due

When Los Angeles City Council members took up a plan to hike the wages of tourism workers this week, they received some carefully worded advice from city lawyers: Don’t vote on this yet.

Senior Assistant City Atty. Michael J. Dundas advised them on Wednesday — deep into their meeting — that his office had not yet conducted a final legal review of the flurry of last-minute changes they requested earlier in the day.

Dundas recommended that the council delay its vote for two days to comply with the Ralph M. Brown Act, the state’s open meeting law.

“We advise that the posted agenda for today’s meeting provides insufficient notice under the Brown Act for first consideration and adoption of an ordinance to increase the wages and health benefits for hotel and airport workers,” Dundas wrote.

The council pressed ahead anyway, voting 12-3 to increase the minimum wage of those workers to $30 per hour by 2028, despite objections from business groups, hotel owners and airport businesses.

Then, on Friday, the council conducted a do-over vote, taking up the rewritten wage measure at a special noon meeting — one called only the day before. The result was the same, with the measure passing again, 12-3.

Some in the hotel industry questioned why Council President Marqueece Harris-Dawson, who runs the meetings, insisted on moving forward Wednesday, even after the lawyers’ warning.

Jackie Filla, president and chief executive of the Hotel Assn. of Los Angeles, said the decision to proceed Wednesday gave a political boost to Unite Here Local 11, which represents hotel workers. The union had already scheduled an election for Thursday for its members to vote on whether to increase their dues.

By approving the $30 per hour minimum wage on Wednesday, the council gave the union a potent selling point for the proposed dues increase, Filla said.

“It looks like it was in Unite Here’s financial interest to have that timing,” she said.

Councilmember Monica Rodriguez, who opposed the wage increases, was more blunt.

“It was clear that Marqueece intended to be as helpful as possible” to Unite Here Local 11, “even if it meant violating the Brown Act,” she said.

Harris-Dawson spokesperson Rhonda Mitchell declined to say why her boss pushed for a wage vote on Wednesday after receiving the legal advice about the Brown Act. That law requires local governments to take additional public comment if a legislative proposal has changed substantially during a meeting.

Mitchell, in a text message, said Harris-Dawson scheduled the new wage vote for Friday because of a mistake by city lawyers.

“The item was re-agendized because of a clerical error on the City Attorney’s part — and this is the correction,” she said.

Mitchell did not provide details on the error. However, the wording on the two meeting agendas is indeed different.

Wednesday’s agenda called for the council to ask city lawyers to “prepare and present” amendments to the wage laws. Friday’s agenda called for the council to “present and adopt” the proposed changes.

Maria Hernandez, a spokesperson for Unite Here Local 11, said in an email that her union does not control the City Council’s schedule. The union’s vote on higher dues involved not just its L.A. members but also thousands of workers in Orange County and Arizona, Hernandez said.

“The timing of LA City Council votes is not up to us (sadly!) — in fact we were expecting a vote more than a year ago — nor would the precise timing be salient to our members,” she said.

Hernandez said Unite Here Local 11 members voted “overwhelmingly” on Thursday to increase their dues, allowing the union to double the size of its strike fund and pay for “an army of organizers” for the next round of labor talks. She did not disclose the size of the dues increase.

Dundas’ memo, written on behalf of City Atty. Hydee Feldstein Soto, was submitted late in Wednesday’s deliberations, after council members requested a number of changes to the minimum wage ordinance. At one point, they took a recess so their lawyers could work on the changes.

By the time the lawyers emerged with the new language, Dundas’ memo was pinned to the public bulletin board in the council chamber, where spectators quickly snapped screenshots.

The council chairman of a popular UK tourist destination has said that introducing a new car park was “not plausible” as the village continues to struggle with overtourism

Plans for a new car and coach park in one of England’s most idyllic villages have been withdrawn to deter more tourists from visiting. While some destinations clamour to intrigue travellers, this holiday hotspot in Gloucestershire says “enough people” are already visiting.

Bibury – often called the ‘Capital of the Cotswolds’ – sees thousands of tourists visit from across the world annually. But the fairytale-esque village is considered a victim of its own beauty, as hordes of tourists have been causing significant traffic and chaos in the area.

As reported by the BBC, Craig Chapman from Bibury Parish Council said that a potential proposal for a car park would have been rejected by planners had it made it to the council. While the proposal was eventually dropped, Chapman said there are “enough people coming into the village”.

READ MORE: Insanely beautiful UK village is so magical you won’t ever want to leave

He continued: “the thought of having an out of village car park with 130 cars and 10 coaches – at least 500 people shuttling down to the village or walking the narrow pavement was not plausible.”

Bibury has garnered a reputation as the ‘most beautiful village in England’ as once described by 19th century writer William Morris. Today, it is home to a few hundred residents but welcomes thousands of visitors daily, with up to 50 coach buses coming into the village a day.

Locals have grown increasingly unnerved by the massive tourist crowds descending on the area. To address the problem of overtourism, residents have formed a working group that includes councillors and police. Gloucestershire County Council has also announced plans to tackle overtourism in the village.

Early this year, reports emerged that coaches could soon be banned from stopping and parking in the village. However, less drastic measures will be implemented sooner.

Over the next few months, the layout of parking bays will be updated to prevent coaches from parking or idling in the layby on the B4425. This is next to the Swan Bridge in the centre of the village.

The second phase of plans will see the potential introduction of restrictions on coach access to the centre of Bibury. In order to move forward with this, a legal consultation process would be needed and is set to start in early summer.

Longer-term recommendations from the working group also include improving signs to direct coaches away from the village’s narrow lanes. In addition, the group wants to explore alternative parking options outside the village.

Finally, the local working group wants to encourage tourists to use other modes of transport to visit the village, including walking, cycling or using public transport. There is no direct train into Bibury, however many travellers take a direct train to Kemble from London and then get a 24-minute taxi to Bibury.

All said, there are still plenty of other villages in the Cotswolds to explore and which deserve traveller attention. Despite being slightly less popular than Bibury, Broadway is considered to be the ‘jewel of the Cotswolds’.

Located in the north of the region, the village is known for its manicured lawns, art galleries and classic tea shops. Broadway is a particular gem for art and antique lovers and collectors.