The Brief

Los Angeles residents have a lot of questions about a controversial plan to build a gondola connecting Union Station in downtown to Dodger Stadium.

California State Parks hosted a virtual meeting on Tuesday night to go over a proposed amendment to the plan that would allow it to be built over L.A. State Historic Park, which opponents have argued would threaten the 32-acre green space.

Alex Stehl, the deputy director of planning at State Parks, clarified during the meeting that the amendment is not a done deal.

“As we move through this process, we're going to be looking at whether or not it's feasible for this project to be in the park, and how would it be feasible,” she said.

What would the gondola do exactly?

The project, officially named LA Art, would connect the stadium, station, and Elysian Park.

(

Courtesy L.A. Metro

)

It would include three stations — one near El Pueblo, a Chinatown / State Park station, and another at Dodger Stadium. Three towers and a junction would also need to be built, as well as a system of cables and cabins.

Officials said it would provide access to surrounding communities, including Chinatown, Mission Junction, and Solano Canyon. It would operate daily, with the roughly 1 mile ride taking 7 minutes each way.

“LA ART would provide safe, zero emission, environmentally friendly, and high-capacity transit connectivity, reducing greenhouse gas emissions as a result of reduced vehicular congestion in and around Dodger Stadium and on neighborhood streets, arterial roadways, and freeways,” according to a presentation during the meeting.

Most of the park wouldn’t be beneath the project, which would be along the westernmost edge. The cabins would soar anywhere from 26 to 53 feet over the area.

Questions from residents

The meeting was translated into five languages, including Spanish, Cantonese, Mandarin, and Taishanese.

All of the questions and comments were sent directly to the moderators, and members of the public were not identified or able to share their thoughts verbally.

Some people asked about access to the park, given that it's currently free to visit. Stehl said they don’t intend to change that.

“People would still be able to access this park as they do now,” she said. “Of course, depending on things like special events or other things happening in the area, which sometimes does close off sections of the park, but there's no intent to limit access to the park.”

One person expressed concerns about the visual impact of the gondola and all its infrastructure, which Stehl said would be taken into account throughout the General Plan Amendment process.

Others asked if officials will be gathering information on the losses and risks to the park, and Stehl confirmed they are.

Another asked who will be responsible for operating and maintaining the gondola, such as the city or a private company. Stehl said that’s part of what’s going to be discussed over the next year, and into the future should they move forward.

What is a general plan? Why does it matter?

The General Plan accounts for conceptual goals and guidelines for long-term land use, management, and operations of the park, among others.

The first step is to collect input from the public, which is where we are now.

Officials will then develop amendment options, present the draft plan to the public for their feedback, and then submit the final draft to the State Park and Recreation Commission for its consideration.

The process will involve public outreach, and there will be multiple opportunities for people to comment and share their input, officials said.

Once that’s completed, the project will need several approvals and agreements from State Parks.

Those include a right of entry permit to construct a gondola station in the park, and real property agreements for aerial rights requirements. It’ll also need operational agreements for day to day operations such as hours, security, and programming.

How you can stay up to date

Any and all feedback received by Dec. 15 will be considered as the process moves forward.

You can do that through the General Plan Amendment website here, or email lastatehistoricparkgpa@parks.ca.gov.

You can also share your thoughts via mail by sending it to:

The PDF form is available in English, Spanish, Traditional Chinese, and Simplified Chinese.

And you sign up for the email list here.

News that Warner Bros. Discovery is up for sale has Hollywood buzzing. The legendary film studio, which has grown to include streaming services and cable channels, is currently accepting non-binding bids until Thursday. According to company spokesperson Robert Gibbs, they expect to have a decision about the sale by Christmas.

It's become something of a Hollywood parlor game to guess who will ultimately take over the business, which was founded in 1923 by four brothers: Harry, Albert, Sam and Jack Warner. They owned a movie theater in Pennsylvania before coming to Hollywood to make movies.

Warner Brothers Pictures found one of its first silent picture stars in a German shepherd named Rin Tin Tin. By 1927, the studio made history with its feature-length "talkie" picture: The Jazz Singer, starring Al Jolson.

Over the years, Warner Brothers has made or distributed countless iconic films including: Casablanca, The Big Sleep and The Maltese Falcon in the 1940's. The list goes on, with titles like A Clockwork Orange, Goodfellas, Barbie, as well as Bugs Bunny and all the Looney Tunes cartoons.

Warners Brothers has had multiple owners over the decades. Three years ago, Warner Media, as it was called, merged with Discovery. And in June, the company announced it would split in two, with film, TV and streaming studios in one camp, and in the other, mostly legacy cable channels, including CNN.

The planned split has not yet happened, and a new buyer might get the entirety of Warner Bros. Discovery and its film and TV libraries.

As the film industry continues to consolidate, there's speculation that Warner Brothers' old rival Paramount could take over. Having just merged as Paramount Skydance, CEO David Ellison has already made several overtures.

The idea of streaming giant Netflix buying the company has raised antitrust concerns on Capitol Hill. In an earnings call last month, Netflix co-CEO Ted Sarandos told investors, "We've been very clear in the past that we have no interest in owning legacy media networks. There is no change there."

Industry watchers suggest other suitors could be Comcast, Amazon, or an investor who's not already in the entertainment business.

Regardless of whoever does end up buying the company, theater owners say they hope making movies for cinemas will be a priority.

