ANCHORAGE: ITS FIGHT FOR OLYMPICS : Anchorage, the Chosen City : Other Organizers Upset by USOC’s Quick Decision

When International Olympic Committee members selected the site for the 1992 Winter Games, only one city among the seven candidates received less votes than Anchorage. But the frontier spirit of the city’s supporters made a favorable impression. So Anchorage has received the nod to try again for ’94.

Officials from Reno-Lake Tahoe, Salt Lake City and Portland, Ore., did not exactly disagree that Anchorage has the best chance of any U.S. city to win the bid for the 1994 Winter Olympics. But they might have if given the opportunity.

In designating an official candidate, the United States Olympic Committee (USOC) last month voted not only to support Anchorage but to do so without hearing proposals from other interested cities.

Given a choice between the democratic process and political expediency, the USOC chose the latter.

USOC President Robert Helmick preferred to call the decision logical.

Not even the losers denied that, although their understanding the decision did not mean they liked it.

“They’re trying their best to do the best they can,” said Bruce Bogaert, president of the Reno-Lake Tahoe Winter Games Organizing Committee, of USOC members. “We just have a basic disagreement.”

Timing was everything. When Anchorage received the USOC’s designation last year to bid for the 1992 Winter Olympics, Helmick said U.S. candidates would have another chance before the Winter Games in 1996. But the International Olympic Committee announced in October that there would be no Winter Games in 1996.

So that the Winter Games will not occur in the same year as the Summer Olympics after 1992, the IOC gave the Winter Games a different four-year cycle, starting in 1994.

Whereas the IOC would not have chosen a host city for the 1996 Winter Games until 1990, it will choose one for 1994 in 1988.

That meant the USOC had to have a candidate as soon as possible.

The first name that came to most USOC members, and not only because of alphabetical reasons, was Anchorage.

As the USOC candidate for the 1992 Winter Games, Anchorage made a favorable impression before the balloting at the IOC session last October in Lausanne, Switzerland. That did not translate into votes. Of seven hopefuls, Anchorage was the second eliminated. Only Berchtesgaden, West Germany, better known as Adolf Hitler’s winter home, made a quicker exit. Albertville, France won.

But many IOC members appeared to appreciate the frontier spirit of Anchorage supporters, more than 200 of whom made the trip to Lausanne at their own expense, and let it be known that the city would be considered for the Winter Games in the future, perhaps as early as 1994.

Since Anchorage already is familiar to IOC members, and since the vote for the 1994 Winter Games is scheduled for less than two years from now, the USOC decided to renew its commitment to Anchorage.

“There was very little time to go through the bidding process if we changed from Anchorage to a new city,” said Helmick, who also is an IOC member.

“Realistically, it would be difficult for a new city to put together a bid and hope for any possible success. It’s important for whoever the city is to know IOC members. It’s also important to show continuity of our support, and that we’re not just throwing in the name of a city.”

Dean Plemmons, who represented the U.S. Amateur Boxing Federation at the USOC meetings last month in Sparks, Nev., did not disagree, emphasizing that he had no objection to Anchorage, but he also moved that other cities at least have the opportunity to make their presentations.

Quoting the credo of the ancient Olympics, Plemmons said: “We cannot guarantee a success; we can guarantee an unimpeded path to the finish line. May the best man win. I suggest we run the race instead of mandating the winner.”

But although no one argued with that ideal, a USOC officer, Howard Miller, spoke on behalf of practicalities.

“If we sensed that any other city other than Anchorage would be successful, it might be different,” he said. “But we don’t want to encourage other cities to spend resources for an effort that has a limited chance to be successful. I’d like to see that energy and that enthusiasm and those resources be saved for a later date.”

It should surprise no one that Miller is the USOC’s treasurer.

Helmick said the vote favoring Anchorage was overwhelming.

“We’re not angry; we’re frustrated,” Bogaert said.

