Union launches dueling ballot measures, escalating fight over LA's tourism worker wage hike
Unite Here Local 11, which represents hotel and restaurant workers, filed paperwork Monday for a pair of ballot proposals.
One would raise the minimum wage for all workers in the city to $30 by July 2028. The other would force a public vote on the construction of large hotels or major hotel expansions.
That measure would also require a public vote on the development or expansion of "event centers," such as sports stadiums, concert halls or the city's Convention Center.
Union officials described the proposed ballot measures as a response to an effort launched last month by a group of airlines and hotel businesses to overturn a city ordinance hiking the minimum wage of hotel and airport workers in Los Angeles to $30 an hour by 2028 by forcing a citywide vote on the measure.
Unite Here Local 11 co-President Kurt Petersen said the wage proposal addresses criticism from business groups that the tourism industry had been singled out for wage increases.
"We agree that all workers should make more," Petersen said. "We are hopeful since (airlines and hotels) think that only giving a living wage to one group is unfair, that they will immediately endorse it."
Petersen said the second proposal would give voters a direct say in major hotel and event center projects subsidized by the city, as well as those that could take up valuable real estate that otherwise could be used to develop housing.
The proposal would require that major development projects - including the creation of new hotels with 80 or more rooms, or 80-room expansions to existing hotels - seek voter approval before receiving construction permits.
The development of event spaces with more than 50,000 square feet or with a seating capacity of 1,000 seats would similarly require voter approval, as would any development projects that receive a city subsidy, such as a gift of land or tax rebates.
Petersen had previously said it was hypocritical for business leaders to fight wage increases at the same time they were pressing the City Council to spend tens of millions of dollars preparing for a renovation of the Los Angeles Convention Center, a decision made in April.
The council voted last month to approve the airport and hotel worker wage hikes, which were championed by Unite Here Local 11 and Service Employees International Union-United Service Workers West.
The unions billed the proposal as an "Olympic wage," one that would ensure that their members can keep up with the rising cost of food and rent. They also argued that corporations should not be the only ones to benefit financially from the Olympic Games, scheduled to be held in L.A. in 2028.
Soon after, a coalition of businesses, known as the L.A. Alliance for Tourism, Jobs and Progress, filed paperwork to halt the law and put the issue on the ballot instead, hoping to persuade voters to repeal the ordinance.
The alliance has argued for several weeks that the wage hike will hurt the industry, forcing businesses to lay off workers and thwarting the development of new hotels.
On Monday, the group described the plan to require public votes on hotel and convention center projects as "one union killing other union jobs."
"The initiative being proposed will kill the Convention Center project that union workers would otherwise have and the tourism industry would benefit from," the alliance said in a statement. "The union can play its games, but we remain focused on protecting L.A. residents from lasting, widespread job loss."
One business leader separately voiced alarm about the hotel union's citywide minimum wage wage proposal, warning it would cause companies to pull out of L.A. and relocate to neighboring cities, counties and states.
"People will lose their jobs. Businesses will close," said Stuart Waldman, president of the Valley Industry and Commerce Association, which is based in the San Fernando Valley. "The city will become a barren land of empty storefronts and empty office buildings as employers go elsewhere."
An official at the city's tourism department declined comment on the event center proposal, saying he had not yet read it.
To successfully place the measure on the ballot in an upcoming election, the union and other backers would need to collect about 140,000 signatures within 120 days, organizers said.
The hotel minimum wage, approved by the council in 2014, currently stands at $20.32 per hour. The minimum wage for private-sector employees at Los Angeles International Airport is $25.23 per hour, once those workers' $5.95 hourly healthcare payment is included.
For nearly everyone else in L.A., the hourly minimum wage is $17.28, which is 78 cents higher than the state's.
Copyright (C) 2025, Tribune Content Agency, LLC. Portions copyrighted by the respective providers.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Could Cruise Lines Be Forced To Rethink Size As Europe Pushes Back?
