Los Angeles city leaders voted 12-0 to press for a transparent review of Casey Wasserman's past ties to Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell, escalating pressure on LA28 amid calls for resignation
The Los Angeles City Council took formal action on March 13, 2026, adopting a 12-0 resolution that urges the LA28 organizing body and the International Olympic Committee to examine the connections between Casey Wasserman and figures in the Jeffrey Epstein files. Council members framed their move as a matter of aligning leadership with the Olympic movement’s values of integrity and accountability, while acknowledging the symbolic nature of the measure because the council lacks direct authority to remove the LA28 chair.
The resolution was introduced by Councilmembers Imelda Padilla and Monica Rodriguez after public disclosure of decades-old communications and associations that have shaken confidence among local officials and community leaders. In response, the LA28 board reiterated that its leadership decision is settled and that the organization is focused on delivering a fiscally responsible, privately funded Games that protects taxpayers and benefits Los Angeles.
The backlash intensified after a late January release of Department of Justice materials included a 2003 email exchange between Casey Wasserman and Ghislaine Maxwell, alongside reporting that he had traveled on a plane linked to Jeffrey Epstein as part of a humanitarian trip. Those records prompted questions about judgment and association, even as no allegation of criminal conduct by Wasserman has been made. An outside counsel review by O’Melveny & Myers LLP concluded that his interactions did not extend beyond what has already been disclosed publicly, a finding that the LA28 board used when it met virtually on February 11 to express confidence in his leadership.
The Board’s February evaluation, described by board members as an independent review, found the documented contacts limited in scope and placed emphasis on cooperation from Wasserman during the inquiry. Despite that, the council resolution asks the organizing committee and the IOC to ensure leaders reflect the values of the Games, underscoring a disconnect between the local political will and the authority of sporting institutions. The council specifically called for a thorough and transparent review of his involvement in ongoing inquiries into these matters.
Political figures and civic bodies across Los Angeles have added to the pressure: Mayor Karen Bass publicly urged Wasserman to step down after previously engaging with him on legacy projects, and other local entities including the West Hollywood City Council and two Los Angeles County supervisors have sought his removal. High-profile artists and athletes represented by Wasserman’s talent firm also announced separations, and Wasserman disclosed on February 13 that he would sell his agency, recently rebranded as The Team, citing the distraction the controversy has created.
As the agency goes to market, industry players and investors reportedly lining up to assess opportunities include major agencies and financial firms. Names said to be evaluating the business environment around The Team range from traditional talent agencies to private equity and Wall Street interests. This activity reflects not only reputational fallout but also the commercial ripple effects that controversies involving leadership can produce.
With the Games scheduled for July 14-30, 2028, stakeholders have limited runway to resolve leadership disputes without affecting planning. The council resolution will be shared with LA28, the International Olympic Committee, and other relevant parties, setting a public expectation for scrutiny and transparency. Whether the IOC or LA28 changes course remains uncertain, but the situation spotlights governance questions at the intersection of sport, civic oversight, and public trust.
The broader implications are clear: major events require not only technical preparedness but also credible leadership. The council framed its action as protecting community values and taxpayer interests, while LA28 insists its mandate is to deliver a privately funded, fiscally disciplined Olympic and Paralympic Games. How those priorities are reconciled will shape both the lead-up to 2028 and the public perception of the movement that hosts it.