LA2028 - In my previous articles I’ve written about leadership under pressure—and what we do institutionally when trust is shaken. Los Angeles is entering a make-or-break stretch—wildfire recovery, homelessness, and mega-event readiness—and we cannot afford leadership drift.
Newly released Epstein-file salacious emails have triggered local calls for LA28 chair Casey Wasserman to resign, largely on the grounds that he has become a distraction and a credibility risk for the Games. Wasserman has expressed regret, denied any personal or business relationship with Jeffrey Epstein, and apologized for any association. The IOC president has described the episode as a “sad” distraction. And Mayor Bass—at least in the major coverage of the past few days—has emphasized unity and delivery in the run-up to 2028, without taking a yes/no position on whether Wasserman should step aside.
So, what does a “moral compass” framework imply next? It says we should stop treating this situation as a personality fight and convert it into measurable governance—the kind a whole city can understand and monitor.
If the Olympics are a civic mirror, the question is simple: what actions would increase public trust next week—not next year?
- Commission an independent ethics review—now. The immediate governance need is an independent, time-bounded review of leadership ethics and conflicts for LA28: disclosure completeness, decision pathways, recusal rules, and how money and influence flow. This is not performative outrage. It is basic civic hygiene—clarity, fairness, courage, transparency and restraint.
- Publish the rules of the road for LA28 accountability. If Wasserman stays, LA28 should publicly commit to a clear delegation chart (who decides what), audit trails for major decisions, written recusal/conflict policies, and regular public reporting on finances, planning and key risks. The standard should be: not “trust me,” but “watch this.”
- Apply one standard without the need for exceptions. Skip the factional comparisons. The city should say plainly: our standard is full disclosure, independent review, strengthened oversight, and the ability to execute without distraction. If those fail, the leader steps aside—whoever it is.
- Make the resignation decision conditional, not tribal. Under this approach, “Wasserman must resign” is not the starting line; it is the outcome if (a) disclosure is incomplete, (b) conflicts can’t be ruled out, (c) oversight can’t be strengthened credibly, or (d) the controversy materially degrades LA28’s ability to deliver. If the review clears him and the oversight reforms are real, keeping him can be a legitimate choice—because the priority is successful, accountable Games, not satisfying the outrage cycle.
Los Angeles doesn’t need more and more rhetoric. Our City needs institutions that earn trust by how they operate—starting now, while there’s still time to correct course.
(Nick Patsaouras was president of the Southern California Rapid District, the predecessor of Metro, during the 1984 Olympics. He is the author of the book" The Making of Modern Los Angeles")
