Opinion: L.A. has all the leverage in negotiating its Olympics contract. Why the rush to sign one?

To the editor: I am not sure why the Los Angeles City Council is in a rush to sign a contract with the International Olympic Committee to host the 2028 Summer Games. (“Six reasons to worry about the 2028 Olympics,” Opinion, Aug. 10)

Small time frames are frequently used in negotiations by one party to get a favorable settlement by not allowing the other side to effectively evaluate offers and information. Since the city of Los Angeles really has the leverage in this negotiation to take on something other than it proposed (the 2024 Olympics), I would delay signature until we have time to pull together financial data to properly evaluate the contract.

We should not take on a burden like this, including the risk to the city budget, without taking our time to evaluate the proposed contract. Any council member who voted for this is not operating in the public best interest.

Why the rush? Why the short deadline? Sign a memorandum of agreement and defer contract signature at least six months to ensure that we don’t turn this into a financial disaster like those that have been inflicted on other Olympic hosts.

What is the IOC going to do, award the Games to someone else?

Bill Spear, Fountain Valley

..

To the editor: It seems to me and many of my associates that Mayor Eric Garcetti is really a showman like his predecessor.

Montreal, which hosted the Games in 1976, only recently paid off its debts incurred from the event. L.A. does not need this; what it does need is new water mains, repaved city streets, fixed sidewalks, more housing for homeless people and better schools.

We would prefer all of that to hosting the Games. Our city needs basic improvements rather than more sporting events. L.A. already runs a deficit; we don’t want more.

Lynne Shapiro, Marina del Rey

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook