19 replies to this topic

[ChicagoFan90]

According to ChicagoSports.com. today Bob Ctvitlik sent letters to all 5 cities asking for more information..venues, and especially $$

Those replies are due back in Colorado Springs on June 21st

Presentations for all 5 cities in La Jolla will begin on June 23rd


Link

http://www.google.co...&ct=result&cd=1

[ejaycat]

Ah, what nice place to pick for a meeting, La Jolla.

I wonder how many people on these boards know how to prounounce that name.

Here's a slightly more detailed (and I mean slightly) article on the same topic:

USOC 2016 Candidate City Evaluation Process Moves Forward with Request For Additional Information
Cities Also Invited To Present To USOC Board of Directors and Participate In U.S. Olympic Assembly Later This Month

COLORADO SPRINGS, Colo. - The United States Olympic Committee (USOC) is taking the next step in its 2016 Candidate City Evaluation Process by requesting additional information from each of the five U.S. cities with which the USOC met last month to discuss the Olympic bid process and the possibility of a U.S. bid for the 2016 Games.

The request was made in writing by USOC Vice President, International Bob Ctvrtlik (stuh-vert-lick) to the Mayors of Chicago, Houston, Los Angeles, Philadelphia and San Francisco seeking additional information on proposed 2016 Olympic and Paralympic Games plans.

The supplementary information is to be returned to the USOC by close of business June 21, 2006. Along with specific items addressed in the preliminary meetings between the cities and USOC leadership, the requested materials also include further detail on each city's venue plans and proposed organizational model.

In addition, each city has been invited to make a 15-minute presentation to the USOC Board of Directors at its upcoming meeting June 23 in La Jolla, Calif. The cities have also been invited to participate in the exposition at the U.S. Olympic Assembly June 23 and 24, also in La Jolla (no fee will be charged by the USOC to the cities that choose to participate in the exposition).

"From our perspective, the initial meetings with the five U.S. cities were extremely productive, which is why we are now seeking additional information from each," said USOC Chairman Peter Ueberroth. "Each of these cities has a proud legacy of support and involvement with the Olympic Movement, and we appreciate their interest not only in the 2016 process, but in continuing that legacy."

A USOC delegation led by Ueberroth, Ctvrtlik, Chief Executive Officer Jim Scherr, Chief of International Relations Robert Fasulo and Strategic Advisor George Hirthler began the initial review of the five cities in May by traveling to each and meeting with leaders from both the public- and private-sectors. The face-to-face discussions were a critical first step for the USOC in determining whether or not to pursue a U.S. bid for the 2016 Games.

"The United States is fortunate to have a group of cities that has shown a clear appreciation for what the Olympic and Paralympic Games can mean not only to their regions and our country, but to the athletes of the world," added Ctvrtlik. "The Olympic Ideals and the Olympic Movement continue to be a driving force for how sport can infuse positive change in society, which is why we believe hosting the Games is the ultimate honor for any city.

"As we begin to look more closely at each city's technical plans, we will also assess each city from an international perspective," added Ctvrtlik. "If ultimately we elect to proceed with a U.S. bid for the 2016 Games, our key criteria for selecting a bid partner will be which city has the best chance of winning internationally - and that means the city that can perform best in strengthening our partnership with the international Olympic Movement."

Following receipt of the requested information, the USOC leadership will review the submitted material and determine whether additional detail will be needed. No timetable has been established by the USOC as to when a decision will be made about whether or not the organization will pursue a U.S. bid for the 2016 Games.

See the whole article here:
USOC taking next steps in 2016 process

[NewYork2016]

Ah, what nice place to pick for a meeting, La Jolla.

I wonder how many people on these boards know how to prounounce that name.

It's "La Joya"

[bohemianrsdy]

Weird, I go to college in LA JOLLA (UCSD). But I won't be here on the 23rd

[baron-pierreIV]

It's "La Joya"

As with numerous places in California assigned names by non-Spanish speaking people (i.e., Anglos), whoever named present-day La Jolla really meant La Joya meaning the "jewel." But because non-Spanish speakers generally can't pronounce the double-l sound properly (el-ye), phonetically, they thought La Joya's spelling was La Jolla; and no one has bothered to correct it since -- because if you pronounce La Jolla now, it should be La Hol-ya which technically means nothing.

