Going solar should be cheaper and easier. Local governments are standing in the way.
(Getty Images)
Colorado doesn't need to wait on Washington to address climate change, reduce costs for families, and make government work more efficiently. We have the power to make it cheaper and quicker for families to install rooftop solar and home batteries by streamlining local permitting processes.
Unfortunately, permitting wait times and delays for rooftop solar in Colorado are some of the worst in the western United States.
In Arapahoe County, for example, the majority of permits take more than 10 weeks to process. These delays impose significant costs. According to a recent analysis by Brown University, local red tape increases the price of installing a residential solar system by more than $3,200. This price hike puts solar out reach of thousands of Coloradans, particularly low- and middle-income families. As solar professionals in Colorado, we can attest to the detrimental impact of these unnecessary bureaucratic barriers: fewer jobs installing solar and more greenhouse gas emissions.
SUBSCRIBE: GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX
Wisely, our General Assembly offered legislation this year to tackle this problem. House Bill 25-1096, sponsored by Reps. Lesley Smith and Kyle Brown and Sen. Matt Ball, and championed by Gov. Jared Polis, would have required our cities and counties to implement one of several software platforms that automatically approve most residential solar and home battery permits. The National Renewable Energy Laboratory in Golden developed one of these software platforms, SolarAPP+, which is now used in Denver — and in hundreds of other localities around the country. Using a platform such as SolarAPP+ also makes for faster inspections. Automating solar permitting is one of those rare win-wins — saving families and solar installers money and headaches, and saving cities and counties resources and time.
But climate-forward cities and counties, including Boulder and Fort Collins, lined up this legislative session to oppose the legislation and were ultimately responsible for its demise. They argued that automated permitting would prevent them from assessing the historical significance of every home built before 1975 before allowing solar panels on its roof, that certain homes in flood plains should be raised on stilts before they were allowed to install rooftop solar, and that their government IT departments would struggle to implement widely-used free software.
Their opposition is disappointing. Boulder and Fort Collins have set goals to get to 100% renewable energy by 2030 — a stronger target than even the state of Colorado. And yet city officials and local electeds in Boulder and Fort Collins spent valuable time and resources lobbying against a common-sense solution that would make rooftop solar cheaper for Coloradans statewide.
Our local governments should keep two important considerations in mind. First, decarbonization is on the chopping block in Washington, including critical funding for renewable energy projects and facilities in Colorado. Our cities and counties — especially those that claim to be environmental leaders — should do everything in their power to ensure that as subsidies go away we make renewable energy as cheap to buy and as fast to deploy as possible.
Second, we are seeing just how many Americans have lost faith in the simple idea that the government prioritizes our needs over its processes. Across the ideological spectrum, more and more believe that government is standing in the way of building what we need, from critical national infrastructure to a simple home renovation. Cities and counties in Colorado like Boulder and Fort Collins should be at the forefront of creating an efficient government that prioritizes people, rather than hiding behind local exceptionalism to justify burdensome red tape and costly inefficiency.
Colorado is blessed with abundant sunshine, and a commitment to good government. We urge our cities, counties and the legislature to step up and make it easier for Coloradans to install rooftop solar, reduce their utility bills and fight the climate crisis.
