After announcing back in December their intent to pursue the opportunity to host the 2024 Summer Olympics, the United States Olympic Committee recently granted the U.S. bid for the 2024 Games to the City of Boston.

The USOC mulled over the field of Boston, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Washington, D.C., but Boston handily won the support of the USOC. A press release from the Committee revealed “ultimately, the Boston bid received the unanimous endorsement of the USOC’s board of directors.”

This is only an early step towards the selection of the host city for the 2024 Games, as the International Olympic Committee will not decide on the host for 2024 until September 2017. Opposing potential international bids include cities like Rome, Paris and Berlin.

AIC Athletic Director Matt Johnson had mixed feelings upon hearing the news.

“I had two initial reactions. The first was, wow, that seems like a great thing for the Boston area, one of the best sports cities in the world,” said Johnson, before continuing, “my second thought was, how is this going to affect me as a Massachusetts taxpayer? Where is the money going to come from?”

There’s no question that Boston is a world-class city and a great sports town, but does the City of Boston really need the Olympics? Are Massachusetts taxpayers ready and willing to fork over billions of tax dollars to help fund the Olympics?

“It seems hard to believe that the state would be able to accommodate a five billion dollar project without dipping into any public funds,” Johnson stated.

Yet, Boston 2024 (the group that has been pushing for the bid) insists that “no tax dollars have been spent on Boston 2024, and tax dollars will not be used to build venues or pay for the operation of the Games. Public investment will be confined to roadway, transportation and infrastructure improvements, most of which are already planned and are needed with or without the Olympics.” So is a Boston Olympics just a crutch that will give an automatic green light on several infrastructure projects planned for Massachusetts?

On top of all the roadwork planned for the years leading up to 2024, a special commission report found on Boston 2024’s website (Boston2024.org) states that the IOC requires 35 venues for the Summer Games, as well as an Olympic Village that will house 16,500 athletes and officials, and a central Olympic Stadium with a capacity of at least 80,000, used to host the opening and closing ceremonies.

Anthony Polito, an AIC student and lifelong resident of Hanson (a town on the South Shore, not far from Boston) generally thinks that the Olympics will have a positive impact on Greater Boston.

“I think it would be good for the City of Boston, since it would bring in a ton of revenue,” Polito said, adding “but the traffic is already bad enough, and this will just make it worse. But, I do think the Olympics would bring in enough money and people into Boston that it would be worth it.”

If the political and business powers-that-be really think that Boston must host an Olympics, then how come there wasn’t a greater push for a Winter Olympics? Historically, the Winter Olympic stadiums have been smaller than those of the Summer Games, so if historic Fenway Park is still standing ten years from now, its capacity just shy of 40,000 would be more than sufficient to house the opening and closing ceremonies.

With several hockey arenas around Boston, there would be plenty of potential venues for hockey, curling, and figure skating. And just as in past Winter Games where the outdoor events took place well outside the Olympic Village, a New England Winter Olympics could easily incorporate the mountainous states of New Hampshire and Vermont for the various outdoor events.

With several already-existing venues around Boston suitable for Winter Olympic events, one would think the $5 billion Summer Olympic budget could be significantly reduced if a movement for a Boston Winter Olympics ever gained any steam. Time and time again, there have been worldwide examples of venues constructed specifically for Olympic use that have been abandoned and rendered useless in the years following their Olympic use, another concern from Boston Olympic naysayers.

If Boston’s Olympic backers are serious about pursuing a project that will spend $5 billion in order to host the 17 days of Olympic Games, then hopefully they are ready to endure several more years of aggravating and costly planning in the lead up to 2024. Good luck to Boston 2024, and here’s to hoping this isn’t déjà vu of the Big Dig.