City Council
Report
City Council Meeting: October 8, 2024
Agenda Item: 7.A
1 of 17
To: Mayor and City Council
From: David White, City Manager, City Manager's Office
Subject: Study Session on the City of Santa Monica's Proposed Games Agreement with the LA28 Olympic and Paralympic Games Organizing Committee Recommended Action
Staff recommends that the City Council:
1. Adopt a finding of Categorical Exemption pursuant to Section 15272 (Olympic Games) of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines;
2. Hold a study session on the Games Agreement and options and alternatives to host beach volleyball for the LA28 Olympics, weighing the potential benefits of direct involvement against the potential long-term financial and legal risks to the City;
3. Receive public comment; and
4. Provide direction to staff on how to proceed.
Executive Summary
Santa Monica, the birthplace of competitive beach volleyball, has a unique opportunity to host the sport for the 2028 Summer Olympic Games. With its picturesque beaches and iconic landmarks, the City offers an unforgettable stage for athletes and spectators.
City staff has engaged in extensive negotiations with LA28 to secure this honor, and a total of four agreements must be executed to formalize Santa Monica’s participation.
The Games Agreement is the first of these four agreements and is especially critical because it lays the foundation and framework for all future agreements.
The Games Agreement outlines the City’s responsibilities to provide customary and enhanced municipal services, venue logistics, strict enforcement of the City’s vendor ordinances, and prevent unauthorized trademark infringement and ambush marketing, 2 of 17
among other duties. The Games Agreement also states that LA28 is to provide reimbursement to the City for certain services and economic losses, assuming LA28 has revenues available. The Games Agreement also provides a framework for the future negotiation of three additional agreements for venue use, enhanced municipal services, and reimbursement. The exact scope of services or level of reimbursement is not defined in the Games Agreement, thus requiring the City to commit to providing services without understanding the required service levels or costs, which will be defined in subsequent agreements. Negotiations on the provision of services and other significant terms have faced challenges, particularly around the lack of community benefits offered by LA28, restrictions on revenue generating opportunities for the City, and other potential financial and legal risks.
A fiscal impact study conducted by HR&A Advisors projects that if the City opts to host beach volleyball, it could result in a loss of approximately $1.45 million, which could change depending on the level of reimbursement, terms included in final agreements, and other factors yet to be determined. The impact study forecasts that the City would be responsible for $15.54 million in estimated costs to prepare for and host the Olympic Games. If the City were to choose to not host beach volleyball, it stands to gain $10.65 million in fiscal benefits. The City would only generate $2.79 million in additional revenues if it hosted Olympic events but would face significantly higher costs. Overall, hosting beach volleyball could translate to a total net loss to the City of $12.1 million.
The financial uncertainties related to hosting beach volleyball are compounded by the lack of clarity on the reimbursement terms. Moreover, the Games Agreement also prevents Santa Monica from pursuing alternative revenue opportunities, and precludes traditional revenue sources from both City-hosted special events and privately hosted events by Pier lessees and other local businesses, unless approved by LA28. The potential legal risks associated with signing the agreement are significant, as it binds the City to hosting beach volleyball and limits flexibility to negotiate key terms after the Games Agreement is executed.
3 of 17
The City Council is asked to weigh the benefits of hosting and providing services in support of Olympic beach volleyball events against these uncertain financial and legal risks. Potential options for discussion are (i) proceeding with executing the Games Agreement or (ii) declining to execute the draft Games Agreement proposed by LA28 and continuing negotiations (assuming LA28 wishes to continue discussions with the City).
Should LA28 and the City not move forward with executing the Games Agreement, Santa Monica would remain a regional partner by providing support through programming and services, events, public safety, and transportation. Council direction is needed to determine the City’s future role in the LA28 Games and its financial and legal obligations moving forward.