Could smaller cruise ships be the future for busy European cruise ports such as Barcelona? getty For years now, it seems that cruise lines have been obsessed with going bigger. Each new launch seemed to outdo the last, boasting more decks, more passengers, and more headline-grabbing onboard attractions. But as some of Europe's most iconic destinations move to restrict or even ban large cruise ships, a question looms: Could this be the beginning of the end for the megaship era? Cannes is the latest city to impose tough new rules. From 2026, ships carrying more than 1,000 passengers will no longer be allowed to dock in the glamorous French Riviera hotspot. It's just one example of a growing movement across Europe where authorities are drawing a line between the economic benefits of cruise tourism and its social and environmental costs. As pressure mounts and ports tighten their rules, cruise lines may be forced to reconsider not just where they sail, but how. The future of cruising might not be bigger after all. Cannes Says No To Cruise Lines' Megaships From January 1, 2026, vessels carrying more than 1,000 passengers will no longer be allowed to dock at the harbor in Cannes. Instead, larger ships must anchor offshore and transfer guests via tender boats, while daily disembarkations will be capped at 6,000 passengers. Described by the city council as a form of 'drastic regulation,' the new policy aims to make tourism in Cannes 'less numerous, less big, less polluting and more esthetic.' Mayor David Lisnard insists this is not a ban, but a strategic response to balance visitor demand with environmental concerns. 'Cannes has become a major cruise ship destination, with real economic benefits,' he said. 'It's not about banning cruise ships, but about regulating, organizing, setting guidelines for their navigation.' Environmental advocates have welcomed the move. In 2024, Cannes hosted 175 ships and more than 450,000 passengers, underscoring the significance of the shift. A Growing Movement Across Europe Cannes is just the latest in a series of high-profile European ports placing limits on cruise ship access. In recent years, cities across the continent have introduced restrictions to tackle the environmental impact of cruise tourism and the pressure it places on local infrastructure. Venice led the way by banning large ships from entering its historic lagoon in 2021, rerouting vessels over 25,000 gross tons to nearby industrial ports. Amsterdam has announced a phased reduction in cruise traffic, aiming to cap visits at 100 ships per year from 2026, with a long-term goal of eliminating cruise ships entirely by 2035. In Spain, Palma de Mallorca limits daily arrivals to just three ships, only one of which may carry more than 5,000 passengers. Meanwhile, Barcelona has capped arrivals at seven ships per day and banned the biggest ships from its downtown port. While that figure may seem high, Barcelona is one of the busiest cruise ports in the world and a major turnaround hub, making the restriction a significant step. Other cities, including Dubrovnik and Zeebrugge, have implemented caps on daily dockings, while Nice has restricted access to ships over 190 meters or with more than 900 passengers. The message from Europe is increasingly clear: smaller, better-managed cruise tourism is the way forward. Cruise Lines Need To Segment To Survive The rise of megaships continues to dominate the cruise industry's marketing and media coverage. Cruise lines such as Royal Caribbean are investing heavily in these floating resorts, aiming to attract younger travelers looking for an all-in-one vacation experience with amenities such as surf simulators and water parks. However, this is only one direction the industry is taking. Alongside the growth of megaships, a quieter but equally significant trend is reshaping the sector. There is increasing demand for smaller, boutique-style vessels that focus on cultural enrichment and sustainability, together with access to ports that larger ships cannot reach. Industry analysts report strong growth in the luxury cruise segment, where intimacy and curated experiences are prioritized over size and spectacle. Viking Ocean Cruises is a clear example. Its ocean-going ships each carry fewer than 1,000 passengers and focus on thoughtful itineraries and an enrichment-focused onboard atmosphere. Other lines, such as Explora Journeys, Seabourn, and Ponant are expanding with similar models that emphasise space, style and service. As cruise lines adapt to changing traveler expectations and increased regulatory pressure in major ports, the shift toward a more segmented and diversified market appears not just likely, but inevitable. Large megaships are likely to remain popular on well-established routes such as the Caribbean and parts of Europe, especially where the appeal lies in the ship itself. Travelers seeking cultural depth, unique ports, and a quieter, more personalized atmosphere will increasingly seek smaller ships. As ports introduce new restrictions and passenger expectations continue to evolve, cruise lines that can serve both ends of the market will be better positioned for long-term success. MORE FROM FORBES Forbes New To Cruising? These 5 Cruise Traditions May Surprise You By David Nikel Forbes When It Makes Sense To Book Cruise Line Shore Excursions By David Nikel Forbes Turnaround Ports Are The Cities That Power The Cruise Industry By David Nikel
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Hendersonville EV charging stations projected to see 18% more use in 2025, still free
HENDERSONVILLE - Hendersonville's electric vehicle charging stations saw significantly increased average monthly use in the first months of 2025 compared to all of 2024, according to a city official. In 2023, the city's charging stations put out 6,480 kilowatt-hours, Hendersonville Public Works Superintendent for Sustainability Caitlyn Gendusa said July 2 a presentation to City Council. In 2024, that number was 10,736, up an impressive 66% over 2023. And that usage has continued to increase in 2025, she told the Times-News July 3. While some of the increase in 2024 might be attributable to the installation of two new stations at the end of 2023, usage in 2025 is projected to go up by 18% over last year. Gendusa said she expects 12,700 kilowatt-hours to be used at charging stations in 2025, based on the average from January through April. And that's not taking the spring and summer months into account, when tourism season is in full swing. Gendusa told the Times-News the rise could be attributable to 'a bigger population