"As long as we have more movies," says Daniel Loria, senior vice president at The Boxoffice Company, which analyzes data from studios and theaters. "That doesn't mean the same amount, doesn't mean less, but more movies. I think you're going to find folks in the movie theater industry support any business decision that gets us there."

Loria recalls that after Disney purchased Fox and Fox Searchlight, their combined studios significantly reduced the number of films they released in the theaters. Crunching the numbers, Loria says in 2016, a year before the merger announcement, Disney and Fox released a total of 38 theatrical films. This year, the consolidated studios released 18.

That's a problem for theater owners who've been struggling to bring audiences back to cinemas after the COVID-19 pandemic shut them down; they're competing with movie-watching on TVs, computers and phones.

Some theater owners and cinephiles also fear studio conglomerates will only greenlight a few big-budget blockbusters, leaving the lower budget indies behind.

"The concern is you're going to see less of that risk taking, less of that experimentation and less of that embracing new directors, new filmmakers in the future," says Max Friend, the CEO of Filmbot, the ticketing platform for independent cinemas in the U.S. "It's really important that there are studios that are funding and supporting, cultivating that kind of work."

He points out that this year, Warner Brothers made a string of critical hits, including Ryan Coogler's Sinners, the horror film Weapons and Paul Thomas Anderson's One Battle After Another.

Friend wonders if the next owner will take similar risks with future original, creative films.

Warner Bros. Discovery is a financial supporter of NPR.

Copyright 2025 NPR

A downtown hearing kicked off Wednesday, during which a federal judge will consider holding the city of Los Angeles in contempt of court. The hearing is the latest step in a long-running legal saga regarding the city's response to the region’s homelessness crisis.

The hearing was ordered by U.S. District Judge David O. Carter, who has been overseeing a settlement in a lawsuit brought against the city by the L.A. Alliance for Human Rights, a group of downtown business and property owners. L.A. Alliance sued the city, and county, in 2020 for failing to adequately address homelessness.

Several witnesses are expected to testify during the contempt-of-court hearing, including Gita O’Neill, the new head of the region’s top homeless services agency, and Matt Szabo, the L.A. city administrative officer.

L.A. County Supervisor Kathryn Barger watched at least part of Wednesday’s hearing in the courtroom.

Why now?

Carter said in court documents that he’s concerned “the city has demonstrated a continuous pattern of delay” in meeting its obligations under court orders. During a hearing last week, the judge pointed to several delays, including recently reported issues related to data and interviewing city employees.

The judge noted that similar concerns have come up at previous hearings. Carter told attorneys for the city in March 2024 that he “indicated to the mayor that I’ve already reached the decision that the plaintiffs were misled” and “this is bad faith,” according to court transcripts.

The judge said in a Nov. 14 order that he’s concerned the “delay continues to this day.”

The contempt hearing is expected to cover whether the city has complied with court orders and provided regular updates to the court under the settlement agreement.

Reducing delays

Attorneys for the city have pushed back against the hearing, filing objections with the judge and making an unsuccessful emergency request with the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals to block it from happening.

City authorities also asked the appeals court to press pause on the judge’s order to appoint a monitor in the case to make sure the city stays on track with the settlement. The city argued that Carter handed the monitor “a blank check to interfere with the democratic process,” according to court documents.

The appeals court partly denied the city’s request. It allowed Wednesday’s hearing to move forward, but it agreed to pause the appointment of Daniel Garrie as monitor.

In light of that response, attorneys for the city have argued that looking at the city’s cooperation with Garrie “would be inappropriate” during the hearing and that L.A. “cannot be held in contempt for either the substance or the manner of its compliance with the order,” according to court documents.

Previous hearings related to the settlement have elicited tense questioning of witnesses and harsh words from the judge, who has been vocal about reducing delays and moving the case forward.

In an opening statement Wednesday, Theane Evangelis — one of the attorneys representing the city — urged the judge to “turn down the heat” on the closely watched case. Evangelis said the “city is constantly under fire” in court while L.A. has made “enormous strides” in getting people off the streets.

Elizabeth Mitchell, lead attorney for L.A. Alliance, said the city treats transparency as a burden.

She said Wednesday that the “city still fights oversight harder than it fights homelessness” and that the court should address L.A. 's “consistent” delays throughout the case.

What’s next?

The hearing will resume Dec. 2, when more witnesses can appear in person.

City authorities told the court they believed a one-day hearing wouldn't be enough time to go over all the evidence.

If the judge does find the city of L.A. in contempt of court and that it "isn't doing what it promised to do," the consequences could range from nothing all the way up to serious sanctions, according to Matthew Umhofer, an attorney for L.A. Alliance.

Umhofer told LAist after the hearing that sanctions could include the court ordering more intensive monitoring of the city’s performance, imposing new requirements on the city, monetary penalties or possibly a receivership.

Carter previously stopped short of seizing control of the city’s hundreds of millions of dollars in homelessness spending and handing it to a court-appointed receiver, deciding against that option in a June ruling.

L.A. Alliance is considering asking for an extension to the settlement agreement, Umhofer said.

“The city has gotten away with not complying for a very long time,” he said. “So extending the agreement can be among the things that we might ask for ... given the pattern of delay and obstruction."

Evangelis and Bradley Hamburger, another attorney representing the city, declined LAist’s request for comment after the hearing.