Background
On September 13, 2016, the City Council approved the Venue and City Guarantee Letters for the LA 2024 Summer Olympics bid. Los Angeles was one of four cities bidding to host the 2024 Olympic and Paralympic Games. The LA 2024 Exploratory Committee (LA 2024) sought conceptual approval and agreement to minimum terms for the venue use, which was anticipated to form the basis of the Venue Use Agreement if Los Angeles won the 2024 bid.
Prior to the Council’s approval of the LA 2024 Guarantee Letters in 2016, staff conducted community outreach in partnership with the LA 2024 Communications Team and provided presentations to beach residents, Planning Commission, Recreation and Parks Commission, Pier Corporation Board, Santa Monica Pier Lessees Association, and the State Department of Parks and Recreation.
On September 13, 2017, the International Olympic Committee (IOC) awarded the 2028 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games to Los Angeles, while simultaneously awarding the 2024 Games to Paris, France, the only remaining bidders. Once LA 2024 transitioned to LA28, the Venue and City Guarantee Letters were updated accordingly and approved by the Council on August 22, 2023. The Venue Guarantee established 4 of 17
the minimum terms, including the exclusive use period, rental fee, and reimbursement for the loss of parking revenue. The City Guarantee included commitments by the City to not stage major events during the Games, protect the marketing rights of the Los Angeles Organizing Committee for the Olympic and Paralympic Games (LA28), provide basic public services, comply with local laws, and collaborate with the United States Department of Homeland Security on public safety efforts.
The proposed beach volleyball venue on Santa Monica State Beach is the only Olympic venue being considered for Santa Monica. The concept plan includes a temporary 12,000-seat stadium on the sand north of the Santa Monica Pier, warm-up and practice courts, and operational and broadcast components in Beach Lot 1 North. The plan also outlines security measures, transportation solutions, and construction schedules, all of which are subject to adjustment. In 2016, the rental fee for the venue was estimated to be approximately $3.7 million, based on established formulas and rates at that time.
The rental fee would be updated to 2028 market rates. The preliminary construction plan would phase the closure of Beach Lot 1 North and the beach area as follows:
• April and May 2028: Approximately 400 spaces in Beach Lot 1 North would be occupied.
• June 2028: 800 spaces in Beach Lot 1 North would be occupied as well as the beach construction area.
• July 14 – 30, 2028: LA28 Summer Olympic Games
• July and August 2028 (dates TBD): Entire Beach Lot 1 North and beach venue area would be fenced.
• August 2028 (dates TBD): tear down and restoration; approximately 800 parking spaces would be occupied in Beach Lot 1 North.
The closure of Beach Lot 1 North and reduced parking capacity during the Games would have significant impacts. Alternative parking and transportation options, as well as a communication plan for residents and visitors, would be developed in consultation with Pier stakeholders as a part of the Venue Use Agreement negotiations. 5 of 17
Discussion
Santa Monica, a coastal city renowned for its iconic pier and breathtaking beaches, holds a special place in the history of beach volleyball. It was here, in the early 1920s, that the sport first took root, evolving from a casual pastime into a competitive and beloved activity. The city’s unique blend of sun, sand, and ocean breezes provided the ideal setting for this burgeoning sport to flourish.
Hosting the beach volleyball events for the 2028 Summer Olympic Games would be a truly distinct honor for Santa Monica. The city’s picturesque backdrop, featuring the world-famous pier with its iconic Ferris wheel and the majestic bluffs with palm tree lined Palisades Park, would create a visually stunning and unforgettable experience for athletes and spectators. As the birthplace of competitive beach volleyball, Santa Monica would offer a fitting and historic stage for this global sporting event. It is with this in mind, that City staff has tirelessly negotiated with LA28 to try to secure the opportunity for Santa Monica to host Olympic beach volleyball in 2028, while attempting to mitigate the potential financial and legal risks while maximizing community benefits.
Although the original Guarantee Letters (Attachment A) only contemplated the negotiation of one Venue Use Agreement, LA28 has determined that four agreements are required for the inclusion of Santa Monica as a venue city for the 2028 Summer Olympic Games, as further discussed below. These agreements between LA28 and the City would define financial responsibilities, municipal service commitments, and logistical details.
