[ad_1]
LA’s plans to host the 2028 Olympic and Paralympic games have already faced a troubling set of challenges, including scrambling to secure lucrative sponsorships and searching for buses to close athletes and spectators across the region.
Now, organizers could soon face yet another threat. The proposed vote could, according to city officials, enforce at least five Olympic venues before voters for approval.
Local 11, representing hotel and restaurant workers, filed paperwork in June to request that LA voters approve the development or expansion of major “event centres” such as sports arenas, concert halls, hotels and convention facilities. The measure aims not only for permanent projects but also for temporary structures that include more than 50,000 square feet of space or 1,000 seats.
Former city councillor Paul Clecorian, who leads Mayor Karen Bass’s office for special events, has identified five Olympic venues that could be subject to citywide elections, including the Los Angeles Convention Center, the Swim Stadium at John C. Exposition Park, and the John C. Swim Stadium, which includes the Sepulveda Basin recreation area in the San Fernando Valley.
“The proposed measures will make our city and important projects critical to making these games potentially impossible to complete,” Krecorian said in a statement in the Times. “And also, even relatively small projects require costly special elections before they begin.”
Representatives of LA28, the nonprofit organising the game, refused to see if the Olympic venue would be affected by the proposal, saying they were just monitoring the situation.
Unite requested the proposal as one of the responses to business groups seeking to overturn the so-called Olympic wages passed by the city council in May.
The association has not started collecting signatures for proposals under review by the city’s offices of clerks. If it qualifies, it probably won’t appear on the poll until June 2026. Still, it has already issued an alarm at city hall where elected officials portray it as irresponsible.
Traci Park, a councillor representing the coastal region, said the measure fears that it will force citywide votes at Olympic venues where road cycling, marathons and triathlons will be held. She also said it would be more difficult for the city to attract new hotels and perhaps expand its convention centre.
“This is an absolute attack on our local economy. It’s mean and politically motivated,” she said.
The park, which voted against the $30 tourism minimum wage, has been united here for over a year. The 2022 election united here and supported a rise in the minimum wage, Rep. Tim Makosker expressed concern and called the proposed vote measurement a “attack on workers.”
Makoscar, a district that includes the Port of Los Angeles, said it believes the proposal will force a vote on plans to create a temporary viewing area for Olympic sailing at Bath 46 in San Pedro. He also fears it will trigger a city-wide election with a 6,200-seat amphitheater planned at West Harbor in San Pedro.
“This is bad for people who make things, it’s bad for people who manipulate things, it’s bad for people who work in buildings like this,” he said. “[The proposal] It harms real people and harms the economy. ”
Unite co-president Ada Briceño, also a candidate for Local 11 and state legislative legislative here, refused to answer questions about criticism of the proposal. The other two united representatives here did not respond to the Times inquiry.
The union’s proposal, entitled “Articles Requiring Voters’ Approval for Major Development Projects,” argues that sports arenas and other major event venues “doesn’t always justify their costs.”
Mary Hernandez, a spokesman who united here, told the Times earlier this year that the proposal would apply to Olympic venues that would reach a certain size but refuse to provide details. She said it is not clear whether the voting proposal would hinder efforts to expand the convention center, and in an email it was “reliable on timing.”
The voting proposal will not apply to LA28-planned playgrounds in other nearby cities, such as Long Beach, Carson, Inglewood, Anaheim and El Monte. As a result, LA could face a potentially humiliating prospect that only a handful of venues will host games within city limits.
“If you appear on the ballot, there are projects and events that move from the city of Los Angeles rather than trying to win at the ballot box,” said Stuart Waldman, president of the Valley Industry and Commercial Group.
The city’s future economic health may depend on the success or failure of LA28. Under the host contract, if the Olympics turn red, the city will become hooked for its first $270 million loss.
Critics also expressed concern that a 4th dimension athletic events could drive away low-income tenants, especially those who live near Olympic venues.
Eric Sheehan, a spokesman for the Nolympics against the 2028 game, should have been given the opportunity to decide whether or not the Olympics should be held from the start. Nevertheless, Sheehan expressed little enthusiasm for the union’s proposal.
“The chances of Angelenos voting on whether he wants the Olympics or not will be stronger,” he said.
The voting law proposed by Unite here states that hotels can have a detrimental impact on cities, hindering the construction of new homes and putting a burden on social services. It also provides similar warnings about large development projects, saying it “often includes significant taxpayer spending.”
These projects “may replace other projects that otherwise could benefit more directly from urban residents,” the measure states.
Times staff writer Thuc Nhi Nguyen contributed to this report.
[ad_2]Source link