SUPPORT: YOU MAKE OUR WORK POSSIBLE
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
CBS News
33 minutes ago
- CBS News
Are annuities safe if the market crashes? Experts weigh in
We may receive commissions from some links to products on this page. Promotions are subject to availability and retailer terms. The right annuity type can help retirees weather market turbulence and downturns. Getty Images Though inflation has been decreasing, higher costs have had a major impact on the lives of many Americans, including seniors in or approaching retirement. Increased costs, as well as market uncertainty, geopolitical tensions, and other economic fears have many retirees on edge and nervous about what's next. For those who are relying on their investment portfolios, the prospect of a stock market crash can be especially unsettling when time isn't exactly on your side. Due to the combination of these factors, annuities have surged in popularity over the past few years. An annuity is often referred to as an agreement between an individual and an insurance company. You typically can provide a lump sum of money or multiple payments, and in exchange, you can get guaranteed income that can last for a set term or the rest of your life. Additionally, some annuity options can be insulated from the volatility of the stock market. However, there are a variety of annuity types to explore and some provide more protection than others. So, are annuities safe if there's a major economic downturn and the market crashes? And if so, which ones? We spoke to retirement experts about the nuances between annuity products and how insulated they are from external risk factors, like a market crash. Boost your retirement funds with an annuity here. Are annuities safe if the market crashes? In this uncertain economic climate, it's natural to want to find some certainty, which is why annuities can be so appealing, especially if you choose the lifetime income option. Many people fear running out of money. According to the 2025 Annual Retirement Study from the Allianz Center for the Future of Retirement, 64% of respondents worry more about running out of money than death. 54% of respondents noted that inflation adds to those fears. Annuity income can be a solution to look into. However, there are different annuity payout options and types available. Below, we cover what an annuity is and the risk factors associated with each type. How do annuities work? When you get an annuity, you're essentially entering into a contract with an insurance company. The goal is to provide retirement income in your golden years. But the type you choose will affect how you pay, when the annuity pays out, and how the annuity fares with stock market volatility. Payment: You may make a lump sum payment with a single premium annuity or a series of payments with a multiple premium annuity. You may make a lump sum payment with a single premium annuity or a series of payments with a multiple premium annuity. Timing: You can choose an immediate annuity, which begins to pay out quickly, typically within one year. A deferred annuity is when you defer payment for a later day, sometimes years later. You can choose an immediate annuity, which begins to pay out quickly, typically within one year. A deferred annuity is when you defer payment for a later day, sometimes years later. Type: In general, annuities can be fixed, indexed, or variable. A fixed annuity provides stability with a set interest rate. An indexed annuity offers returns that are lied to a specific market index, like the S&P 500 Index. A variable annuity has a rate that changes based on the performance of specific investments. In general, annuities can be fixed, indexed, or variable. A fixed annuity provides stability with a set interest rate. An indexed annuity offers returns that are lied to a specific market index, like the S&P 500 Index. A variable annuity has a rate that changes based on the performance of specific investments. Annuity payout options: You can choose a lifetime income option or payouts for a specific term, such as 20 years. The type of annuity can have the biggest impact on whether your funds are safe from the volatility of the stock market. Explore your annuity options here to learn more. Fixed annuities are often the safest option If you're looking for an annuity option that's insulated from the volatility of the stock market, fixed annuities are typically the safest bet. "Fixed annuities are annuities that have a fixed income rate. They are similar to, let's say, a CD," says Pamela Sams, chartered retirement planning counselor and financial advisor at Jackson Sams Wealth Strategies. With a fixed annuity, the insurance company you have a contract with agrees to a guaranteed interest rate and a set payment for the term you choose, which can be years or throughout your lifetime. Because of their fixed nature and guarantee, fixed annuities are insulated from market fluctuations. While this can be a positive for risk-averse investors, there are some drawbacks to consider. For example, your annuity returns may be lower compared to other investment vehicles and may not keep up with inflation. Variable annuities carry more risk A variable annuity may give you various investment options to choose from. As such, you could benefit from greater returns. On the other hand, you could also experience