman Peter Ueberroth and current chairman Larry Probst, have yet to respond to the points raised by Ebersol.

But there is an underlying irony in all this, expressed in the cold math of the IOC tax filing.

The IOC and the USOC have been embroiled for three years in a heated dispute over the USOC share of both IOC global sponsorship rights and U.S. television rights, a share established in a 21-year-old deal between the parties that was renegotiated 13 years ago.  The current deal gives the USOC 12.75 percent of U.S. broadcast rights.

The IOC has argued the U.S. percentage should be diminished because the U.S. share of TV and global sponsorship revenues has diminished.  Ueberroth has steadfastly maintained the USOC should not accept less because the U.S. still is the major contributor to those revenues.

The IOC’s tax filing proves that, at least in the case of television, Ueberroth is dead right.

If NBC, whose rights fee for 2008 was more than twice that paid by any other broadcaster, had paid the same amount for Beijing as the next-highest rights holder, (the European Broadcast Union consortium’s $443 million for both the 2006 Winter Games and 2008 Summer Games), the IOC’s 2008 tax return would have looked a lot different.

-

Read Full Article

British firm will do independent review of Chicago Olympics costs

A well-known British consulting firm has been hired to conduct an independent review of the numbers behind the proposed 2016 Chicago Olympics.

L.E.K. Consulting, whose media and entertainment practice includes sports projects, was hired by the Civic Federation, a local tax policy watchdog group in Chicago. The firm “will help us conduct an independent review of expenditures and revenues” for the proposed Chicago games, according to federation President Laurence Msall.

Mr. Msall said he believes the firm has been involved in helping other cities prepare Olympics bids, but stressed that it has played no role in Chicago’s effort to win the games.

The federation is doing the review at the request of the City Council. The council recently passed a resolution asking for an independent study after Mayor Richard M. Daley abruptly reversed course and agreed to sign a contract bearing full financial responsibility for the games if Chicago is awarded them this fall.

Mr. Daley has promised to submit the matter to the City Council later this summer, after the city obtains a promised $1-billion insurance policy. Mr. Msall said the federation intends to submit its report to the council on Aug. 28.

Mr. Daley has insisted any guarantee will be only theoretical, because the games are likely to make money and any shortfall would be covered by insurance. But critics have challenged that view and asked for more details.

-

Article Link

Group Joins No Games Opposing Chicago 2016

The Independent Voters of Illinois-Independent Precint Organization (IVI-IPO) has joined No Games Chicago to oppose Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Summer Olympic Games.

In a statement released Monday the group cites Chicago’s “long history of being unable to contain special projects costs” and the violation of the “initial promise that ‘not a dime’ of taxpayer money would be used”.

In a newsletter IVI-IPO said the recent revelation that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) host city contract will require the City of Chicago to be liable for all cost overruns puts city residents in a precarious position, especially when the city is facing severe budget cuts. The group calls the Olympics a “wonderful institution, but the city’s record of extreme cost overruns on large projects makes this a bad deal for Chicago residents”.

The IVI-IPO has been in existence since 1944. According to its webiste the organization’s primary tools are voter’s registration, voter information and candidate endorsement.

The Independent Voters of Illinois-Independent Precint Organization (IVI-IPO) has joined No Games Chicago to oppose Chicago’s bid for the 2016 Summer Olympic Games.

In a statement released Monday the group cites Chicago’s “long history of being unable to contain special projects costs” and the violation of the “initial promise that ‘not a dime’ of taxpayer money would be used”.

In a newsletter IVI-IPO said the recent revelation that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) host city contract will require the City of Chicago to be liable for all cost overruns puts city residents in a precarious position, especially when the city is facing severe budget cuts. The group calls the Olympics a “wonderful institution, but the city’s record of extreme cost overruns on large projects makes this a bad deal for Chicago residents”.

The IVI-IPO has been in existence since 1944. According to its webiste the organization’s primary tools are voter’s registration, voter information and candidate endorsement.

Obama Effect not the key in 2016 Olympics bid race, says Rogge

EIR RADNEDGE / Sports Features Communications

LONDON, Jul 12: Jacques Rogge has cautioned that too much significance should not necessarily be attached to the potential of the Obama Effect in the 2016 Olympics hosting race between Chicago, Madrid, Rio de Janeiro and Tokyo.

The president of the International Olympic Committee was answering a question about the value of high-level political involvement in the lobbying process.

This was prompted by memories of the crucial role played by the then British Prime Minster, Tony Blair, in the days and hours before London was granted host rights by the IOC in Singapore in 2005.

