The Michael Jackson memorial, and its estimated $1.4 million cost, seem to have split the L.A. City Council into two different factions: the who-authorized-this camp and the it-was-worth-it camp.
Put Janice Hahn down as an it-was-worth-it. Today Hahn made a motion to conduct a study of the economic benefits of having the Jackson memorial in Los Angeles:
Put Janice Hahn down as an it-was-worth-it. Today Hahn made a motion to conduct a study of the economic benefits of having the Jackson memorial in Los Angeles:
Given the City's current financial constraints, it is critical that the City conduct a thorough analysis of the total costs and benefits of this event, weighing direct City costs against the estimated economic benefits to the City from increased revenues from Airport revenues, the City's Transient Occupancy Tax on hotels, Parking Users' tax on lots, Business Tax revenues from increased local sales at businesses and restaurants, and other related City revenues (taxicab, convention center, citations, etc.). To help complete this study, the city should request assistance from outside economic and financial experts to ensure a thorough and complete analysis.Jack Kyser gave a rough estimate of $4 million in increased revenue for local businesses, but presumably the city's cut of that would be substantially less.
I do not believe we, the taxpayers, should foot this bill. Why don't you all go after the M.J. fans for the cost? It makes no sense to issue I.O.U.'s if you do not have money, then fund this useless memorial. Yes, I am mad.
How much is this "thorough analysis" going to cost L.A. taxpayers?
miss hahn needs kept her mouth shut!!!!!
someone needs to pay for this MUSIC FEST and it's not the taxpayers grant you mj was a good songwriter and singer. let the jackson family pay for this it was there son and brother?
did the city where elvis was put too rest pay?