New York's bid officials for the 2012 Olympics were left scrambling yesterday as the financial plan for a proposed West Side Stadium was defeated on the same day an International Olympic Committee report noted the lack of a stadium as a concern in the city's bid.
Deputy Mayor Daniel L. Doctoroff, the bid founder, insisted there was no backup plan to the Manhattan site, whose fate was apparently sealed by the Public Authorities Control Board. With the I.O.C. expected to vote July 6 in Singapore, the bid appears in serious peril.
The I.O.C. released a report by its evaluation commission solidifying Paris as the front-runner over New York, London, Madrid and Moscow. London also drew high praise and was credited with a "very high quality" presentation before the commission.
New York was well regarded, with its weakness being the unapproved stadium. It was a weakness that probably became its downfall later yesterday, when the Public Authorities Control Board rejected the financial plan for the stadium. Representatives for Assembly Speaker Sheldon Silver and Senate Majority Leader Joseph L. Bruno abstained on the issue at a meeting yesterday afternoon. The plan required unanimous approval.
The decision apparently costs New York its signature site, which would be host to the opening and closing ceremonies and the track and field competition. Three of New York's competitors have existing stadiums, and London has approval to begin building immediately after the vote.
"The P.A.C.B. vote is deeply disappointing, especially because it comes on the day when the International Olympic Committee verified the strength of New York's bid," Doctoroff said in a statement. "The I.O.C. report issued this morning continued the bid's strong momentum and put New York in a great position to win in Singapore in July. But in one confusing stroke late this afternoon, the P.A.C.B. has apparently sought to disrupt all of this extraordinary effort."
NYC2012 had staked its bid on the stadium's success, developing no alternative to joining with the Jets on the Manhattan site. The Jets had promised to pay $1.4 billion of the stadium's $2.2 billion cost; the city and the state were to invest a combined $600 million.
"Today is a setback, but it is not the final chapter to be written in our quest to build a home for the New York Jets in Manhattan," said L. Jay Cross, the Jets' president. "Four years of hard work and planning will not be washed away in a single day."
Several other area teams developing plans for new stadiums, including the Yankees and the Giants, said they were not approached about a potential partnership.
Mayor Michael R. Bloomberg, who pushed hard for the West Side plan, said he would confer with members of the United States Olympic Committee before deciding how to proceed with the Olympic bid.
The U.S.O.C. spokesman Darryl Seibel said Peter Ueberroth, the committee chairman, and Jim Scherr, the chief executive, would have no immediate comment.
"We are in the process of fact-finding and gathering additional information," Seibel said. "We are looking forward to having an opportunity to speak with our colleagues at NYC2012 at some point soon."
By design, the evaluation commission did not rank the cities. The report's impact is always questionable because it is doubtful all 116 I.O.C. members read it cover to cover (it is 122 pages long).
The city with the best evaluation does not always win the bid. Toronto, for example, lost to Beijing for the 2008 Games despite having a bid that was considered technically superior.
I.O.C. members often vote based on other considerations, including plans for their particular sport. In its report, the commission states most of its judgments in neutral terms, its praise meted out carefully. Paris drew no criticism. London's compliments were tempered by small red flags raised because of its expensive transportation upgrade and "somewhat crowded" Olympic Village.
New York drew a "high quality" assessment for its presentation, with the lack of stadium approval being its one major flaw. Madrid also received a "high quality" tag, but the report flagged its accommodation plan for relying on hotels that are an hour's train ride from the city, and for an Olympic Village design that needs revision.
Moscow fared worst of all, rebuked for a "lack of detailed planning" that made it "difficult for the commission to evaluate the project." The commission also warned about the large number of new hotels needed to accommodate the Games.
Clearly, Paris and London emerged in the strongest positions, although there is still a month of politicking remaining and the I.O.C. is hard to read.
It was notable, though, that Paris, in its third recent bid for the Games, came through the evaluation with no highlighted weaknesses. It made unsuccessful tries for 1992 and 2008. Paris does have the strongest stadium plan - using Stade de France - and a large number of temporary sites to address I.O.C. concerns about construction costs and post-Games use.
The commission also called its accommodations plan excellent and used the word confident when discussing the transportation systems' ability to meet demand.
London drew some concern for the $30 billion of improvements planned for its transportation system over the next seven years. The commission lauded the urban renewal its Olympic park would spawn and its strong history of commitment to Paralympic sports.
The legacy the Olympics would leave for sports in New York was also lauded, but the city's strengths were overshadowed by the stadium problem. With no alternative site, NYC2012 has offered few clues to how it will proceed.
"For weeks, the Speaker has said that New York couldn't win the Olympics, and so he didn't need to approve the stadium," said Jay Kriegel, the NYC2012 executive director. "Today, in an extraordinary irony, just when the I.O.C. made clear that New York has an exceptional bid and can win, the Speaker announced that he opposed the stadium. Like every other reason given, including the needs of Lower Manhattan, this excuse has been answered. The Speaker's opposition today is inexplicable and terribly damaging to New York's and America's Olympic bid."
Several groups had voiced the idea of placing an Olympic stadium in Flushing, Queens, perhaps in cooperation with the Mets' need to replace an aging Shea Stadium. But an official familiar with the team's stadium hopes said there were never any serious discussions about that. The official, who did not want to be identified because he did not want to become publicly involved, said he did not think yesterday's developments would result in new discussions.