The Games Agreement is the first of the four agreements to be negotiated and is intended to be a fundamental framework for ensuring a coordinated effort between parties, addressing key aspects such as the City’s commitment to provide municipal services, the manner for calculating the reimbursement of municipal services, prevention of unfair business practices and illegal merchandise sales, and facilitation of discussions with advertising media partners to prevent ambush marketing (i.e., when a brand capitalizes on the Olympics by associating itself with it without being an official sponsor). The Games Agreement sets broad terms and general principles that would 6 of 17
guide the City’s partnership with LA28, focusing on overarching goals, mutual interests, and key responsibilities, without delving into a high level of specificity. This agreement is critical in establishing a framework for cooperation and would set the stage for more detailed negotiations to follow for the Enhanced City Resources Master Agreement, Venue Services Agreement, and the Venue Use Agreement, all of which would specify exact terms, conditions, costs, and operational details.
A draft of Santa Monica’s Games Agreement is still pending and would be made available if and when the agreement goes before Council for approval as an Administrative Item at a future meeting. The approved Games Agreements for three other venue cities – Carson, Inglewood, and Long Beach – are available as Attachments B, C, and D for reference, and comprise substantially similar terms and conditions to those proposed in the current draft of Santa Monica’s Games Agreement.
Staff began negotiating the Games Agreement with LA28 in May 2023. In an effort to ensure the negotiation process resulted in an agreement that was both fiscally responsible and beneficial to the community, the City Attorney’s Office engaged David Sunkin, partner at Sheppard Mullin Richter &Hampton LLP as outside legal counsel to assist with negotiations. Sheppard Mullin is a global 100 firm renowned for representation in high-stakes litigation and complex financial agreements, and is also representing the City of Pasadena, the Rose Bowl Operating Company, UCLA, and USC in their negotiations with LA28.
Staff also commissioned HR&A Advisors to conduct a fiscal impact study to provide a comprehensive understanding of the potential financial benefits and risks of hosting beach volleyball for the 2028 Summer Olympics. HR&A Advisors is a prominent real estate, economic development, and public policy consulting firm that has performed feasibility and other analyses for the City on things such as the Housing Element and Downtown Community Plan. HR&A possesses expert knowledge of and a deep familiarity with the strengths of Santa Monica and the unique challenges it faces. 7 of 17
Fiscal Impact Study
HR&A conducted a comprehensive analysis based on available information to estimate the net fiscal impacts to the City for two different scenarios. The first scenario is one in which the City hosts beach volleyball for the LA28 Olympic Games (the “Event Scenario”) and, in the second scenario, the City would not host beach volleyball (the “Non-Event Scenario”). To quantify the net impacts of each scenario on the City’s budget, the analysis considered incremental hotel occupancy, sales, parking, utility, and other associated taxes, as well as the anticipated costs of providing municipal services.
In the Event Scenario, Santa Monica would host over 30 ticketed beach volleyball events at a temporary 12,000-seat venue near the Santa Monica Pier, attracting more than 450,000 attendees during a two-week period in July 2028. The city is already a popular tourist destination, particularly in July, and is expected to reach full capacity in terms of overnight accommodations regardless of whether it hosts beach volleyball.
HR&A projected the fiscal impacts by analyzing historical City budget data, visitor spending reports, and Olympic precedents. The analysis determined that the Event Scenario could result in a net loss to the City of $1.45 million. By contrast, the NonEvent Scenario could result in a financial gain of $10.65 million. A key reason for the projected loss in the Event Scenario is attributed to the additional costs for hosting, including expenses for security, infrastructure, and event operations. In the Non-Event Scenario, the City would still benefit from increased visitation due to the Olympics being held in the region but without the large operational costs associated with hosting, leading to greater fiscal benefits with lower expenses. A summary of HR&A’s fiscal impact findings is provided in Table 1.
