Disney calls DeSantis' bluff

[Ezkaton]

I blame inbreeding and Adderall.

Ad hom.... the last resort of people who can't actually argue their position, right next to the censorship you and the comrades are so fond of.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Yes, disagreeing with psychotic leftist is always a hazard on a social media outlet. Censorship is the "GO-TO!!" move, especially when you're upset over an anti-grooming law and the comrades are having a rough go opposing it without looking like the creepy predatory grooming scum that they are. This is why Musk bought out your precious woke echo chamber Twitter.

What fascist rhetoric??

You should learn what the word 'fascist' means before you make public displays of your ignorance.

The fact that you’re championing the government trying to silence people speaking against it is the definition of fascism.

You’ll have to show me where I ever said anything about Twitter.

 

[phrodeau]

How do you figure??

I used it correctly.


If I'm the one lying then why are you the one hiding like the dishonest coward???

We know why Keith..... SR71 pilot...LMFAO.

Ad hom.... the last resort of people who can't actually argue their position, right next to the censorship you and the comrades are so fond of.

The GOP have chosen not to have debates. Maybe you should follow their example.

 

[Rotadom]

If emobo absconed from debates, how would we be entertained?

 

[phrodeau]

If emobo absconed from debates, how would we be entertained?

Bread and circuses?

 

[butters]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...pc=U531&cvid=556bfda9c64c4eeb9af1b9a77e4f6a58

What does the pledge state?

The district filed a statement with the Municipal Securities Rulemaking Board on April 21, citing the debt pledge in the Reedy Creek Act as its defense to stopping DeSantis’s move.

The pledge promises that it “will not in any way impair the rights or remedies of the holders, and that it will not modify in any way the exemption from taxation provided in the Reedy Creek Act, until all such bonds together with interest thereon, and all costs and expenses in connection with any act or proceeding by or on behalf of such holders, are fully met and discharged.”

What would happen to the debt?

The bill dissolving RCID does not explicitly say what should happen to its debts, but another state statute outlines that the counties — Orange and Osceola — would assume the district’s debt along with the rest of its assets.

“Instead of bonds backed by a special district with the power to levy up to 30 mills in taxes, the property tax bonds will be backed jointly by two governments that can only generate a maximum of 10 mills in taxes,” Schumer wrote in Bloomberg Tax. A mill is an annual charge one-one thousandth of the property’s value.

“Instead of a unified utility system with special powers to charge various fees, supported by special taxing powers, utility revenue bonds will be jointly managed by two counties subject to additional taxing and spending restrictions,” Schumer continued.

He also highlighted the Supreme Court case Von Hoffman v. City of Quincy to show how Florida would be violating its pledge. The ruling “held that once a local government issues a bond based on an authorized taxing power, the state is contract-bound and cannot eliminate the taxing power supporting the bond.”

and this warning, from Fitch Ratings:

https://www.fitchratings.com/resear...l-heightens-bondholder-uncertainty-28-04-2022

Florida’s Reedy Creek Dissolution Bill Heightens Bondholder Uncertainty​

Thu 28 Apr, 2022 - 4:58 PM ET

Fitch Ratings-New York-28 April 2022: The Florida state government’s move to dissolve several independent special districts on June 1, 2023 creates significant risk to the credit quality of these districts, including Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID), says Fitch Ratings. In response, Fitch placed the 'AA-' rating on RCID’s ad valorem tax bonds and the 'A' rating on its utilities revenue bonds on Rating Watch Negative due to uncertainty in servicing the RCID debt post-dissolution. We expect the state will ultimately work with various stakeholders to resolve the uncertainty in a way that ensures timely repayment of RCID debt, with reconstitution of the district as one option specifically offered in the bill. The failure to do so could alter our view of Florida's commitment to preserve bondholder rights and weaken our view of the operating environment for Florida governments.