losses as well, making this option riskier if there's a market crash. "A variable annuity, aside from the fact that oftentimes they're very heavily loaded with fees, so they're expensive to have…they're exposed to the market risk, that means that when the market crashes, the investments within the variable annuity are also going to go down with the market. So they are not exactly the safest type of annuity to be invested in," says Krisstin Petersmarck, a retirement income certified professional and founder and owner of New Horizon Retirement Solutions. Fixed indexed annuities (FIAs) have limited risk A fixed indexed annuity (FIA) can give you greater returns than a traditional fixed annuity, without as much volatility and risk as a variable annuity. Through a fixed indexed annuity, you may have a minimum guaranteed rate combined with a rate that's pegged to a specific index, like the S&P 500. "A type of fixed annuity called an indexed annuity…earnings can fluctuate based on the performance of an index, but your principal is secure," says William A. Stack, retirement income certified professional and owner of Stack Financial Services LLC. An FIA offers the possibility of earning more based on market participation, but preserves the principal in a downturn. "So instead of a fixed interest rate like the 4% or 5%, the fixed indexed annuity has market participation. So, for example, if the stock market goes up 10% and you are participating up to 6%, then you get 6% versus the 10%," says Sams. Deferred income annuities provide guaranteed income As pensions become increasingly rare, it's important to set up options that can help you in the future. A deferred income annuity (DIA) can be a solid alternative. "It's designed like the same concept of an income annuity, but because it's deferred, that means that you're giving the insurance company a certain amount of time that they're going to have your premium that they get to invest in the market, but you do not start receiving your income right away," says Petersmarck. You may use a DIA for retirement income and start receiving the funds within 13 months up to 40 years later. If you purchase a DIA, you may also be able to add more contributions later. However, the insurance carrier may put caps on how much you contribute. A DIA can provide you with a fixed payout for the remainder of your life, regardless of what's happening in the market. The bottom line An annuity can help provide you with retirement income. Sams recommends "having at least 50% of your retirement income coming from some fixed type of source, either guaranteed income through an annuity, Social Security, pension type of things that you know that you can get on a month-to-month basis." However, you want to be mindful of what type you have and how much exposure (if any) you have to the stock market. "Each contract is going to have specific features that they should discuss with their agent and financial planner," says Stack. The experts we spoke to agree that fixed annuities and fixed indexed annuities provide more protection to investors. On the other hand, variable annuities can have higher levels of risk if there's a market crash. As part of your retirement planning, it's key to understand your annuity options, how they work, and the fees and risks associated with each type. Lastly, look at the insurance company's ratings. "Something to also keep in mind is that when you're looking at any kind of annuity, you want to be working with an insurance carrier that has a high rating. I recommend working with a carrier that has an A rating or better," says Petersmarck. Have more questions? Learn more about your annuity options here.
Yahoo
2 hours ago
- Yahoo
2026 World Cup, one year out: The 10 biggest storylines, from Lionel Messi to Donald Trump
The 2026 World Cup, a North American party decades in the making, arrives at an arbitrary yet significant milestone Wednesday: It is one year away. One year from showtime. One year from captivating the world, whether or not its co-hosts — Mexico, Canada and the United States — are ready. On the field, its contenders are assembling. World Cup qualifying is underway or complete on all six continents. Eleven nations have secured their place at the expanded 48-team tournament, which organizers say will be the grandest sporting event in human history. Advertisement Off the field, though, those organizers have work to do — and minefields to navigate. As the one-year-out milestone neared, for example, U.S. authorities were violently quashing protests against immigration raids in Los Angeles — which, 366 days from now, is set to host the U.S. national team's World Cup opener, the curtain raiser for what is supposed to be an 'inclusive,' 'global,' multicultural celebration of soccer and humanity. U.S. President Donald Trump's travel ban also clouds FIFA's promise that all fans are 'welcome.' FIFA, nonetheless, has aligned itself with Trump, who will surely be front and center as the World Cup kicks off next June, no matter how internationally unpopular he gets. That, too, will be a part of the 2026 story, as will unforeseen sagas. 