Event Scenario
(Hosting)
Non-Event Scenario
(Not Hosting)
Incremental Impacts:
Hosting Beach Volleyball
Revenues $14.09M $11.3M $2.79M
Costs ($15.54M) ($650K) ($14.89M)
Net ($1.45M) $10.65M ($12.10M)
Table 1: Summary of Fiscal Impacts – Event Scenario vs. Non-Event Scenario (2024$) 8 of 17
To comprehensively assess the financial implications of the Event Scenario, it is essential to consider the incremental revenue and cost impacts, as shown in Table 1.
Should the City host beach volleyball, the projected incremental impact would yield an additional $2.79 million in revenue compared to the Non-Event Scenario. However, it would also incur $14.89 million in additional incremental costs, leading to a potential total net loss of $12.1 million. This figure reflects the anticipated net loss under the Event Scenario and also accounts for the opportunity cost of $10.65 million in net revenues that could be realized under the Non-Event Scenario.
It is critical to note that several uncertainties could affect the final fiscal outcome. For instance, HR&A’s projections assume that LA28 would pay the City to rent the beach and parking lot and would also pay for parking revenues lost as a result of Lot 1 North being closed. The analysis also assumes the Pier will be fully operational, which cannot be guaranteed at this time and would be determined in future negotiations with LA28.
Should LA28 security concerns or other operational challenges cause business disruptions at the Pier, the negative fiscal impacts would be significant.
LA28 is also expected to reimburse the City for some municipal services that exceed normal and customary levels provided in the venue footprint and potentially in other areas beyond the venue footprint. The fiscal impact analysis does not account for LA28 reimbursing the City for enhanced municipal services since there are currently too many unknowns, including how baseline services will be established, eligible costs and reimbursement rates, and the size and scope of reimbursement areas (i.e., inside and beyond the venue). As detailed later in the report, the unknown terms and conditions for reimbursement could significantly alter the overall impact on the City’s budget.
Further, there are also concerns about where event-related point of sale transactions (ticket sales, merchandise, concessions, etc.) would be taxed, as past events have seen revenue diverted to other municipalities, like Los Angeles. Additionally, several potential costs – such as capital improvements, staff time, post-event site restoration, and environmental mitigation – remain unquantified. Table 1 calculations also do not include potential additional revenues that could result from partnerships, sponsorships, 9 of 17
events, and activations in the Non-Event Scenario, activities which would be prohibited in the Event Scenario.
Ultimately, the financial impact would depend heavily on the results of Santa Monica’s negotiations with LA28, particularly regarding revenue-sharing, reimbursements, and operational agreements. HR&A’s full report is available as Attachment E.
Agreement Terms
Given the potential net financial loss of over $12 million if Santa Monica hosts beach volleyball, it is critical that our agreements with LA28 safeguard the City's finances and minimize legal and budgetary risks. Specific provisions in the Games Agreement are of paramount concern and warrant particular attention as detailed in the following subsections.
• Community Benefits. As the host city, Los Angeles was granted $160 million from LA28 to fund youth sports development. The venue cities do not receive any of that funding, and other benefits offered to the City of Los Angeles, such as local hire, workforce development, or a legacy project, have not been offered to Santa Monica or any other venue city. City staff proposed including local hire and workforce development provisions in Santa Monica’s Games Agreement, but LA28 declined.
Santa Monica is exceptionally well-positioned compared to some other venue cities, benefiting from consistent summer tourism and high hotel occupancy rates, while also enjoying strong global brand recognition. Therefore, it is important to recognize that hosting beach volleyball would result in only modest increases in revenues from sales, hotel occupancy, and parking taxes (estimated to be approximately $2.79 million), which would be offset by the estimated $14.89 million in additional net costs the City would incur. This leaves the City with no resources for community benefits through an LA28 partnership, putting the City in a position to find additional resources that would be very limited, if possible at all, given prohibitions in the Games Agreement. The City, however, 10 of 17
stands to gain some potential intangible benefits from hosting beach volleyball, such as community pride, brand enhancement, and earned media coverage. • Revenue-Generating Opportunities. The Games Agreement prevents the City from pursuing revenue-generating opportunities, such as sponsorships or cobranded merchandise, and prohibits public and private events from being hosted citywide unless approved by or in coordination with LA28. These opportunities could generate revenue to mitigate some of the City’s costs associated with hosting beach volleyball but, unfortunately, would not be permitted by the Games Agreement.
