Is the International Olympic Committee so stupid that it is willing to accept the word of a mayor of a near-bankrupt city that it will cover any of the Games’ huge losses if it comes to Chicago?

Is the committee stupid enough to believe that Daley is a king and can commit Chicago to paying hundreds of millions of dollars all by himself?

Of all the stupid things that the committee has done to the Games (such as cheapening them by letting in professional athletes), this has to rank right up there with the worst. Daley, in a reversal, said he now will sign the standard contract that puts Chicago (and, practically speaking) Illinois on the hook for $500 million or more if the 2016 Games here are a bust.

Not to worry, Daley still insists, the private group that is pushing the games will take out extra insurance to cover that half-billion-dollars if something goes wrong. To which I say: then let the local 2016 committee, headed by Patrick Ryan, sign the damn thing, and let those who are pushing this enterprise on Chicago pledge their own personal fortunes to the Games’ success. After all, a good part of their enthusiasm is the dollar signs ringing up in their eyes over the prospects of the money that the Games will bring to their businesses.

I don’t recall anyone asking the taxpayers if they want to sign on to this kind of obligation, when the mayor already is mining every possible tax, talking about service cutbacks and laying off hundreds of employees. It’s all right to be far-sighted by proposing these kinds of big plans, but they ought to be (1) certifiably realistic, (2) securely and transparently funded and (3) widely supported by the public. Oh, and (4) they must offer a reasonable expectation that the cost and inconvenience of holding the Olympics are substantially less than the benefits that will accrue to the city and state.

Daley’s proposal hasn’t met even one of these tests, and that’s before he, in a king-like way, offered the Chicago treasury as a lure for the Games. Daley and his minions, of course “had” to commit, or the Games would have been lost to one of the three finalist cities that have national backing.

Then let the Games somewhere else.

President Barack Obama has pledged his “full support” for his hometown of Chicago to host the Games, but with his now-routine trillion-dollar raids on the U.S. Treasury, it’s doubtful that his pledge is nothing more than words. What the committee will have is a document with Daley’s signature obligating the city to full financial responsibility for a Chicago 2016 Summer Games. The contract requires the city and the Olympic organizing committee to assume unlimited financial liability for the “planning, organization and staging of the Games.”

The Olympic committee, if it has any sense, will require something more than His Majesty’s signature. In a democracy, there’s usually a requirement for legislative approval of some sort for a commitment of money this large. Sure, Daley, when he comes back from kissing up to the Olympic committee, will instruct the servile City Council to back his play with some sort of cockamamie funding scheme that will have all the appearances of not costing taxpayers anything.

But that will be interesting to watch. Will the aldermen be willing to embarrass themselves again after “deliberating” only moments before “approving” Daley’s controversial parking meter scheme? How long will they willingly suit up in the duds of fools and court jesters? Most of them probably would cave before His Majesty, seeing as how most of them were originally appointed by Daley, and wouldn’t risk his administration withholding city services from their wards in retaliation for their independence.

No lawyer I, but without some firmer contract, executed according to reasonable legal standards, wouldn’t the Olympic committee have some serious problems if the Games here tanked and the city couldn’t make up the difference? Even before the Games, wouldn’t the city and the committee find themselves entangled in a costly and extended citizen’s suit arguing that the contract wasn’t properly executed? No doubt, Daley would figure that such a lawsuit wouldn’t be a problem in a court system that he and his cronies control.

And so it goes.

Originally, I was somewhat neutral about the project in the naïve hope that perhaps it could be accomplished without the usual Chicago shenanigans and that it might be a good thing for the city. Silly me. The funding and beneficiaries of this endeavor, opaque from the beginning, are becoming increasing cloudy and more prone to legitimate questions and concerns. Questions that I’m sure that Daley, as is his practice, will ignore.

**
Dennis Byrne is a regular contributor to the Chicago Daily Observer