'There are gonna be geopolitical issues that we don't even know right now,' said Meg Kane, the CEO of Philadelphia's World Cup host committee, 'that are gonna affect the tournament.' But we'll begin our rundown of 10 storylines on the field — with the GOATs, their successors, and a co-host bleeding hope. Fans of Cristiano Ronaldo and Lionel Messi might witness the end of the global icons' storied careers at the 2026 World Cup. (Photo by) (Yasser Bakhsh via Getty Images) Swan songs for Lionel Messi and Cristiano Ronaldo? Before, during and after the 2022 World Cup, Lionel Messi said, 'seguramente,' surely, that the Mundial in Qatar would be his last. Then he won it. That cathartic triumph helped revitalize him, and turned the Argentine national team into his happy place. Eighteen months later, he won a second straight Copa América. Now, although he hasn't explicitly said it, all indications are that Messi is probable for a sixth World Cup next summer, during which he will turn 39 years old. Advertisement Cristiano Ronaldo, meanwhile, will be 41. When he exited the 2022 World Cup in tears, having been benched and then ousted in the quarterfinals by Morocco, he assumed that his 'dream' of lifting sport's most coveted trophy had 'ended.' But two-and-a-half years later, he is once again starting and scoring — and winning trophies — for Portugal. So, it seems that both generational stars will come to North America next summer for their sixth World Cups — and this time, surely, their swan songs. The more compelling question: Will they be any good? Will they continue to inspire their respective countries? Or will their aging legs and all-consuming presence bog down their teams and impede evolution? Lamine Yamal and the next generation Messi and Ronaldo remain the two most famous names in the sport — and perhaps the world — but they're no longer the planet's best players. And by next summer, that title could belong to a kid less than half their age, a teenager who's taken Europe by storm: Lamine Yamal. Advertisement The 17-year-old has already helped lead Spain and FC Barcelona to titles. He has dazzled in the Champions League and wowed the world. In 2026, at his first World Cup, he could confirm his superstardom, and sprint down the same path that Messi set all those years ago. There are others, though, who could also burst onto the scene. There's French forward Désiré Doué, and Norway's Erling Haaland — who, at 25, could grace his first major tournament. There are also a few Spanish teammates of Yamal who could steal the show: Pedri and Nico Williams. Who are the 2026 World Cup favorites? Spain, the reigning European champs, deserve their status as the betting favorite to win the 2026 World Cup. But a year out, the field of challengers is deep. Argentina still seems formidable. France still has loads of talent. Brazil now has a revered coach, Carlo Ancelotti, and a year to work through its troubles. Portugal, England and Germany should be in the mix. Uruguay and Colombia could be equally potent — and they have more familiarity with American stadiums. Advertisement Generally, the balance of power in men's soccer looks much like it did in 2022. And in 2022, it gave us a World Cup for the ages. Three years later, there are once again a dozen teams lurking below the elite — including Norway, Japan, Morocco (again) and Ecuador — who could make noise in the knockout rounds. And there are two co-hosts, Canada and Mexico, who look capable of riding a wave of public support to a stage they've never reached before. Mauricio Pochettino's U.S. men's national team seems to be regressing ahead of co-hosting the World Cup next summer. (Photo by John Dorton/ISI Photos/USSF/Getty Images) (John Dorton/ISI Photos/USSF via Getty Images) A flailing USMNT The other co-host, the U.S., left Qatar 2022 'on our way,' as midfielder Weston McKennie said, to 'be[ing] giants eventually.' The Americans were rising, above their region, apparently toward the upper echelons of the sport. 'If we continue to develop in the way that we have,' then-head coach Gregg Berhalter said in 2023, 'the sky's the limit.' Advertisement Sadly, though, they did not continue to develop. They plateaued; fired Berhalter; spent $6 million per year on a renowned replacement, Mauricio Pochettino … and continued to regress. Now, they have lost four straight games for the first time in 18 years. On Tuesday night, they dipped to a new low. Rather than rehearsing for next summer, Christian Pulisic and others are skipping this summer's Gold Cup. Former players have called them out. Pulisic's dad has clapped back. Some fans are fuming; others are booing; others have simply checked out. It is difficult to imagine a national team generating less public excitement one year out from a home World Cup. The impacts of World Cup expansion Although the top half of the 2026 field will look familiar, the bottom half will feature new faces. Uzbekistan and Jordan qualified last week. The likes of Iraq, Cape Verde, Venezuela and Gabon could realistically join them. Advertisement That, in part, is because the World Cup has grown from 32 to 48 teams; there are 16 new seats at the table. Caribbean minnows and tiny emirates now stand a chance. They'll give the World Cup fresh flavors. The big unknown is whether they'll make it better. Will they spice up the early stages? Or will they just get hammered? If there are blowouts — especially with most third-place teams now advancing to a Round of 32 in FIFA's flawed 48-team format — the group stage could be dull. But if there are upsets, it could be gloriously chaotic. Are foreign