Rogge, in a BBC Radio Five interview, was asked about the power of the United States President to sway hearts and minds of IOC members on behalf of his home city of Chicago.

He countered: “What is most important is that the evaluation commission has told us that all four cities could stage perfect Games and this means that, whatever the result the IOC will be the winner.

“As far as President Obama is concerned of course the support of a head of government or head of state is important. We have seen that with Tony Blair in Singapore but one should not overstate that. What is paramount is the quality of the bid and everything presented to the IOC about the care of the athletes, logistics and so on, matter much more than one figure, albeit a very important man.”

President Obama’s presence in Copenhagen for the vote on October 2 has not been confirmed though Chicago’s bid team hope he will be present.

Chicago spokesmen have always refuted suggestions that the bid could be hindered by problems between the US Olympic Committee and the IOC over Olympic revenue share and, most recently, the USOC’s plans to launch an Olympic TV network.

-

Article Link

How Olympic TV Might Kill Chicago’s 2016 Bid

By Sean Gregory

On October 2, members of the International Olympic Committee (IOC) will meet in Copenhagen to decide the host city for the 2016 Summer Olympics. Officials from Chicago, which is competing against Rio de Janeiro, Madrid, and Tokyo for the Olympic prize, are working feverishly to perfect their pitch down the homestretch. The Chicago delegation just returned from Africa, where it made a presentation to the Olympic executives of that continent. President Obama himself sent a video message, asking the Africans for their vote.

Chicago’s bid has received positive feedback, and many consider the Windy City the favorite to win the Games. So why, less than three months before the vote, is the Olympic governing body of the United States ticking off the very officials that will decide Chicago’s fate, in a move that could cost an American city the Games?

The U.S. Olympic Committee (USOC), on July 8, announced that it had signed an agreement with Comcast to form the U.S. Olympic Network, which will provide year-round coverage of Olympic sports. According to the USOC, the network would launch sometime after the 2010 Vancouver Games. One problem: such a network could compete with NBC, which is paying $2.2 billion to broadcast the 2010 and 2012 Olympics. The network accounts for roughly half of the IOC’s global broadcast rights fees, and NBC will surely be among the bidders for the 2014 and 2016 Olympics as well. Plus, NBC wanted the USOC to partner with its own cable network, Universal Sports, for Olympic programming. NBC is irked, and the IOC doesn’t like to see its sugar daddy sulking.

So the IOC publicly chided U.S. Olympic officials. “We were aware that the USOC had been considering a new ‘Olympic broadcast network,’ but we have never been presented with a plan, and we had assumed that we would have an opportunity to discuss unresolved questions together before the project moved forward,” the IOC said in a statement. “It is for this reason that the IOC is disappointed that the USOC acted unilaterally and, in our view, in haste by announcing their plans before we had a chance to consider the ramifications.” The IOC also said that the network “raises complex legal and contractual issues and could have a negative impact with other Olympic broadcasters and partners, including our U.S. TV partner, NBC.”(See TIME’s photos of the Olympic highs and lows in Beijing)

Ouch. This wrist-slap comes at the worst possible time for Chicago. The IOC and USOC were already squabbling about the USOC’s share of sponsorship and broadcast revenues: the IOC wants to reduce the funds flowing to the U.S., while the Americans are resisting. Both sides, however, had agreed to put those negotiations aside until after the 2016 decision was finalized. Now, all tensions are back on the table.

The IOC is a famously isolated, self-important organization whose members do not like to be slighted. Competition for hosting rights is fierce: a city needs a majority of the 107 members to vote in its favor to win. One ballot can tip the balance, and this dust-up could alter a member’s decision. “This is an absolutely unnecessary self-inflicted wound,” says Marc Ganis, a Chicago-based sports business consultant who has closely followed the 2016 bid. “It just serves to remind the IOC of their preconceived notion that the Americans are arrogant and self-serving.”

Indeed, the USOC’s strategy is mystifying. A Chicago win would be a financial boon to the USOC. Given the buzz around an Olympics in the States, greater levels of broadcast and sponsorship revenue would trickle down to the USOC and the governing bodies of the Olympic sports. The USOC needs this money, as it has lost valuable sponsors like Home Depot, General Motors, and Bank of America since the onset of the recession. So why not work with the IOC to resolve any issues with the network — or at least hold off on action until Oct. 2?