This is like my favorite named-street in all of Los Angeles - a Dona (can't do the tilde on this keyboard) Pegita street! As most anglos (where is Cordelia when you need her? ) know, "Peg" is the short affectionate name for someone named Margaret. So whichever Anglo named this street meant to name it after his favorite Margaret, except choosing instead the nick-named PEG, and then adding the Spanish-affectinate ending "-ita" to come up with the ridiculously discombobulated Dona Pegita!

Edited by baron-pierreIV, 12 June 2006 - 07:48 AM.

[Mikel]

As with numerous places in California assigned names by non-Spanish speaking people (i.e., Anglos), whoever named present-day La Jolla really meant La Joya meaning the "jewel." But because non-Spanish speakers generally can't pronounce the double-l sound properly (el-ye), phonetically, they thought La Joya's spelling was La Jolla; and no one has bothered to correct it since -- because if you pronounce La Jolla now, it should be La Hol-ya which technically means nothing.

This is like my favorite named-street in all of Los Angeles - a Dona (can't do the tilde on this keyboard) Pegita street! As most anglos (where is Cordelia when you need her? ) know, "Peg" is the short affectionate name for someone named Margaret. So whichever Anglo named this street meant to name it after his favorite Margaret, except choosing instead the nick-named PEG, and then adding the Spanish-affectinate ending "-ita" to come up with the ridiculously discombobulated Dona Pegita!

Why do u know so much about Spanish?

[baron-pierreIV]

Why do u know so much about Spanish?

Because I know more than I let on -- and sometimes I over-medicate, so I post as you, errr...me, yo o tu!!

[can135]

Do you really think that these 5 cities have an equal chance - I see it as a race between SF and Chicago - LA has already hosted twice, and I can't see the IOC giving it to them a third time (but then look at London) and Houston and Philadelphia don't have the same international reputations at the other three - just my opinion

[ejaycat]

As with numerous places in California assigned names by non-Spanish speaking people (i.e., Anglos), whoever named present-day La Jolla really meant La Joya meaning the "jewel." But because non-Spanish speakers generally can't pronounce the double-l sound properly (el-ye), phonetically, they thought La Joya's spelling was La Jolla; and no one has bothered to correct it since -- because if you pronounce La Jolla now, it should be La Hol-ya which technically means nothing.

This is like my favorite named-street in all of Los Angeles - a Dona (can't do the tilde on this keyboard) Pegita street! As most anglos (where is Cordelia when you need her? ) know, "Peg" is the short affectionate name for someone named Margaret. So whichever Anglo named this street meant to name it after his favorite Margaret, except choosing instead the nick-named PEG, and then adding the Spanish-affectinate ending "-ita" to come up with the ridiculously discombobulated Dona Pegita!

The City of L.A. and even CalTrans have made it a point to use the tilde on street signs/road signs for the past several years; some years ago the Los Angeles Times did a story on this. It pointed out that somewhere in LA County, I think it's Diamond Bar, there a street called "Ano Nuevo Drive" or something. The guy that wrote the article was sure that the developer meant the street to be called "Año Nuevo," which of course means "new year." Without the tilde over the n, the street name translates as "New Anus."

Misspellings and grammar errors/syntax errors occur with a number of Yankee developers/town founders who tried to give their towns/developments historic/Spanish-California-sounding names. "Buena Park" and "Mission Viejo" in Orange County are the ones I can think of off the top of my head; It should actually be "Parque Bueno" and "Misión Vieja," respectively; I know they mixed an English word with a Spanish one in those city names, but you'd think they would at least get the correct grammatical gender for the Spanish word.

[LA84]

At the meeting in La Jolla, The Gav will be promoting San Francisco's "green sensibilities"

Newsome's Pitch to USOC

I wonder what objections Supervisors Daly and "pesky" Peskin will have to this proposal