Fitch's U.S. Tax-Supported Rating Criteria recognizes certain structural factors as a strength for all U.S. local governments, including significant, but not unlimited, autonomy and respect for property rights and bondholder security. In that context, the RCID dissolution bill is outside our baseline expectations for the sector, as it creates ambiguity around which entity or entities will ultimately repay bondholders, which carries adverse consequences for RCID's credit quality and was a significant factor in the Negative Watch.

Fitch expects the title of all property owned by RCID, including its indebtedness, to be transferred to Orange (AAA/Stable) and Osceola (AA/Positive) counties, the cities of Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista (neither rated), or to a successor agency, pursuant to state law. Fitch believes the mechanics of implementation, including the transfer of the revenue pledged to bondholders, will be complicated, increasing the likelihood of negative rating actions for RCID’s outstanding bonds. Moreover, neither Orange nor Osceola county provide the complete suite of utility and emergency services provided by RCID. Fitch expects the RCID to continue to maintain its facilities and operations and to service its debt through the dissolution date.

Furthermore, the dissolution potentially impinges creditors' rights and may violate the state's covenant to bondholders under the RCID Enabling Act in that it will not limit or alter the right of the district to carry out various governmental services or to levy and collect taxes, fees and other charges. These risks have been highlighted in Fitch's ESG Relevance Score of '5', indicating high relevance to the rating, for Governance Structure for the RCID utilities revenue bonds and Rule of Law, Institutional & Regulatory Quality, Control of Corruption for the ad valorem tax bonds.

 

[Rightguide]

Disney Exec Geoff Morrell, Who Crafted the Response to Florida’s Parental Rights Law, Resigns After 3 Months on the Job​

WARNER TODD HUSTON29 Apr 2022

Geoff Morrell, the chief corporate affairs officer for Disney, who helped craft the embattled company’s response to Florida’s Parental Rights in Education law, has resigned to “pursue other opportunities” after just three months.

The one-time George W. Bush Pentagon spokesman joined Disney only three months ago to head up the company’s global communications department — which included overseeing Disney’s government relations and public policy.

But on Friday, Morrell released a statement telling the company that he was stepping away, saying, “After three months in this new role, it has become clear to me that for a number of reasons it is not the right fit,” according to the Hollywood Reporter.

Morrell’s announcement comes on the heels of Disney’s failed attempts to stop the state’s Parental Rights in Education law that prevents school children from pre-k to third grade from being exposed to controversial gender identity politics and age-inappropriate conversations about sexuality in class.

More here:

https://www.breitbart.com/entertain...rights-law-resigns-after-3-months-on-the-job/

My my, retribution was swift. Looks like Disney is trying to claw back its respectability and stave off possible lawsuits for failing in its fiduciary responsibilities.

 

[Rightguide]

https://www.msn.com/en-us/news/poli...pc=U531&cvid=556bfda9c64c4eeb9af1b9a77e4f6a58






and this warning, from Fitch Ratings:

https://www.fitchratings.com/resear...l-heightens-bondholder-uncertainty-28-04-2022

The bottom line is Disney is going to have to pay its own debts.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

The bottom line is Disney is going to have to pay its own debts.

They certainly will, but they won’t pay RCID debts.

 

[ll74]

The bottom line is Disney is going to have to pay its own debts.

The bottom line is that there was no reason or push to change their status until the made a public statement against DeSantis.

 

[Rightguide]

The bottom line is that there was no reason or push to change their status until the made a public statement against DeSantis.

That isn't true.

 

[ll74]

That isn't true.

Please enlighten me of the Florida legislator even mentioning doing this (or the governor) prior to their statement.

(Hint: they never have)

 

[Rightguide]

Please enlighten me of the Florida legislator even mentioning doing this (or the governor) prior to their statement.

(Hint: they never have)

The legislature acted on the public outcry after the Disney policy was announced by its hapless CEO, who stupidly thought the entire parent stratum of the state would gladly swallow his intention to pervert its children as he sucked up to a tiny minority of his employees and wrecked the financial futures of his stockholders.