base that's using the chargers.' The city started its EV charging program around 10 years ago, and in that time, it has 'saved 18 tons of greenhouse gas emissions,' Gendusa told Council during the June 2 meeting. Electric vehicle charging costs Hendersonville around 95 cents per kilowatt-hour. That's factoring in the cost of energy itself, the cost of the infrastructure and fees paid to the manufacturer for support services. She said that in comparable North Carolina cities where users pay for charging, the cost is around 40 cents per kilowatt-hour, but that many cities still subsidize charging. City Manager John Connet asked Gendusa if there was an alternative to ChargePoint, pointing out that fees the city paid the company were greater than the cost of electricity itself. In response Gendusa said that, without paying the fee to ChargePoint, the city wouldn't be able to track electricity usage at its stations. The fee also includes warranty and support services, she told the Times-News. Each Hendersonville station cost between $7,000 and $8,000, plus another $600 for installation, she said, but Gendusa told Council that, according to the Public Works Department, maintenance costs have been low. Up until now, the cost of charging at one of the city's four stations has been 100% subsidized by the city as a 'service to the community,' Connet said. Electric vehicle drivers pay nothing to charge up at city stations. It's possible that may change in the future. In the July 2 meeting, councilors mentioned the idea of changing to a pay structure but came to no conclusions. 'Folks are already paying a fee to park in the city, which is new, so I know (the city and council are) more cautious about having another fee, even if it's an additional service that someone's getting,' like charging, Gendusa said. ChargePoint, the charging manufacturer, would take 10% of any charging fee. More: After McDowell County fatality, NC's Helene-related death toll rises to 108 More: Are fireworks legal in NC? Here's what to know this Fourth of July George Fabe Russell is the Henderson County Reporter for the Hendersonville Times-News. Tips, questions, comments? Email him at GFRussell@ This article originally appeared on Hendersonville Times-News: Use of Hendersonville EV stations projected to rise 18% in 2025
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Judge denies Mayor Mike Norris' bid to remove Charles Gambaro from council
A judge on July 3 denied Mayor Mike Norris's bid to remove fellow City Council member Charles Gambaro from his District 4 City Council seat. Norris filed the lawsuit against the city of Palm Coast, Flagler County Supervisor of Elections Kaiti Lenhart and Gambaro. Norris was represented by Attorney Anthony Sabatini who in the lawsuit argued that the City Council violated the city charter by failing to put Gambaro's seat up for a vote in the same November election in which Norris was voted into office. Sabatini said Gambaro's term ended on the night of the election in 2024. Circuit Judge Christopher France asked Sabatini about what standing Norris had to challenge the appointment. Sabatini argued that Norris had standing as a resident of Palm Coast affected by the actions of the City Council. He also argued that Norris was 'injured' because his votes were diluted by the votes in the council. Norris filed his lawsuit as mayor, but under the city charter, the mayor cannot make such a claim unless approved by the City Council. The attorney for the city and Gambaro, Rachael Crews, argued that Norris did not have standing based on Florida law; only the attorney general or the person who claims to be the rightful holder of the seat could challenge. She also spoke about the timing and discretionary language in the city charter. Crews also said that, according to the charter, even if the court were to remove Gambaro, the position would be filled by an appointment, not an election. She said the charter only called for a special election to fill the mayor's seat or in the event of a recall. In a previous email to The News-Journal, Norris said he was funding the lawsuit to remove Gambaro from the council. Gambaro did not attend the hearing. Norris declined to comment after the verdict was read. The lawsuit is another front in Norris' fight against the city. Norris received a unanimous vote of no confidence in April by his four fellow council members last month. The no-confidence vote stemmed from a 57-page report released April 21 regarding allegations that Norris violated the city charter, interfered with city employees and behaved unprofessionally. The Palm Coast City Council on May 9 submitted the letter filing a formal complaint against Norris with the Florida Ethics Commission. Norris' complaint to remove Gambaro states that the city charter gives the council two options if a council member "vacates their seat during the first two years of their term": Either appoint someone within 90 days or delay the appointment, according to a previous News-Journal story. If the council makes an appointment, that councilmember only serves until "the next regularly scheduled election." Palm Coast District 4 Councilmember Cathy Heighter resigned in August, and the council appointed Gambaro 3-1 (with only four members on the panel at that point) to replace her Oct. 1. Those in favor were previous Mayor David Alfin, previous Vice Mayor Ed Danko and previous Councilman Nick Klufas. All three were voted out in November. Theresa Pontieri, the only one to retain her seat after the election, supported Darryl Boyer. According to Norris' complaint, the city charter would have required Gambaro's appointment to expire after the Nov. 5 election. It is Norris' position that the city "has continued to allow Gambaro to occupy the seat beyond the term authorized by the charter." In a social media post referring to the hearing, Norris wrote "Independence Day is gonna get a lot better this year!" In its response to Norris, the city argued that the mayor was trying to use the judicial system to oust a political opponent and force a costly election, which would not be authorized by the city charter anyway. Attorney Crews, representing the city and Gambaro, filed a response on Thursday, May 29, listing a number of reasons Norris' request for Gambaro's removal should be denied. n the response, Crews wrote that Norris 'comes to the court with unclean hands' because he was 'improperly using the judicial system to undo a political opponent.' This article originally appeared on The Daytona Beach News-Journal: Palm Coast mayor's court bid to remove councilman denied