fans welcome? Off the field, in theory, this World Cup will be a monthlong festival of football, a 48-nation, continent-wide fiesta unlike anything the United States has ever seen. Back in 2022, upon naming the 16 host cities, FIFA president Gianni Infantino predicted that North America would be 'invaded by a big wave of joy and happiness." The 6 million foreigners expected to visit, per FIFA, will help bring the World Cup to life. Advertisement But only if they can get visas. And only if they aren't deterred by detentions and deportations, toxic xenophobia, tariff-fueled tensions, and all the other reasons that fewer people have been traveling to the U.S. in recent months. There are 'growing concerns about America's welcomeness,' as U.S. Travel Association CEO Geoff Freeman recently wrote. And there are growing concerns that all of this will affect the World Cup. Organizers and even the Trump administration have insisted that all are welcome. But fans from Iran — one of 11 counties that have qualified, and one of 12 countries subject to Trump's full travel ban — apparently aren't. Immigration experts are also certain that thousands of fans will be denied visas — or will be stuck in monthslong lines, unable to get an interview, when the tournament kicks off. The most expensive World Cup ever Others will be deterred by cost. The U.S. is already one of the world's most expensive countries to visit. A World Cup trip — especially one that follows a team to multiple cities — will require thousands and thousands of dollars for airfare and lodging and food, money that most people simply don't have. Advertisement Oh, and hundreds or thousands of dollars for tickets. When those go on sale this fall, insiders expect them to be obnoxiously expensive. FIFA's initial prices for the 2025 Club World Cup, a start-up tournament, were 'alarming' and worrisome to diehard supporters. The 2026 prices — which will reportedly be subject to dynamic pricing — will be among the highest in soccer history. And so, as Bailey Brown, president of the Independent Supporters Council, a group representing soccer fans across the U.S. and Canada, told Yahoo Sports in an email this past winter: 'Many of the most passionate fans will be priced out of enjoying the sport because of it.' President Donald Trump could have a prominent presence at the 2026 World Cup due to his close relationship with FIFA president Gianni Infantino. (AP Photo/Mark Schiefelbein) (ASSOCIATED PRESS) President Trump's starring role Another potential deterrent for some, but an attraction for others, will be the spotlight that FIFA gifts to Trump. Infantino has built a tight, often fawning relationship with the U.S. president. Trump has given Infantino seats onstage at his inauguration, and at high-level meetings. He has given Infantino a platform in the Oval Office to sell the Club World Cup. The assumption is that Infantino will reciprocate with whatever Trump wants in 2026. Advertisement That could merely be a seat in luxury suites. Or, it could be a stage for state propaganda and 'sportswashing,' à la the one that Infantino gave Vladimir Putin in 2018. It could be a forgettable footnote; or, for some soccer fans it could corrupt the viewing experience. Is the U.S. ready? Operationally, the two main questions hounding U.S. organizers concern security and transportation. The former became an acute worry when last summer's Copa América final descended into 'inhumane' chaos; but most stakeholders say FIFA is more prepared. It's the latter — the challenge of moving millions of fans across America, to stadiums and fan festivals — that worries those who know the ins and outs of major soccer tournaments. Only three of 11 U.S. stadiums are accessible by subway or mass rapid transit. Many are surrounded by parking lots, but those will be swallowed up by extended outer security perimeters. Most if not all cities are devising temporary solutions to shuttle fans to and fro, but will they work? And will FIFA's in-development 2026 World Cup app, which will feature transport guidance, actually be helpful? Advertisement Much of that remains to be determined. Will the World Cup leave a lasting legacy? The last men's World Cup in North America, USA 1994, led to the launch of Major League Soccer and transformative growth. What impact will this one have? Everyone, from the host cities to MLS and the U.S. Soccer Federation, is trying — and struggling — to answer that question. They all want to build new fields and fund new programs, especially in underserved communities. But, as Chris Canetti, the president of Houston's World Cup host committee, said, 'these plans and these initiatives all cost money.' And while the city host committees have been trying to raise money, FIFA has clamped down on their ability to sell sponsorships. FIFA will monopolize the World Cup's revenues (some $13 billion). It has taken total control of the tournament, and will take its money back to global soccer. U.S. Soccer isn't involved like it was in 1994, when the World Cup's profits birthed a thriving charitable foundation. This time around, the legacy will be indirect and piecemeal. It won't dismantle the pay-to-play system that plagues American soccer. MLS and the USSF, therefore, will have to get bold and creative to maximize what everyone agrees is a 'unique opportunity' for 'transformational change.'
