The Brief

Chris Lillian works at Universal Studios Hollywood, but he’s a long way from the dream factory. The giant theme park lies in the San Fernando Valley mostly within unincorporated Los Angeles County, where the minimum wage is set at $16.90 per hour. Lillian makes the minimum.

Lillian, 37, will earn about $35,000 this year. Even with a rent deal that is only a fraction of what an average Angeleno pays for housing, the food stand attendant says that covering his most basic expenses each month “is a little bit of voodoo and prayer.”

“I wonder myself how I get things paid sometimes,” Lillian said this week. “It’s a never-ending litany of costs, which means there’s no work-life balance and no long-term plan.”

According to the state’s Department of Housing and Community Development, Lillian’s earnings mark him as a “very low income” worker in L.A. County, where even a single person earning $70,000 is considered low income. But the bigger picture is that, for workers like Lillian, the promise of the Golden State lies increasingly beyond their reach.

The strain on lower-income workers in California is beginning to buckle them, according to a new study of the state’s lowest income residents. Between March and mid-July of this year, more than 60% of households earning less than $35,000 said they had trouble paying for basic expenses such as food, housing and medical costs.

Those figures, based on the California Budget & Policy Center’s analysis of U.S. Census Bureau data, come into bolder relief in specific categories. Families, for instance: Almost half of all California households with children — regardless of their income — said they were having trouble paying essential costs. The figure skyrocketed to 71% for those with incomes below $35,000.

And Black and Latino residents were the most likely to struggle financially overall, with 54% of Black households and 49% of Latino households saying they had trouble paying for the basics no matter their income level. For white households, that figure was far lower at 30%.

“The findings were pretty striking,” said Hannah Orbach-Mandel, a policy fellow at the center. “They’re telling the story that we were kind of afraid they’d tell.”

There are some obvious factors, including the end of critical pandemic-related relief programs. In 2021, the expansion of the federal Child Tax Credit played a significant role in the dramatic drop in child poverty rates in California and nationally, but that CTC program ended. So too did expanded food credits under CalFresh, the state’s version of the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

Record inflation has further ratcheted up the pressure. Lillian said his commute to Universal is relatively short, but spiking gas costs are still eating into his take-home pay. On Sept. 12, the average price of a gallon of gas in L.A. County was $5.56.

Lillian long ago gave up his own living space. He now rents a room in a Glendale home, because the cost — $600 a month — is what he can afford. (The average rent for a one-bedroom apartment in Glendale is nearly $2,600.) But his savings are so low, he said, that he has been postponing needed oral surgery until he can scrape together the $600 for the portion of the procedure that his dental insurance won’t cover.

Universal workers who are members of UNITE HERE Local 11 appeared Tuesday at the L.A. County Board of Supervisors meeting in support of a proposal to raise the county’s minimum wage to $25. (UNITE HERE is a financial supporter of Capital & Main.) The proposal, co-authored by board chair Janice Hahn, has already met strong pushback from the hotel industry.

“A $25 minimum wage would not make these workers rich, but it would make their lives a little easier and may mean that they don’t need to work multiple jobs just to stay in their homes,” Hahn said in introducing the proposal in August.

All of this plays out against the ever-widening gap between rich and poor in California. According to the Franchise Tax Board, the share of statewide income going to the top 1% rose to an all-time high of more than 30% in 2021, the most recent data available. Just two years earlier, the one-percenters’ share of statewide income was 23%.

Orbach-Mandel said those numbers affirm what the budget and policy center has long maintained: There is more than enough wealth in the state to create opportunities to help its most burdened residents.

The center has proposed a multipronged plan toward that end, advocating, among other things, for higher tax rates on the state’s most profitable corporations and a firm minimum that such corporations must pay. But the political will to enact such measures is not yet evident — and in the here and now, life goes on for Chris Lillian and workers like him.

That life has become a constant struggle. “I don’t even crunch the numbers these days — it’s too stress-inducing,” Lillian said, chuckling. “The only thing I know for sure is that the cost of everything is rising.”

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.