What it's all about

Rummaging through life's couch cushions for topics in the law, economics, sports, stats, and technology

Thursday, August 9, 2012

Why Denver dumped the 1976 Winter Olympics

A couple of years ago, Chicago spent in excess of $50 million to host the 2016 Summer Olympics. In their corner: Barack Obama, recently elected president, international superstar and Nobel Laureate. They had the most developed infrastructure of any city in the bidding. But they still couldn't make it happen. Despite all their resources and glad-handing, the OC picked Rio de Janeiro instead.

So why would a city reject the opportunity to host the Olympics? Because, back in the early 1970s, Denver, Colorado, wasn't trying to market itself to the rest of the world. Denver was trying to keep the rest of the world out.  It seems almost inconceivable today, but back then, Colorado's most powerful political forces got elected on an anti-growth platform.  And if your primary focus is anti-growth, you don't want the Olympics coming to town.

In 1970, Denver was awarded the Olympics, outbidding a number of other larger cities, including most recent Winter Games host Vancouver, Canada. Colorado has always rightfully had renown as an epic Winter playground, so it wasn't a huge surprise. What did come as a surprise was the political reaction internally.

Denver has always had a "close-the-door-behind-you" attitude. Colorado is the only state where it is common to advertise, on bumper stickers, that you are a "native." What does native mean, in this context? That your family has been in Colorado for one whole generation!  For most of the world, this would be a ludicrous thing to boast.  The vast majority of people come from the same place that their parents do. But not here. Colorado's population is over 5 million now, according to the 2010 census. But in 1970, it was only a little more than 2 million.  In 1940, it was right around 1 million. Ever since it became a state, Colorado's population has at least doubled every 35 years or so. 

As such, Colorado has always had anti-transplant sentiment. But one man made a career out of it better than any other. And so, in 1972, a hot shot young lawyer and accountant named Dick Lamm started raising a stink about the Olympics.

Not that young or hot shotty anymore

Lamm sparked a movement to turn the main bond issue to fund the 1976 Olympics into a public referendum. In November 1972, he made it happen, and the state’s voters got to choose whether to authorize a $5 million bond issue to help finance the Games.

Colorado, long home to aggressive anti-government and anti-tax movements, wanted nothing to do with it. The voters body-slammed the proposition by 60-40 margin. One week later, Denver officially abdicated its status as host city for the 1976 Olympics.

Dick Lamm later was elected governor of Colorado three times, largely catapulted by the political capital he earned in sending the games to Innsbruck, Austria.  He was famous for trying to kill the construction of C-470 (an essential roadway circumventing the city) and pretty much every other major public works project that was proposed during his tenure.

Shortly after he left office, Colorado finished C-470, embarked on plans to build E-470 (the other half of the circumvention project), began construction on a a massive new airport and a baseball stadium, all while completely refurbishing the main arteries going through Denver.  And Denver's population started skyrocketing once again.

Since then, Denver has tried on multiple occasions to reignite a movement to host the Olympics. They've never made it past the early bidding stages.  And probably never will.


4 comments:

  1. Can you imagine Denver without C-470? Now it needs to be expanded. Maybe he figured that if it took everyone 3 hours to go to work, no one would move here? Also, it is almost ridiculous that Denver has not hosted a Winter Olympics.

    On a side not, my boss told me that he wants to flip off everyone that has a native bumper sticker.... The native thing is just a local version of our country's fear of immigration. How quickly we forget that we were all immigrants at one time.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kind of a chicken/egg debate with infrastructure. If your goal is to make it inconvenient to live somewhere, no infrastructure is a great way to do it. But if you're trying to get somewhere efficiently, you want roads (duh).

      I just think it's quaint that Colorado had such a strong anti-growth perspective 40 years ago. That perspective is such a non-starter today.

      Delete
  2. Kieran,

    I think you need to compare Colorado population growth with say the US or another state or two to make your point. Population has been doubling on the planet and in this country at a similar rate as Colorado. US population was 130 million in 1940, 200 million in 1970, and is now at 310 million. Colorado has grown faster than the US as a whole, but its growth in context is much less impressive.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Fair point. Depending on which measure you use and when you start from, Colorado usually comes in between 3rd and 5th in population growth. Arizona and Nevada grew way faster in the latter half of the 20th century, but have tailed off lately. Texas is growing faster than Colorado now.

      But if the base rate is 50% pop. growth over the last 40 years, Colorado is still three times the national average. Colorado is not unique in this, but it is in the upper echelon for growth and has grown more consistently than the other fast-growers.

      Delete