Colin Hilton, the CEO of the Utah Olympic Legacy Foundation, was here in the late 1990s in the runup to the Olympic Games in Salt Lake City. He said local leaders then put their goals down in writing.
"Their words were: We want to have the best Olympics ever, public cost covered, enduring physical legacies, manage impacts, involve our children, boost resort economy. So those were for the time leading up to ’02,” Hilton said.
Now, it’s pretty hard to imagine that boosting the resort economy would crack the top five goals in Park City. Local leaders instead talk about dealing with the results of booming growth, like bumper-to-bumper traffic and exorbitant housing costs.
Hilton said the goals have indeed shifted, and the local Olympic bid committee was working with leaders from Park City and Summit County to determine what their priorities would be for a future Games.
“Most of what we're hearing, obviously, is we don't need to broadcast any more notice of ‘Wow, we're a great place to come to,’” he said. “So that is not part of the interest.”
Salt Lake City is one of three top contenders to land the Olympics Games in 2030 or 2034. Officials recently said they expect a decision about ‘30 or ‘34 to come this summer.
Whichever timeline is chosen, Park City Manager Matt Dias suggested local leaders were working to be ready. He said “the Olympics don’t write a check anymore” for facilities and projects that otherwise wouldn’t be necessary. But he suggested funding could be available for infrastructure projects that would facilitate the Games and would also help the host communities into the future.
“You're going to see us convening, definitely in the next quarter, over the next six months and year, about what type of projects, infrastructure projects, that are likely on our horizon for the next decade, that we would then be able to fast forward and accelerate,” Dias said.
Leaders from Summit County and Park City met with local Olympic officials Tuesday, and Dias suggested local governments would hone a list of projects to pursue. He said transit, transportation and housing were areas of focus.
“Likely a large infrastructure project in the Kimball Junction area. Likely a large infrastructure project out our back door here on (S.R.) 248,” he said of work an Olympic Games could facilitate. “And then perhaps there's some regional housing solution (that) could be amplified or accelerated by the Games that we would take away and then have that as a community asset moving forward.”
Dias agreed that 2002 Park City did not have the same goals as 2022 Park City. This time around, the potential upside from a Games does not include spurring more growth.
“I was here in 2001, I was a young employee. I volunteered for the Olympics. And at that time, you're right, the lens, the goals — it was entirely different. And so this time, I think it's about either improving or maintaining our quality of life, accelerating some critically needed infrastructure projects and ensuring that it's not growth-inducing. I don't think that's the point anymore.”
Local leaders have said that they will pursue public outreach, including polling and public meetings, to gauge the community’s interest in a future Games.