Yahoo
3 hours ago
- Yahoo
With FIFA World Cup one year away, fans and politicians still aren't sure what to expect
Soccer fans watch a friendly match between Manchester United and Arsenal at SoFi Stadium in July 2024. SoFi Stadium is scheduled to host eight matches during the 2026 FIFA World Cup. (Ronald Martinez / Getty Images) Think of the World Cup as a big dinner party. Only instead of asking over family, neighbors and some folks from the office, the whole planet has been invited. Many of those people will be coming to Southern California, and with Wednesday marking the one-year countdown to the tournament's kickoff, Larry Freedman, co-chair of the Los Angeles World Cup host committee, acknowledges there's still a lot of tidying up that has to be done before the guests arrive. Advertisement 'As with any event of this magnitude, there are a tremendous number of moving pieces,' he said. 'Nobody is ready, 100%, a year out. When we signed up for this, we knew we would be working to the end to get ready.' The 2026 World Cup will be the largest and most complex sporting event in history, with 48 national teams playing 104 games in 16 cities spread across the U.S., Mexico and Canada over 39 days. Eight games will be played at SoFi Stadium in Inglewood. Read more: Visa approval crisis threatens to cost 2026 World Cup and L.A. Olympics millions With more than 6 million fans expected to attend matches and another 6 billion engaging globally, FIFA, the World Cup's organizer, says the economic impact to the three countries could top $40 billion. But the number of obstacles host cities will have to negotiate are almost as large and complex as the tournament itself. Advertisement 'Transportation, communications, ticketing, security, the fan fest,' Freedman said. 'You name it.' Hovering over it all like a black cloud are uncertainties over visas, which about half the fans coming to the U.S. for the tournament will need in order to enter the country. Last week, the Trump administration reneged on a pledge to host an open World Cup by issuing a travel ban on people from 12 countries, including Iran, which has already qualified for the World Cup. Citizens of seven other countries face severe restrictions in obtaining visas. Before that, the State Department, which is charge of visa issuance, announced plans to close 10 embassies and 17 consulates and reduce its work force by 3,400 at a time when the average wait for a visa application appointment in some countries is more than a year. Advertisement And Southern California, which will host the U.S. national team's first game, has experienced days of civil unrest sparked by widespread immigration raids. After protesters shut down freeways, burned cars and vandalized businesses, the national guard was deployed. The turmoil could threaten the success of an event that Kathryn Schloessman, president and chief executive of the L.A. Sports & Entertainment Commission, considers both a unique opportunity and a major responsibility. 'The thing that keeps me awake at night is how quickly this has been,' she said. 'We started in 2017 on this bid and it just always seemed like it was a long way away. Then, all of sudden, poof, we're at one year out.' 'I want to make a positive impact on people and their memories,' she continued. 'That, to me, is the biggest responsibility here because we're not going to have this event here again in my lifetime. So this is the one opportunity of the world's biggest event to really do some good in L.A.' Advertisement This is already the second World Cup played in the U.S. in Schloessman's lifetime. The first, in 1994, was the most successful in history, setting records for average and overall attendance and returning a record $50-million profit to its organizing committee, headed by Alan Rothenberg. Read more: SoFi Stadium's hybrid soccer pitch exceeds expectations during Nations League A year out from that tournament, Rothenberg had far different concerns. The U.S. didn't have a first-division soccer league then and its national team had played in just one World Cup since 1950. As a result, soccer was so foreign to most Americans, many of the nine stadiums selected to host games didn't have fields wide enough to meet FIFA standards. 'We had a keen sense of confidence and yet, at the same time, total apprehension. Because nobody had ever done it before,' Rothenberg said. Advertisement 'We were reasonably confident about how ticket sales were going to go. A lot was riding on the success of the [U.S.] team. If the team was an embarrassment it would be a real downcast over the entire operation.' Instead, the U.S. drew Switzerland, beat Colombia and advanced to the knockout round, where it played eventual champion Brazil even for 70 minutes. That World Cup also introduced a number of features that have since become common, such as fan fests and group-play victories counting for three points instead of two. It was also the first World Cup in which a temporary grass carpet was laid over an artificial-turf field; next summer eight of the 16 stadiums will do that. Rothenberg even planned a halftime show for the final at the Rose Bowl, signing Whitney Houston to perform. FIFA nixed the idea then but has revived it for 2026. Advertisement 'Everything we did was like a first, other than the actual playing of the matches,' Rothenberg said. 