Can LA still host the Olympics?

In March 2020 it became clear that Tokyo's Summer Olympic and Paralympic Games could not be held safely due to the pandemic. The IOC made a historic — and in hindsight, overly optimistic — announcement that the games would be postponed to "no later than summer 2021." But just in case Tokyo ultimately backed out, the IOC also began quietly lining up a plan B, placing a call to the ever-ready Los Angeles. "The IOC actually reached out to us and said, we need a backup plan," according to Doane Liu, LA's chief tourism officer. Surprisingly, in the midst of its own public health crisis, LA said yes. "We scrambled a bit and said, yeah, sure, we could do it," Liu said at a Southern California Development Forum breakfast last November. "If Tokyo did not come through with the 2021 games, we were an option for the IOC to host the games during COVID."

All of this didn't matter, of course; Tokyo ended up hosting the games, spectator-free, in 2021. But the IOC always has a plan B. Just last week it was announced that Lake Placid, host of the Winter Olympics in 1932 and 1980, is all set to step in for several events of the 2026 Milano Cortina games if a new bobsleigh slope isn't ready in 13 months. This plan was set in motion one year ago when construction delays forced the IOC to publicly express concerns "about the delivery of this project within the required timeline." Rest assured, the IOC has absolutely vetted the cities that can step in for LA.

There are two major takeaways here in regards to our current situation. Just like the IOC was sniffing around for a backup host for Tokyo in the throes of the pandemic, the IOC doesn't care if LA holds its games or not. And, perhaps more troublingly, the city of LA will happily brush aside its own emergencies in order to stage a megaevent.

Speculating about all this right now was not my top priority. Search and rescue teams continue to locate victims and there's another major windstorm coming tonight. (Please stay prepared and vigilant.) But since some elected officials decided to raise the issue while homes are still aflame, I guess we have to talk about it. Los Angeles, what do we think of this idea of millions more people showing up here 1,280 days from now?

The first thing to note is that it's not just the Olympics and Paralympics. LA is the megaevent capital of the U.S. right now. Our World Cup games are next year. The 2026 NBA All Star Weekend is even sooner, in about 13 months. We're hosting the Super Bowl in 2027. And while you might think those events are more geographically constrained to one venue than the sprawling Olympics and Paralympics, the big promise officials make is the same: whether it's dispersing "fan zones" across neighborhoods or a widespread surge of customers for small businesses, everyone in the region is supposed to benefit from them. If all of these megaevents are suddenly yanked, the economic windfall our leaders have predicted in order to argue for their existence would also vanish.

But even before this catastrophe, financial success wasn't a sure thing for LA. On the same day the Palisades Fire began, Councilmember Katy Yaroslavsky filed a motion for a city teetering on the brink of a fiscal crisis, asking for revenue generation ideas "to cover existing city expenses to not only update our infrastructure, but to limit liability and improve the everyday lives of Angelenos" in light of the "number of major international events." When Mayor Karen Bass appointed former councilmember Paul Krekorian as her Olympics czar, even she admitted LA's planning was running behind. Our hope of getting much-needed infrastructure money from the new administration was already in jeopardy. If the megaevents went away, LA might lose even more federal funding opportunities we were pursuing because of the games.

Which is why I think Gavin Newsom was trotted out on Meet the Press yesterday to reassure everyone that LA will, in fact, be ready. He's already got a plan, "LA 2.0," that he said he's putting together with LA city leaders, civic leaders, business leaders, nonprofits, and labor leaders. Standing in Altadena, a historically Black community, where multigenerational homes were burned to the ground, Newsom said he's using these megaevents as a deadline, which he says "only reinforces the imperative of moving quickly." Angelenos will take pride in the "spirit that comes from not just hosting those three iconic games and venues," but also the "opportunity to rebuild at the same time."

And then, Newsom — who just a few weeks ago described Donald Trump's reelection this way: "the freedoms we hold dear in California are under attack, and we won’t sit idle" — decided to praise the president-elect for bringing the Olympics to LA, and called these megaevents an "opportunity for him to shine, for this country to shine, for California and this community to shine."

I'll be the first to admit that LA 1.0 is not going great, but if "Bay Area man announces urban renewal plan for devastated Southern California region to please megaevent producers" wasn't enough of a red flag, now the governor of California is basically inviting Trump and his buddies — do not search "LA 2.0" on Twitter — to reimagine their least-favorite city using federal dollars as Monopoly money. It doesn't matter the cost or the timeline to rebuild. The broligarchs will spare no expense to bring their vision to life.

Although I'm not so sure you can convince these people that California should get an opportunity to shine. Many of Trump's sycophants, who think that LA is too much of a hellhole to host the games even when it's not on fire, are calling on the president to withhold federal funds. "There is no way we can showcase LA to the world. A full federal takeover is needed," said Fox News host Jesse Watters. "Martial law might have to be declared." Who wants to tell him that we already have a federal takeover in place: LA received its National Special Security Event designation last year, a full four years ahead of 2028. The Secret Service is already the lead agency in charge of public safety. While we're pointing fingers, why didn't the Secret Service prevent the fires?

There is a way out for LA, maybe. The city has not officially approved LA28's venue plan. In June, LA28 announced softball and canoe slalom were moving to Oklahoma City — Oklahoma City??? — along with other sports heading to other LA County cities. That change still needs LA's permission. There are at least 14 total sports up in the air. In November, the city's legislative and administrative officers sent a letter to councilmembers recommending that, in light of all those proposed venue changes, the city should order LA28 to "conduct an independent economic impact study to highlight the anticipated impacts of the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic Games" by June 30. Post fires, that's going to be one hell of a report.

Also, LA isn't the only affected municipality holding a contract. Other cities could begin to balk. Santa Monica, adjacent to the Palisades, is still negotiating its games agreement for beach volleyball. And LA County leaders, concerned with what Supervisor Holly Mitchell called the "widely recognized threats of gentrification and displacement that comes with hosting the games," are in the midst of conducting their own economic impact analysis of the 2028 games. Like the city analysis, the authors of the county report will reach very different conclusions in 2025 than they would have in 2024. Officials may heed such conclusions as evidence to back out.

Because like I said in the very first issue of this newsletter: the question is never "will LA be ready." No Olympic venues burned, despite breathless reports that "wildfires threaten 2028 Olympics as flames inch closer to key venues." Even if the Riviera Country Club, the 2028 golf host on the edge of the Palisades, had been somehow destroyed, that doesn't necessarily present an existential threat to megaevents happening months or years from now. "The reason Los Angeles can host the 2028 Games is its wealth of facilities," wrote Rich Perelman, who tamped down on the hysteria. "If Riviera were to be impacted, there are more than a dozen other championship courses in the area." This, after all, is the promise of LA's perpetual readiness. Our leaders have always claimed — even if it's not 100 percent true — we have more venues than we need.

But "should LA still host" is a completely different question, and one that we may not be likely to see many officials engage with publicly — for now. Metro's Olympic and Paralympic committee, tentatively scheduled for Wednesday, has been canceled. The city's Olympic and Paralympic committee hasn't met since June. One of the newest members of that committee is LA Councilmember Hugo Soto-Martínez, who, as I've noted before, is a former organizer with NOlympics LA. In a pre-fire interview with former LA councilmember Mike Bonin, Soto-Martínez said that his fellow councilmembers had shared concerns about hosting the games. At one point in the interview, Bonin asks Soto-Martínez how the city should be preparing for the Olympics to come.

"I would say that if the Olympics are gonna come, right?" says Soto-Martínez. "Because I don't think that is as obvious to folks. There's a lot of issues." And now, there are many more. 🔥