 

[ll74]

The legislature acted on the public outcry after the Disney policy was announced by its hapless CEO, who stupidly thought the entire parent stratum of the state would gladly swallow his intention to pervert its children as he sucked up to a tiny minority of his employees and wrecked the financial futures of his stockholders.

They retaliated because Disney didn't like their bill. Disney has no policy against the law that was enacted

Just admit it and stop lying.

You like that a government entity is retaliating against a company you don't like. In fact, you celebrate it.

 

[Rightguide]

They retaliated because Disney didn't like their bill. Disney has no policy against the law that was enacted

Just admit it and stop lying.

You like that a government entity is retaliating against a company you don't like. In fact, you celebrate it.

Disney threatened to do all they could to oppose the bill. Here are some "key facts:"

KEY FACTS​

Disney said in a statement Monday after DeSantis signed HB 1557 into law that its “goal as a company is for this law to be repealed by the legislature or struck down in the courts” by supporting advocacy groups challenging the law, adding it “should never” have been passed or enacted.

DeSantis told reporters Tuesday Disney’s statement was “fundamentally dishonest” and “crossed a line,” adding that Florida is not governed “based on the demands of California corporate executives.”

DeSantis pointed out Disney did not speak out against HB 1557 before the bill was passed—which they’ve been widely criticized for—saying Florida’s House Speaker told him “Disney never called him” when the bill was going through the legislature.

Florida state Rep. Joe Harding (R), who sponsored HB 1557, said in a statement Tuesday his campaign has returned Disney’s political donations due to the company’s opposition against the law, saying in a statement the company’s “rejection of common sense, parents-first principles gives me no other choice but to return their donations.”

More here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...down-law-that-crossed-a-line/?sh=6ec88b961269

 

[ll74]

Disney threatened to do all they could to oppose the bill. Here are some "key facts:"

KEY FACTS​

Disney said in a statement Monday after DeSantis signed HB 1557 into law that its “goal as a company is for this law to be repealed by the legislature or struck down in the courts” by supporting advocacy groups challenging the law, adding it “should never” have been passed or enacted.

DeSantis told reporters Tuesday Disney’s statement was “fundamentally dishonest” and “crossed a line,” adding that Florida is not governed “based on the demands of California corporate executives.”

DeSantis pointed out Disney did not speak out against HB 1557 before the bill was passed—which they’ve been widely criticized for—saying Florida’s House Speaker told him “Disney never called him” when the bill was going through the legislature.

Florida state Rep. Joe Harding (R), who sponsored HB 1557, said in a statement Tuesday his campaign has returned Disney’s political donations due to the company’s opposition against the law, saying in a statement the company’s “rejection of common sense, parents-first principles gives me no other choice but to return their donations.”

More here:

https://www.forbes.com/sites/alison...down-law-that-crossed-a-line/?sh=6ec88b961269

They did not set any policy that was against the legislation or law

They publicly announced their dissatisfaction with the bill and employed lobbiest to oppose it.

And DeSantis and the government punished them for their public speech.

You support the government punishing public speech.

Say those words above and quit trying to rationalize that you do

 

[pecksniff]

The fact that you’re championing the government trying to silence people speaking against it is the definition of fascism.

No, that's authoritarianism. Fascism is a more complicated subject.

 

[pecksniff]

They did not set any policy that was against the legislation or law

How could they? Disney does not run its own schools, does it? I don't think the RCID has enough actual residents to warrant a one-room schoolhouse.

 

[pecksniff]

Of course, one is tempted to wonder whether Disney's position here is influenced by Walt Disney World getting a whole lot of gay trade.