'I think it really took '94 to let the rest of the soccer world accept the fact that 'OK, the U.S. can be part of our club.' We were doing some unusual things. We were using celebrities and doing all kinds of entertainment events to build public interest. We had our legacy tour where we were going to city after city, basically traveling the country to get people interested.' Fans pack the Rose Bowl during a World Cup match between Brazil and Italy on July 17, 1994. (Lois Bernstein / Associated Press) And Rothenberg could do that because, as president of U.S. Soccer and chairman of the World Cup organizing committee, he was in charge of the entire tournament. That has changed. FIFA now runs the show, overseeing each of the 16 World Cup cities, who are acting independently of one another. Advertisement The financial agreements between FIFA and the World Cup hosts have also changed, which is why it's highly unlikely any future tournament will be as profitable for the host country as Rothenberg's was for the U.S. In 1994, FIFA shared some of its earnings with local organizers, who were also allowed to cut their own sponsorship deals. That led to a $50 million surplus that funded the U.S. Soccer Foundation. This time around FIFA is taking virtually all tournament-related revenue from ticket sales, sponsorships and broadcasting, even at the local level, while leaving host cities on the hook for public services, security and stadium operations. The relationship is so one-sided that Chicago, where the World Cup opened in 1994, backed out of the 2026 tournament citing the costs to the public. Los Angeles threatened to pass on the tournament as well until a privately funded host committee made up of nearly a dozen local sports and civic organizations agreed to cover much of the risks to taxpayers. In return, a report by Micronomics Economic Research and Consulting estimates Southern California will receive $594 million in economic impact from the tournament, including $343 million in direct spending on hotels, meals, transportation and other services from the estimated 180,000 out-of-town World Cup visitors. Advertisement But that's assuming those visitors show up. According to the State Department website, wait times for a non-immigrant B1/B2 visa — the one World Cup visitors who do not qualify for a visa waiver will need to enter the U.S. — topped a year in Colombia, Honduras and several cities in Mexico. And things may be getting worse. 'Based on our experience, the approval rate for B1/B2 tourist and/or temporary business visas in Colombia has changed,' said Pamela Monroy, a paralegal who helps prospective U.S. visitors through the immigration process. 'There has been a considerable increase in the denial rate for this visa category. We believe this is a result of the ongoing policies and changes in immigration matters being implemented by the Donald Trump administration.' Those kinds of stories worry Rep. Sydney Kamlager-Dove (D-Los Angeles), whose district borders SoFi Stadium. Last month Kamlager-Dove sent a letter, signed by a bipartisan group of more than 50 congressional representatives, to Secretary of State Marco Rubio asking him to 'ensure expeditious and secure visa processing' for the World Cup. Advertisement In testimony before the House Foreign Affairs Committee, of which Kamlager-Dove is a member, Rubio promised he would. But the congresswoman has yet to see proof. 'Show me what that looks like,' she said Monday. 'We're not going to wait too long. We're all unified, Republicans and Democrats. We want these games to be successful, want them to get their act together and are willing to work with one another to push the State Department to follow through on their commitment.' The White House, meanwhile, has sent mixed messages. Last month, President Trump opened the first meeting of a task force on the World Cup by saying that 'everyone who wants to come here to enjoy, to have fun and to celebrate the game will be able to do that.' A month later he signed the travel ban, effectively limiting the definition of 'everyone.' President Trump signs a soccer ball as Qatar's Emir Sheikh Tamim bin Hamad Al Thani, right, and FIFA President Gianni Infantino look on at Lusail Palace in Doha, Qatar, on May 14. (Alex Brandon / Associated Press) At that same White House meeting in May, Vice President JD Vance, the co-chair of the task force, warned World Cup visitors that they would have to leave immediately after the tournament. 