Norm Bellingham, chief operating officer for the USOC, insists that the IOC was informed of the network’s plans for months. “We never heard any negative feedback from them,” says Bellingham. “By the time we heard that they prefer that we hold off, we just did not feel like that was viable.”

-

Read Full Article

-

Hurdles to Clear for US Olympic Network

(ATR) The USOC and IOC appear to be searching for a way to defuse a dispute over the launch an Olympic channel in the U.S., a channel the IOC worries could pose a threat to the value of TV rights for the Olympic Games.

Wednesday the USOC announced that it would partner with U.S. cable giant Comcast to launch the U.S. Olympic Network next year. The channel would operate 24/7, its programming consisting of competitions involving the Olympic sports and other events but not the Games themselves. Games-time coverage is reserved for the U.S. broadcast rights-holder, which is determined by the IOC.

The USOC drew the ire of the IOC when it went ahead with the announcement. The IOC says there are issues to be resolved while the USOC says it does not need IOC permission to move ahead.

A day later, USOC and IOC issued carefully-worded statements that indicate a willingness to address IOC concerns about the new channel.

“The IOC is seeking additional information on USOC’s plans and remain hopeful that we can work through the issues and reach a solution that works for all the many partners involved and for the American public in particular,” says the IOC statement.

The USOC also pledges cooperation – and says it has kept the IOC informed.

“We agree with the IOC on the importance of working together to reach a positive solution that works for all the parties involved and hope to do so as soon as possible,” says the USOC statement.

“We have had and will continue to have numerous conversations with the IOC leadership,” the statement concludes.

But the IOC says it has not been fully informed on plans for the USON.

“We were aware that the USOC had been considering a new ‘Olympic broadcast network’, but we have never been presented with a plan, and we had assumed that we would have an opportunity to discuss unresolved questions together before the project moved forward. It is for this reason that the IOC is disappointed that USOC acted unilaterally and, in our view, in haste by announcing their plans before we had had a chance to consider together the ramifications,” says the IOC release.

“The proposed channel raises complex legal and contractual issues and could have a negative impact our relationships with other Olympic broadcasters and sponsors, including our U. S. TV partner, NBC,” warns the IOC.

There is no word on when meetings might be scheduled to resolve the differences between the IOC and USOC, but an official with the USOC says plans are being made for talks.

-

IOC Members Endorse Network, Dismiss Chicago Concerns

Two European IOC members are rallying around the idea of the U.S. Olympic Network.

Gerhard Heiberg, chair of the IOC Marketing Commission, tells Around the Rings the new network can be a plus for the U.S.

“They have been talking about this for a long time and finally they launch it. I hope and think it will be a positive thing for the U.S. It will draw a lot of attention to the Olympic Games and Olympic sports.”

Heiberg says he does not believe the Olympic TV channel could spell trouble for the Chicago 2016 bid: “I don’t think it will have an impact on the voting of IOC members [Oct. 2]. If it should, it might even be positive … it [the Olympic Network] means the U.S. is putting more emphasis on Olympic sports.”

-

Read Full Article

Chicago to host Beyond Sport in 2010

Beyond Sport is delighted to announce that Chicago has been selected to be the Host City for the Beyond Sport Summit and Awards in 2010.

Fresh from the success of the inaugural Beyond Sport event in London, Chicago will take up the reins for next year becoming the focus of the continuing evolution of the Beyond Sport network and its mission to celebrate and support the use of sport as a vehicle for positive social change.

As a bidding city for the 2016 Olympic Games, Chicago’s focus on creating a lasting legacy will not only strengthen the Olympic movement but also gives Beyond Sport the perfect platform for future growth and to increase its reach and impact further still across the globe.

Rt. Hon. Tony Blair, Chairman of the Beyond Sport Ambassadors, stated: “I am delighted that Chicago is backing Beyond Sport and its vision to unlock the great value that sport holds for social development, building on the huge progress made this week in London.”

World Sport Chicago’s commitment to create an urban sports programme that will affect the lives of many thousands of young, disadvantaged children is one of many reasons why the city has chosen to partner with Beyond Sport.

“As Mayor, we look forward to officially welcoming the Beyond Sport Summit to Chicago in 2010,” said Chicago Mayor Richard M. Daley.

“Having Chicago selected to host Beyond Sport demonstrates a great vote of confidence in the commitment World Sport Chicago has made to giving young people opportunities to participate in sport. This is very important to us because since we have been working to bring the 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games to Chicago, we have come to appreciate even more strongly the power of sport to change people’s lives – especially young people.”

-
Read Full Article