 

[butters]

entire article full of information, well worth checking out

https://www.mediaite.com/news/taxpa...illion-bond-debt-more-lawsuits-expected-soon/

For a fuller explanation of RCID and its functions, I’d encourage you to read the deep-dive analysis I wrote here at Mediaite last month. Basically, RCID is one of the oldest special taxing districts in the state and has broad powers, but it is not unique. Florida currently has over 1,800 such districts, encompassing areas like the launch pads and facilities at Cape Canaveral, various airports around the state, and The Villages, the heavily-Republican retirement community north of Orlando. Through RCID, Disney has been paying roughly $150 million in additional taxes that cover everything from water and sewage treatment, trash and recycling, landscaping, road construction and maintenance, fire department and EMS services, and so on.

Florida law prohibits counties from taxing taxpayers at different rates unless a “special taxing district” is created in which the affected taxpayers consent to a higher millage rate for the purposes of that district. At the time Disney bought its Florida property in the 1960s, the parcel was rural pastures and swamps, miles from existing power lines and other utilities. Disney pays property taxes to Orange and Osceola Counties, and then pays an additional tax levied by RCID, currently set at the highest millage rate in the entire state.

Disney is willing to have RCID levy these additional taxes on itself because they want these services to be provided at a higher level than the counties would otherwise be able to manage. RCID employees have better pay and benefits than their government counterparts. Maintenance services are also performed more frequently and to a higher standard. I live in unincorporated Orange County and there is a pothole the size of a hubcap at the end of my street; no one has ever seen a pothole in an RCID-maintained road.

As I’ve previously reported, neither Disney nor the local governments of Orange and Osceola County want RCID to be eliminated, and no one from DeSantis’ office or the bill’s Republican sponsors in the legislature seemed to have done even the bare minimum of due diligence before rushing through the repeal, such as calling anyone at Disney, RCID, or either county, or actually researching the legal and tax issues invoked by repealing RCID, several of which are invoked in this lawsuit.

Chief among those legal issues are Disney’s First Amendment rights. RCID was targeted for elimination after Disney’s CEO criticized HB 1557, the Parental Rights in Education bill (dubbed “Don’t Say Gay” by its critics) after it had already passed. Florida Republicans were not shy about voicing their intention to retaliate against Disney, leading many attorneys and legal scholars to assess this as a clear-cut case of viewpoint discrimination and a violation of Disney’s right to free speech, as confirmed by the Citizens United Supreme Court case.

 

[butters]

The article goes on to address RCID's municipal bond debt, stating that the Orange County Tax Collector estimates a tax raise of between $2,200 and $2,800 on families of four. The 4 plaintiffs are taxpayers and are arguing that desantis has no right to take these actions which will raise the amount of taxes they will have to pay this way.

And then there's an inclusion in Florida Statutes Section 189.072 that "prohibits the dissolution of an independent special district like RCID unless it is inactive or the majority of the voting landowners consent". Guess who the "voting landowners" are in the RCID: the Walt Disney Company. along with a select few senior Disney employees.

It continues to address the violation of the pledge Florida made to the RCID bondholders, but i think that's already been covered in the posts here.

 

[wallstreetguy]

Lefties sure love multibillion dollar corporations that have complete autonomy and dodge taxes.

 

[ll74]

Lefties sure love multibillion dollar corporations that have complete autonomy and dodge taxes.

The company hasnt done a damn thing except speak out of line against Republicans.

 

[butters]

Lefties sure love multibillion dollar corporations that have complete autonomy and dodge taxes.

guess your mush-brain republican arse missed this part... didn't read or didn't understand, it's all the same with you numbnuts:

Disney pays property taxes to Orange and Osceola Counties, and then pays an additional tax levied by RCID, currently set at the highest millage rate in the entire state.

 

[Fuzzy1975]

Lefties sure love multibillion dollar corporations that have complete autonomy and dodge taxes.

But I thought Republicans were all for capitalism? You know lower taxes, support of those multi-billion corporations who employee tens of thousands of employees. Yet here we see a governor going directly after one such entity, the possible result of which will be a new huge tax burden on his constituents.

Seems un Republican to me.