'Otherwise,' he said 'they will have to talk to Secretary Noem,' referring to Homeland Security secretary Kristi Noem, whose agency has detained and interrogated people with approved immigration documents at U.S. points of entry. Advertisement The last two World Cup hosts — Russia in 2018 and Qatar in 2022 — allowed visitors to enter their countries with a game ticket essentially doubling as their visa. Both governments also performed background checks on all visitors coming to the tournament. Trump's travel ban, which took effect Monday, bars travel to the U.S. for people in 12 countries and severely limits access to people from seven others. In addition to Iran, which has already assured itself a place in the 2026 tournament, those 19 countries include Sudan, Haiti, Cuba and Venezuela, whose teams still have a chance to earn World Cup bids via regional qualifying tournaments. An exception to the travel ban will allow athletes, coaches and support staff into the U.S. but not fans, directly contradicting FIFA president Gianni Infantino, who told delegates at last month's FIFA Congress that 'the world is welcome in America ... but definitely also all the fans.' Infantino has built a relationship with Trump, attending the president's inauguration in January. If the administration's seemingly contradictory actions caught the FIFA leader by surprise, it also might have convinced some foreign soccer fans to not attend games in the U.S. Advertisement Read more: L.A. Olympic organizers confident they will cover estimated $7.1 billion cost of Games Marcel Ott, a 30-year-old software consultant from Leipzig, Germany, has long been saving for a trip to the World Cup but reports of German tourists being detained, some for weeks, at U.S. airports has led him to reconsider. 'Now I'm not so sure because of the political developments in the U.S.,' he said in German. 'I don't know if it's worth the risk of getting stopped and detained at the airport and risk being deporting back to Germany.' Germany is one of 42 countries whose citizens are eligible for the visa waiver program, which generally allows them to enter the U.S. for visits of up to 90 days without a visa. However, they must obtain Electronic System for Travel Authorization (ESTA) approval prior to travel and can be turned away at any point of entry by Customs and Border Protection officers. Advertisement Ott, who has attended two World Cups, said he may fly to Canada and try to enter the U.S. from there. 'If I get sent back at the border crossing to Canada, I won't have to fly back to Germany right away,' he said. 'I'm thinking the guards at the border to Canada might be a little more relaxed. And there are World Cup games in Canada, too, so it wouldn't be so bad if I get sent back at the Canadian border. 'To be honest, I am still not sure what to do next year.' Marlene, 33, who declined to give her last name, is also uncertain. A city government employee in Berlin, she attended the last two World Cups in Russia and Qatar and planned to travel to the U.S. next summer 'but the general events and U.S. politics put me off. I think it would be better for me not to travel to the USA.' Advertisement But Volker Heun, who worked as a bank executive in the U.S. and once golfed with Trump, said those fears are misplaced, citing the nearly two million Germans who visited America without issue last year. 'This whole issue is being totally overblown in the German media,' said Heun, who plans to enter a World Cup lottery for tickets to multiple games. 'The atmosphere is going to be great.' In South Korea, Jo Ho-tae, who helps manage the Red Devils, a supporter group that recently followed the country's national team to a qualifying match in Jordan, said he will rely on government officials to warn of potential problems. 'I haven't thought too much about Trump's immigration policy yet,' he said. 'But who even knows if our matches will be held in the U.S. and not in Canada or Mexico?' Advertisement The White House could always reverse its immigration policy, as it has done repeatedly with tariffs, and prioritize visa requests for World Cup travelers. That's the solution Freedman, L.A. organizing committee co-chair, is betting on. 'They are looking at this as a showcase event for the country and the host cities. And they understand, it seems, how important it is to welcome the world,' he said. 'I am hopeful that it all gets sorted out in a good way.' Read more: News Analysis: Why are big-name U.S. players passing on World Cup tuneup? Many close observers of World Cup preparations share Freedman's optimism. Advertisement Whether that cautious optimism is justified may soon be known. Tickets for the tournament are expected to go on sale this summer and the draw to determine matchups and venues for the group-play stage of the tournament will be held this winter. Those two events could go a long way toward determining how the World Cup plays out, said Travis Murphy, a former U.S. diplomat who is founder and chief executive of Jetr Global Sports + Entertainment, a Washington-based firm that works to solve visa and immigrant issues for athletes and sports franchises. 'There's kind of this stopwatch that begins the moment the draw is complete to figure out [training] camps and logistics and visas and travel arrangements,' he said. 'I do think they'll make it happen. Is that to say there won't be any issues? Of course not. There was never going to be a scenario where there's not significant challenges to get all these people into the country. 'There are times when the rhetoric seems to run contrary to what's happening on the ground. But it does, at least for the moment, seem like they're implementing changes that are ultimately going to be helpful.' Advertisement Baxter reported from Los Angeles, special correspondent Kirschbaum from Berlin and staff writer Max Kim from Seoul. Get the best, most interesting and strangest stories of the day from the L.A. sports scene and beyond from our newsletter The Sports Report. This story originally appeared in Los Angeles Times.