“Obviously, when no one else is considered, that smacks against the Olympic movement as I envision it. You should always have the right to compete.”

The principle aside, Bogaert said he believes Reno-Lake Tahoe would be as viable a candidate as Anchorage.

“Anchorage has a political advantage because they’ve been there before,” Bogaert said. “If we were Anchorage, we’d use that to ask the USOC to roll us over. But that doesn’t mean we can’t do better. Instead of a worn-out face, we have new ideas and a dynamic organization.”

As for Anchorage’s presentation in Lausanne, Bogaert said: “They had some holes as far as we’re concerned.”

But Rick Mystrom, chairman of the Anchorage Olympic Organizing Committee, said the holes have been sealed.

“I think there were three reasons we weren’t selected for 1992,” he said. “Since the 1988 Games are in North America (Calgary, Canada), it was Europe’s turn in 1992. Also, we had a first-time candidacy. The first time, you’re really introducing yourself and your bid. The second time, you can ask for their vote. You can pop the question. Third and most important, we were the last candidate to submit our bid. Albertville had been bidding for five years. By the time we got into it, commitments already had been made.

“Now, all of the obstacles have been overcome.”

Mystrom said that the USOC decision to support Anchorage, instead of waiting to hear presentations from other candidates next spring, is crucial to the city’s effort. It allowed Anchorage officials to become the first to submit an official bid to the IOC. They resumed their lobbying efforts last week at the IOC Executive Board meetings in Lausanne.

What are Anchorage’s chances to win the IOC bid for 1994?

Of the six cities that lost for 1992, only Sofia, Bulgaria, Lillehammer, Norway, and Anchorage are expected to continue their campaigns. Both Sofia and Lillehammer received more votes in October than Anchorage. Sofia, in fact, was runner-up to Albertville.

In Lausanne, Mystrom said he did not expect Sofia to receive government funding necessary to bid again.

“That was what I heard before the vote,” Mystrom said last month at the USOC meetings in Sparks. “That was before the Winter Games were changed to 1994 from 1996, before Sofia had such a strong showing. A lot of people were impressed with Sofia’s bid.”

Mystrom said he still believes Anchorage will win.

But a high-ranking USOC official, who did not want to be identified, said Sofia is the favorite.

“The feeling now is that the 1994 Games will be given to the Communist Bloc,” he said. “But then it will be the United States’ turn for 1998.”

He expressed concern, however, that the United States might forfeit its turn if Anchorage is not again designated the U.S. candidate for 1998.

Nevertheless, Helmick said every interested U.S. city will have an opportunity to bid for the 1998 Winter Games.

“If we lose our bid for the 1992 Games, we will in no way discourage an open vote when the USOC selects a candidate for 1998,” Mystrom said. “We will bid again. But if we lose, we will actively lobby at the IOC level for whichever city becomes the U.S. candidate. They will benefit from our contacts and our experience.”

That promise satisfied Jack Elder, president of Winter Olympics of Oregon (WOO), which represented Portland at the USOC meetings.

“I’d like to see an open process this time, but we understand the time constraints,” he said. “We were preparing our bid for 1996, not 1994. We would have had to do in two years what we were prepared to do in four. We just came here to make sure we would have a chance for 1998.”

But Bogaert of Reno-Lake Tahoe said he remains skeptical.

“Anchorage says it won’t ask to be automatically selected for 1998,” he said. “Obviously, we have to question that. The people here now from Anchorage may not be in control then.”

USOC officials are not pleased when officials from rival cities snipe at each other, but they admit they could have worse problems. Not so long ago, no U.S. cities wanted the Winter Games. After the IOC awarded the 1976 Winter Games to Denver, citizens of Colorado, fearing financial and ecological damage, rejected them in a referendum.

“One thing I think is crucial to the Olympic movement is the keen interest by Reno-Lake Tahoe, Salt Lake City and Portland in having the Winter Games,” Helmick said. “It was never like this in the past. We don’t want to do anything that will discourage this interest.”