Event Services

Posted by .

Funfest Productions, Inc. is a full-service concert and special event production company. For concerts, we have access to staging, sound systems, lighting systems, generators and technicians. We can also help layout and design your entire event. We have access to tents, porta johns, fencing, generators and anything else you would need to put on a world-class event. We can also provide national and local bands, novelty acts, children’s entertainment, carnival rides, art exhibits and other activities.

Please call us at (586) 493-4344 or e-mail us at info@funfestinc.com.

Hire us to Enhance Your Event

Funfest Productions, Inc. can help you book, promote and market your event to the masses. We can handle all of your advertising needs with radio, television, newspapers and other forms of media. The following is a sample of what we can do:

  • Event Booking: Local, Regional, and National Talent at our fingertips
  • Marketing: Television, Radio, Print, Internet, Social Media
  • Event Production: You name it, we can provide it and manage it
  • Concert Production: We will handle all the needs for your entertainers
  • Concessions: Manage every aspect of your food & beverage operation
  • Labor: Providing stagehands and specialized labor is our specialty
  • Sponsorships: Acquire the right sponsors to help pay for your event
  • Vendors: Deliver vendors that sell a variety of goods and services that will pay you to be at your event
Supreme Court upholds Michigan anti

Supreme Court on Tuesday upheld an identical Michigan law that bans affirmative action in public programs such as university admissions.

The Supreme Court, although splintered in its legal reasoning, determined that voters had a right to enact Michigan’s law in 2006 and choose to outlaw race and gender preferences. The majority decision, written by cheap jerseys china Justice Anthony Kennedy, based the outcome on a states’ rights argument, steering clear of whether Michigan’s law violated the constitutional rights of minorities in the state.

An affirmative action rally outside Boalt Hall School of Law, 1997. (Mercury News)Ron BurdaThe case had major implications for California, where Proposition 209 since 1996 has forbidden consideration of race and gender in university admissions, contracting and other public programs throughout the state. Legal challenges to Proposition 209 have failed, and its critics considered the Supreme Court case out of Michigan the last, best chance to revive the prospect of a renewed challenge in the courts.

As a result of Tuesday’s decision, the only likely method for Proposition 209 opponents to get rid of the law would be a move to repeal it at the ballot box. But just three of the justices backed Kennedy’s approach, which was to conclude there is no constitutional reason to interfere with the right of Michigan voters to ban affirmative action.

“This case is not about the constitutionality, or the merits, of race conscious admissions policies in higher education,” Kennedy wrote.

Justice Stephen Breyer agreed only with the result in the case, wholesale jerseys while Justices Antonin Scalia and Clarence Thomas would have gone further, saying Michigan’s approach to affirmative action is constitutional. Justices Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsburg dissented. Justice Elena Kagan did not participate in the case.

California, joined by five other states and the District of Columbia, joined civil rights groups in asking the Supreme Court to invalidate Michigan’s Proposal 2, enacted in 2006. The University of California also opposed the law in the high court, noting that Proposition 209 has dramatically reduced the admissions rates for Latino, black and Native American students, particularly at highly selective schools such as UC Berkeley and UCLA.

Other California interests sided against the Michigan law in the Supreme Court, including a number of high school districts in urban areas such as Berkeley, Oakland and San Francisco, where school officials say Proposition 209 dashes the college hopes of minority students. BART also jumped into the case, arguing cheap wholesale jerseys that the state law has hampered hiring of minority contractors.

Legal experts had predicted that the conservative Supreme Court was likely to leave laws such as Michigan’s and California’s intact. Supporters of the law, such as Ward Connerly, a former UC regent and architect of the Michigan and California laws, argue that the approach is race neutral, and does not target any particular group.

Civil rights groups decried the ruling, saying leaving the anti affirmative action laws intact in states such as California and Michigan will damage efforts to diversify higher education.

“This case is ultimately about whether students of color in Michigan are allowed to compete on cheap nhl jerseys china the same playing field as all other students,” said Mark Rosenbaum, an American Civil Liberties Union attorney who challenged both the Michigan and California laws. “Today, the Supreme Court said they are not.”Articles Connexes:

Comments are closed.