• Pier Operations. At this time, LA28 is unable to provide assurance that the Santa Monica Pier will remain open and fully operational throughout the entirety of the Olympic Games. While the City's guarantee letters with LA28 from 2016 indicated a fully operational pier, the status of pier operations will be determined at a later date as subsequent agreements are negotiated. • City Services. The Games Agreement indicates that LA28 would reimburse the City for all enhanced municipal services (above normal and customary levels), presumably for police and fire overtime, supplemental traffic control, crowd control, trash collection, and maintenance provided within the venue footprint (Figure 1). However, the venue footprint only represents a fraction of the city that would be impacted by the increase in daytime visitors expected to attend beach volleyball matches or other Olympic-related activities in Santa Monica. 11 of 17
Figure 1: Venue Footprint
LA28 has indicated that there would also be a “games footprint,” a currently undetermined area beyond the venue footprint where the City would be reimbursed for providing enhanced City services. However, there is no language in the Games Agreement that specifically addresses or ensures reimbursement in the games footprint.
The Games Agreement also requires the City to provide services such as prevention of illegal merchandise sales and price-gouging citywide. It is unclear if LA28 would be willing to reimburse the City for these services, or if the City would be financially responsible for the staff, equipment, and supplies required to meet the increased demands for public safety, maintenance, transportation, and all other City services beyond the venue and games footprints.
Furthermore, another provision in the Games Agreement worth noting is that the City of Santa Monica's normal and customary service levels would be determined by comparison to those of the City of Los Angeles. Currently, LA28 and the City of Los Angeles have not completed their negotiations to establish normal and 12 of 17
customary service levels or the costs of those services, and the rates at which LA28 would reimburse the City of Los Angeles for these services. Therefore, the Games Agreement effectively requires Santa Monica to agree to unknown LA28 reimbursement rates to provide unknown levels of unknown services at unknown costs. Given the substantial disparity in size and service delivery methods between the two cities, this clause presents a significant financial risk.
It should be noted that Section iii(a) of Santa Monica’s Guarantee Letter with LA28, approved by the Council in 2016 and affirmed in 2023, requires “the general provision of the normal and customary level of municipal services (e.g., cleaning, maintenance, police, fire, transportation, public works, and building and safety) appropriated in the Venue Owner’s Budget, at the time of the Games.” Staff has urged LA28 to include this provision in the Games Agreement, as stated in the Guarantee Letter, to allow Santa Monica’s normal and customary service levels to be determined by the City’s normal budget appropriations at the time of the Games, but LA28 declined.
• Reimbursement Guarantee. In addition to the multiple unknowns related to what municipal services would be reimbursed, in what areas, and at what service levels, the general reimbursement provisions in the Games Agreement are concerning. As currently written, the Games Agreement requires the City to advance all municipal costs related to hosting beach volleyball with no timetable or process for reimbursement of these costs.
Further, the Games Agreement only requires LA28 to reimburse the City if LA28 has net revenues available to do so. While LA28 and City of Los Angeles representatives have publicly stated on multiple occasions that they anticipate the 2028 Summer Games will result in a budget surplus, that cannot be guaranteed at this time. If LA28 is financially unsuccessful – as many Olympics organizing committees have been in the recent past – and becomes insolvent, the Games Agreement would prevent the City from pursuing legal action against any entity except LA28, a non-profit organization that may wind down operations 13 of 17
and dissolve shortly after the completion of the 2028 Summer Games. Once dissolved, and if adequate funds are not available in LA28’s reserves, the City would have no way of recovering any monies owed to it.
