Sue Lee has seen the Olympics from both sides, now.
As an athlete, Ms. Lee shivered with goose bumps as she marched behind the Canadian flag before a crowd of 65,000 at the 1988 Summer Games in Seoul. Later, she exulted in her eighth-place finish in the 10,000-metre race, posting a personal-best time that still stands as the Canadian record for that gruelling distance.
Ms. Lee retired as an athlete in 1992 and, these days, she sees firsthand the shortcomings of British Columbia's health-care system as a social worker in the emergency department at Vancouver Hospital.
Few are in a better position to assess what many see as a key question in today's crucial, city-wide referendum on a bid for the 2010 Winter Olympics: Should money be spent on the Games when health care is increasingly pressed for funds?
Ms. Lee, 42, says Yes.
"We do have crowded hospitals and emergency wards. For sure, it's a crisis. But health care and the Olympics are separate issues," she said during a rare respite at the hospital. "The Olympics can do so much for us. People relate to them differently than they do to any other sporting event. I buy into the theme that something as big and powerful as the Olympics can really promote health and wellness."
Plus, Ms. Lee said, there is the marvelous feeling of staging the Games "right here, right in our face."
"As a social worker, I know the importance of self-esteem, and what the self-esteem of putting on the Winter Olympics could do for our community," she said. "It's not about the Olympics. It's about all of us, and what [the Games]inspire."
Although non-binding, if today's vote is No, Vancouver's chance of playing host to the 2010 Games is almost certainly doomed.
"It's over. That's the message," said city councillor and Olympics supporter Jim Green, a veteran activist for better housing in the poverty-stricken downtown Eastside.
No wonder nerves are beginning to fray on the Yes side.
During a debate on CBC last night, Mayor Larry Campbell, a passionate advocate of the Olympics, snapped at bid opponents and challenged non-resident critics of the Games to hold referendums in their cities.
Jack Poole, president of the 2010 Bid Corporation, is not exactly Mr. Casual, either.
"It's an anxious time," he said this week. "This is a scary sort of prospect."
Further compounding the unease is news from Salzburg, Austria, that polls there show more than 75 per cent support for its 2010 bid.
Despite wads of cash, hundreds of volunteers, support from movers and shakers on both sides of the political spectrum and the undoubted legacy the Games would bring to Vancouver, Yes campaigners know the history.
Not one Olympic referendum has resulted in a positive vote. Voters have said No to playing host to either the Summer or Winter Games every single time.
"What happens is that these Olympic votes get hijacked by other issues," Mr. Poole said. "People get angry about something and here's a high-profile project they can use to ventilate their anger by saying No. "
Much of the Games criticism has focused on controversial policies of the provincial government, a major partner in the bid. Some have said that every time Premier Gordon Campbell opens his mouth about the Olympics, they feel like voting No.
However, no city in recent memory that has held the Winter Olympics, a much more manageable event than the mammoth Summer Games, has regretted it. Both Calgary and Lillehammer, Norway, which hosted the Winter Games in 1988 and 1994 respectively, want to do it again.
Today's referendum, or plebiscite as some like to call it, is being held to fulfill a campaign promise by Mayor Campbell and his left-leaning party, the Committee of Progressive Electors. And the Yes and No campaigns could not be more different.
Chris Shaw, a 52-year-old medical-research professor at the University of British Columbia, leads the somewhat ragamuffin No forces.
Mr. Shaw agrees he is cut from a different cloth than many Vancouver activists.
For one thing, he can't vote today because he lives outside the city.
He is a long-time member of the Canadian military reserves, a failed candidate in the last federal election for the Canada Action Party and resigned from a local antiglobalization organization over what he says were false allegations that he belonged to the "new far right."
Mr. Shaw's energy is remarkable. He keeps up a steady bombardment of e-mail to the media and his supporters, outlining bid shortcomings and corporate entanglements of bid directors. He attends every public forum he can, always seems available for interviews and manages to do all this from his small office at work.
"I never intended this to become the monster it has," Mr. Shaw said this week. "It's gobbled up so much of my time. But my sense is that we're going to win. You look at the body language of the other side. They look nervous."
Mr. Shaw's opposition is driven by a belief that the cost of the Games far outweighs the economic benefits.
"They are taking public money and putting it into the pockets of developers," he said. And, there's the Premier factor.
"Inevitably, people take their feelings about Gordon Campbell to the polls," he chortled.
The No side says its total budget is a paltry $5,000, give or take a few No buttons.
The Yes side has it all: Close to $700,000 in donations, about a thousand people on phone-bank duty to get the voters out today, and the resources to distribute 2,500 lawn signs, 500,000 stickers, 120,000 buttons, 180,000 postcards and 110 building banners.
"Overall, I think we've done everything possible," said David Podmore, leader of the pro-Games Team 2010, adding that there is a reason for the David and Goliath element of the two campaigns.
"This is a huge risk for us. People may say this is corny, but we'd be letting down Canada and all of B.C. if we lose this vote," he said.
"What's at risk for the No side? They can obstruct, create mischief, make outrageous slanders and there are no consequences. This isn't a political issue. As [former NDP premier]Mike Harcourt has said: 'If you use this vote to punish the provincial government, you just end up punishing yourself.' "
The issue has split COPE councillors down the middle. Four, plus Mr. Campbell, will vote Yes. Ann Roberts is one of four councillors opposed to the Games bid.
"When you actually add it all up, is it really worth it?" Ms. Roberts asked.
"How do we have the money for a 17-day sporting event when people are being cut off welfare, schools are being closed and seniors' benefits are being reduced? It's very hard to justify. The spending priorities are skewed."
Mr. Green said the Olympics will provide many tangible benefits for the city, including social housing, jobs for disadvantaged youth, redevelopment of the historic Woodwards building and money for arts and cultural events.
"If the choice was between the Olympics and universal daycare, feeding the poor and housing for everyone, the choice would be obvious," Mr. Green said.
"But that's not the way it works. If I can leverage things out of the government that they normally wouldn't do, I'm going to do that."
Mr. Campbell, meanwhile, insists he is losing no sleep over the chance of being known as "the mayor who lost the Games."
"Holding this vote was the right thing to do, no matter what happens," he said.