Quote:
Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi
Los Angeles is in a state of fiscal emergency, much like many local and state governments across this nation are at the moment. The City of Los Angeles is currently faced with a $500 million budget deficit. You know what a big factor in that is? Pension plans - City pension plans have lost about half their 2007 value. (Wanna blame the City for that, or the stock market?) Not to mention the fact that the state of California is withholding monies promised to local governments, or reducing budgeted allocations for practically all expenditures.
There's really no wiggle room when we're in the worst economy we've seen in a generation. The City of Los Angeles is dealing with a 10% PLUS unemployment rate - higher than the national average. Sales tax, business tax and property tax revenues are all on the decline, even though sales tax in the state of California recently went up by 0.5% to help cover the state's deficit.
A budget was recently passed in the City of Los Angeles that calls for nearly universal salary cuts and budget cuts to every department, with the exception of Police and Fire, though they are looking at COLA deferrals like everyone else. The Mayor has worked tirelessly to negotiate salary reductions, benefit reductions and early retirements from the City's union workers, since the City Council and the Mayor can only mandate layoffs and furloughs (not salary/benefit reductions) of union staff.
|
All good reasons for the city to have asked the Jackson family to come up with the costs for the extra city services (police, etc.) that would be used for this. If the city is in such dire straits, and it knew that this would be such a public spectacle, it should have approached the family about funding.
If it did so and the family refused, then that's a different story.
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi
Now, as for this whole MJ debacle. The City is in the difficult position of being forced to ensure the public safety, despite the actions of private parties. The last year has seen a significant change in the City's special events policies: traditionally, big events such as award shows, marathons, parades, etc., received fee waivers for the street closures, additional cops and traffic mitigations that they require, with the understanding that the cultural or financial benefits to the City would outweigh the costs. The current policy no longer allows for fee waivers without significant exceptions.
However, the Jackson memorial was a slightly different kind of animal than a typical special event: the event itself was held at the Staples Center, a private venue, and the anticipated problems were going to be the result of average citizens NOT attending the event. Street closures and extra police were deemed necessary by the City, not necessarily the event organizers, because everyone was well aware of the possibility of thousands, if not tens of thousands, of average citizens crowding the streets to be close to the event. At this point, there is an element of the First Amendment's freedom of assembly rights, in addition to the obvious public safety concerns.
|
Was there a fee waiver given for the Jackson memorial? If CA is in such dire straits, there shouldn't have been such a waiver issued, unless they thought that the revenues of the event (tax dollars from local businesses, revenues to government-provided services, etc.) would outweigh the costs. I just feel very uncomfortable with the city "fundraising" from citizens to cover the costs for a private individual's funeral and memorial service. If anyone should be lobbied for these funds, it should be Jackson's friends and family.
Also, what is this element of First Amendment assembly rights that you're claiming?
Quote:
Originally Posted by LAblondeGPhi
The City of Los Angeles would have been blasted for several courses of action over this - providing too few cops in the event of a major gathering, too many cops in the event of a smaller-than-expected turn out, or any cops at all by some folks.
Just my thoughts...
/soapbox
|
True, especially if people were injured in the big crowds...but in this case, I think something could have or should have been worked out with the Jackson family (if it wasn't already) to privately fund this level of police protection.