If ‘This Is It’ Is Such A Success, Why Can’t Sony & AEG Reimburse City Of L.A. For $6M Michael Jackson Tribute Cost?

COMMENTS (21)

• Maybe I’m missing something, but why is it AEG’s fault that the City of Los Angeles vastly overestimated the crowd?

  Comment by John — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 10:30am PST  Reply to this post

• How about just repeal Prop 13 so the state has money to pay to protect it citizens and educate it’s children without begging the deceased.

  Prop 13, allegedly to help senior citizens, is a sham that has millionaires living in Pacific Palisades mansions paying $1000 a year in properly tax based on the value of their home in the 1970s!! and it can never increase. And everyone here shrugs their shoulders wondering why there’s no money.

  Do a fair tax assessment of a home’s current value and tax property owners accordingly instead of letting them basically skip paying property tax for the infrastructure and instead hire private armed security to patrol their own neighborhoods and pay the bill to send their kids to private school– in their minds exonerating them from contributing their fair share to support systems for civilization city wide and state wide.

  I’m never disappointed by the way Californians try to fix symptoms never dealing with actual problems. (We have no property tax base–the very thing every other state uses for survival.)

  The city has a duty to protect it’s citizenry, control crowds, control traffic–not at the event necessarily, but certainly city wide. Some days are busier than others.

  This town survives on entertainment. An entertainment giant dies and the funeral is gonna be big.

  C’mon for crying out loud. You think controlling traffic and crowds city wide is the responsibility of the deceased? Please wake up from your deep sleep.

  Comment by zackery — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 10:44am PST  Reply to this post

  • Just the kind of thinking that got LA, and to a larger extent Ca. into the mess it’s in. More taxes, huh Zach. Control spending, unheard of, just charge more and more for everything. Prop 13 is not a sham as it does help seniors, I know my parents couldn’t keep the home they’ve been in since the 60′s if prop 13 were repealed. Swing and a miss on your panacea to cure the cities financial woes.
    As far as controlling traffic and crowds city wide at this promoted event being the responsibility of the deceased, of course it isn’t. It IS however the respomsibility of those who are promoting the “star-studded” tribute/funeral, not the taxpayers of Los Angeles.

    Comment by youdon'tgetit — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 9:49pm PST  Reply to this post

    • Yes, prop 13 protects senior citizens, but it also gives enormous ongoing tax breaks to long term commercial land owners (typically legal entities, not individuals). Sadly, it will never be overturned or overhauled to address the disparity, as voters always seem to focus on how 13 benefits them now (or might benefit them later when they buy a house), rather than focusing on the fundamental unfairness of the overall disparity among taxes paid paid by owners of equally valuable property. Any attempt to modify 13 (say to equalize commercial property taxes) will always be met with strong oppositional funding from commercial property owners who have benefited the most from prop 13′s favoring long term ownership over recent buyers.

      Comment by CMR — Tuesday November 3, 2009 @ 1:59pm PST  Reply to this post

• To quote Stephen Colbert “Let’s Get AEG!”

  Comment by Lytton Strachey — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 10:53am PST  Reply to this post

• Voluntarily paying fees like this would be a bad precedent. They already pay taxes. And Sony is hardly responsible for Michael Jackson’s death. This sort of thing is and should be covered by bright-line laws. If L.A. wants to bill people for public services, pass a law clearing delineating the circumstances, and let that law be subject to legal scrutiny and challenge.

  Comment by Mike — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 10:53am PST  Reply to this post

• Yet another example of the industry of scum that continues to metastasize around MJ. The US attorney should look into this. Our city dollars were pilfered for the circus at Staples, and then the benefits were reaped ACROSS STATE LINES with this docu… Sue? No. Put MFers in jail.

  Comment by J.R. — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 11:03am PST  Reply to this post

  • J.R. wrote “Our city dollars were pilfered for the circus at Staples, and then the benefits were reaped ACROSS STATE LINES with this docu…”

    Although related, the MJ memorial event at Staples and the concert film now in theatres are separate events. In fact there is no reference whatsoever to the memorial event in the film.

    Logically, the cost of providing police protection during the Jackson memorial should have been handled the way any other high profile event at the Staples Center would be handled.