While LA28 has represented that the City’s financial risks are mitigated by financial guarantees by the City of Los Angeles and the State of California, these guarantees do not ensure payment to the City of Santa Monica. The City of Los Angeles has pledged a $270 million financial guarantee that, according to the Games Agreement executed between LA28 and Los Angeles (Attachment F), can only be utilized to cover expenditures if LA28’s revenues are not available to cover said expenditures.
The City of Los Angeles’ Games Agreement provides for priority reimbursement for the City of Los Angeles and does not specifically provide for reimbursement to venue cities like Santa Monica. Even if it did, the Games Agreement specifically prohibits the City of Santa Monica from taking legal action against the City of Los Angeles for repayment of LA28’s financial obligations. Further, assuming the City of Los Angeles would be willing to distribute the $270 million to cover LA28’s debts, the Games Agreement provides no clarity on the prioritization of repayment of other parties, meaning that Santa Monica would be competing with other venue cities, LA County, and privately-owned venues for reimbursement.
AB132, approved by Governor Newsom in 2017, pledges a financial guarantee of an additional $270 million from the State of California if LA28 expenses exceed its budget, subject to several caveats, including that the City of Los Angeles has already expended its $270 million guarantee. Sections 4(a)(1) and 4(a)(2) of the bill state that the $270 million pledge is only for debts LA28 owes to the IOC and International Paralympic Committee for claims by third parties arising from the games, and for debts owed by LA28 as a result of the City of Los Angeles’s hosting of the Olympics. (See Attachment G.)
14 of 17
Although AB132 provides a financial guarantee for the IOC for claims by third parties, the Games Agreement specifically prohibits the City of Santa Monica from taking legal action against the IOC, the State of California, or the City of Los Angeles, thus rendering both the City of Los Angeles’s and the State of California’s financial guarantees available for the City’s reimbursement only if there are sufficient funds remaining after waterfall reimbursements/payments to the City of Los Angles and any other venue hosts with priority payments promised ahead of the City. Further, even if these guarantees become available to the City for reimbursement, they would only cover mutually agreed upon enhanced services within the venue and games footprints, which at this time are unknown in terms of scope and cost eligibility as detailed above.
Lastly, LA28’s estimated budget for the 2028 Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games is currently $7 billion. Cumulatively, $540 million in financial guarantees represents less than 8% of LA28’s total budget and should not be considered sufficient contingency nor relied upon for reimbursements owed to the City.
Budget Impacts
With various financial factors still uncertain, the anticipated budget impacts of the LA28 Olympic Games on the City of Santa Monica are expected to be significant. The total projected incremental cost for Santa Monica to host Olympic events is approximately $14.89 million, based on information currently available. However, the reimbursement amount from LA28 remains undetermined, leaving a potential financial gap the City would need to address. Santa Monica may also need to invest in capital infrastructure improvements to support the influx of visitors and athletes, though the scope and cost of these projects are still unclear and would not be eligible for reimbursement.
In addition to direct costs, Santa Monica will face increased demands on staff time and resources across various departments, such as public safety, transportation, and public works to manage event logistics. Further exacerbating unknown costs is the reality that the organization does not have staff capacity to deliver enhanced services without hiring additional employees through restorations, additions, and/or contracted services. Post- 15 of 17
event site restoration would also need to be factored into the budget, as well as potential long-term infrastructure maintenance resulting from the increased use of City facilities.
While there are known financial risks associated with hosting the event, the full magnitude of these risks is unclear at this time, particularly due to the uncertainty surrounding the extent of costs and the likelihood or timing of reimbursement from LA28. Executing the agreement without a full understanding of these financial obligations exposes the City to potential additional budgetary strains, with no guarantees of compensation for expenses incurred. Given the City's existing budget constraints, the General Fund cannot absorb additional liabilities without trade-offs.
Once the Games Agreement is signed, Santa Monica would be contractually bound to serve as a venue city, in accordance with the terms thereof, and locking the City into a commitment with little flexibility to renegotiate terms related to community benefits or reimbursement in the future Venue Use Agreement and Enhanced City Resources Master Agreement. This loss of negotiation power could limit the City’s ability to protect its financial and public interests throughout the planning and execution of the Olympic events.
Options and Alternatives
The City of Santa Monica faces two options regarding its negotiations with LA28, each carrying its own set of risks and opportunities. One option is to move forward with executing the Games Agreement despite the uncertainty surrounding the full cost impact and timing of reimbursement. This would allow Santa Monica to play a key role in hosting Olympic events, potentially bringing economic benefits such as tourism and enhanced visibility. However, moving ahead without fully understanding the financial implications could put the City at significant risk. This option involves accepting the serious legal and financial challenges/risks in exchange for being a direct participant in the global event.
16 of 17
The alternative option would be to continue negotiations and/or decline to execute the current draft of the Games Agreement. If LA28 ends negotiations, Santa Monica would remain a regional partner by providing support through services such as events, public safety, and transportation. This approach would allow the City to avoid the risks associated with signing the Games Agreement, while still contributing to the broader success of the LA28 Games. For example, Santa Monica could provide support through its Big Blue Bus transit service, public safety personnel, and the potential use of local facilities for Olympics practice or training. This alternative would allow Santa Monica to remain a collaborative partner in regional efforts without taking on the direct liabilities associated with hosting the Games.
Ultimately, the decision hinges on weighing the potential benefits of direct involvement in LA28 against the long-term financial and legal risks to the City.
Environmental Analysis
Conceptual approval for the Olympic Games is statutorily exempt from CEQA pursuant to Section 15272 of the State CEQA Guidelines, which states that “CEQA does not apply to activities or approvals necessary to the bidding for, hosting or staffing of, and funding or carrying out of Olympic Games under the authority of the International Olympic Committee, except for the construction of facilities necessary for such Olympic Games.” The construction of the temporary stadium on the beach by LA28 would be subject to further review to determine the level of environmental clearance necessary.
Past Council Action
Meeting Date Description
08/22/2023
(Attachment H)
Affirmation and Update of Los Angeles 2024 Summer Olympics and Paralympics Games Guarantee Letters to LA28
09/13/2016
(Attachment I)
Approval of City and Venue Guarantee Letters for the Los Angeles 2024 Summer Olympics and Paralympics Bid
17 of 17
Financial Impacts and Budget Actions
There is no immediate financial impact or budget action necessary as a result of the recommended action. However, moving forward with execution of the Games Agreement to host beach volleyball could potentially result in total incremental costs of $14.89 million or greater that the City would need to advance, which would likely necessitate budget trade-offs in the form of reduced City programs and service levels.
Some of these costs may be reimbursed by LA28, but reimbursement terms and conditions are unclear and not guaranteed by the Games Agreement. This comes at a time when the City remains in a precarious financial situation. Facing unprecedented liabilities, seeking to restore city services, address deferred infrastructure maintenance and $450 million in unfunded capital projects, impacts of inflation on city costs, and repayment of funds deferred from enterprise funds. All of this exacerbated by significantly reduced general fund reserve levels and insufficient staffing.
Prepared By: Melissa Spagnuolo, Community Partnerships Manager Approved Forwarded to Council
Attachments:
A. City and Venue Guarantee Letters
B. City of Carson Games Agreement
C. City of Inglewood Games Agreement
D. City of Long Beach Games Agreement
E. 2028 Olympic Games Fiscal Impact Analysis for Santa Monica (HR&A) F. City of Los Angeles Games Agreement
G. AB132 LA28 State Guarantee (2017)
H. August 22, 2023 City Council Staff Report (weblink)
I. September 13, 2016 City Council Staff Report (weblink) J. Written Comments
K. PowerPoint Presentation
L. PowerPoint Presentation