    It would be appropriate for the Jackson estate and Sony Records to at least partially reimburse the city for those police services since they reaped the benefits of a spike in CD sales at the time of the memorial. But to use the concert film’s grosses as a justification for paying when there was not even a reference to the memorial, much less footage, is illogical.

    Comment by Silly Me — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 3:50pm PST  Reply to this post

• Thank you! But it will never happen, as long as Leiweke remains a power broker in LA politics (ching-ching). Wonder what City Council Candidate (and former Paramount exec) Christine Essel has to say on the matter.

  Comment by Paloma Pigeon — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 11:34am PST  Reply to this post

• I can’t understand why you think that “This is it” isn’t a hit.
  100 million in five days for a documentary?
  And it will make at least three times its budget.
  Sorry, Nikki, but you are wrong.
  “This is It” is a big hit and they will make a lot of money with this movie (don’t forget the DVD sales!).

  Comment by AJ — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 1:14pm PST  Reply to this post

• Why were city tax-payer $$$$$ even considered to start with for the disgusting spectacle? A pickled-brained corpse who did nothing for the city of LA, other than perpetuate stalkerism, papparrazzi, and -more than likely- take under age children to bed.

  Why as a tax payer should I fund the corpse-glorification of a immature freak who I wouldn’t ever buy a .99 cent music track from?

  Comment by P.J. — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 1:41pm PST  Reply to this post

• have you ever done biz with Leiweke?
  promises the world then vanishes.

  Comment by not right — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 2:34pm PST  Reply to this post

• Here here!!!

  Comment by Sally — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 3:39pm PST  Reply to this post

• City should have negoitated this at the time they were holding the cards and created a “loan” to AEG and Michael Jackson esate for the purposes of providing city servies for a private at a private facility, paid back at a later date. Not difficult to do and at the time would have had the position to do so. Now the city is crying foul.

  Comment by Hollywood Joe — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 6:15pm PST  Reply to this post

• You know what Nikki I agree with you and wish some of you heavy hitters reading this would send notes in to AEG. I think the city f–ed up too on this one BUT Los Angeles really can’t afford what amounted to basically special treatment to AEG.

  Now, AEG does do a lot for the city of Los Angles – a lot people. BUT, they really need to step up on this one. It’s been bothering me since the summer.

  Comment by Troy — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 6:22pm PST  Reply to this post

• It’s like watching a train wreck in slow motion, you can’t help but stare.

  Comment by PubliusClodius — Monday November 2, 2009 @ 7:11pm PST  Reply to this post

• Chief Bratton suggested that if LA wants to be a considered a world-class city, that these kinds of expenses are part of the deal. When the Oscars roll around, is anyone going to ask the Academy to foot the bill for the added security it requires? We should be thankful we live in a city of this caliber and just accept that there will occasionally be things like the MJ tribute that will cost the city a little more money.

  Comment by Earnest Pettie — Tuesday November 3, 2009 @ 4:02pm PST  Reply to this post

  • No of course if the Academy Awards or other REGULAR events come up, the city should supervise with police, BUT, the Michael Jackson spectacle – honestly, did NOT need to occur. Plus, we are in a recession, people need to be realistic. The city is drowning in debt. This was not a proper use of funds. OF COURSE we can have major events in LA, but seriously ask yourself… did we really need this one? Did we? We didn’t.

    Comment by Troy — Thursday November 5, 2009 @ 6:31am PST  Reply to this post

• The L.A.P.D. bought into the media hype hook, line and sinker on this one. It’s nobody’s fault but theirs that they didn’t project the crowd size based on what goes on in the real world. We should be calling for the heads of our elected officials, not demanding reparations from corporations.

  Comment by Patrick — Tuesday November 3, 2009 @ 5:59pm PST  Reply to this post

• It would be nice if Sony who will make a lot of money on this movie gives something back to the L.A.P.D.
  The studio heads donate to all the horrid politicans who have
  destroyed CA. at least they could donate to a good cause with
  the $$$ they made on this Movie.

  Comment by Jane — Wednesday November 4, 2009 @ 2:11am PST  Reply to this post

  • couldn’t agree more. just even small donations from both AEG AND SONY AND the Jackson family to the City of Los Angeles would make it right somehow. it just still seems wrong. what if we had a gigantic funeral for every major celebrity who died in Los Angeles????

    Comment by Troy — Thursday November 5, 2009 @ 6:32am PST  Reply to this post