Disney Checkmates DeSantis

[BabyBoomer50s]

I disagree with your speculation. Disney reached an agreement with the outgoing board, had it recorded as a valid restrictive covenant at the courthouse. It is essentially a valid binding contract between two parties. The state would have to pass legislation to permit a one-sided modification of a valid civil contract. And any major modification would likely trigger the billion dollar bond default provisions in Reedy Creek (which is why DeSantis had to wait for the outgoing terms to expire in the first place).

Florida, not Disney, is the one who is fucked here.

I understand it’s valid and binding agreement. Both parties could agree to terminate or amend it, no? The state’s power to tax and regulate is potent leverage.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

I understand it’s valid and binding agreement. Both parties could agree to terminate or amend it, no? The state’s power to tax and regulate is potent leverage.

So why only tax Disney?

 

[zipman]

Disney would not be happy with fewer customers or lower after tax returns and their shareholders would definitely not be happy either.

Fewer Disney customers equals fewer tourism dollars for Florida.

It's stupid and all due to DeSantis' ego.

 

[KeithD]

Disney should rumble about moving out of Florida, and then maybe we'd see how scurrying the cockroaches there get.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Disney should rumble about moving out of Florida, and then maybe we'd see how scurrying the cockroaches there get.

It would be a hollow threat. They have billions invested there. Disney World and it’s resorts are not like pop up circus tents that you pack on trucks and move from town to town. They‘re not going anywhere.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Fewer Disney customers equals fewer tourism dollars for Florida.

It's stupid and all due to DeSantis' ego.

Disney management is accountable to its shareholders. They will do what‘s necessary to protect market share, revenue growth, and margins. That might mean ceding full governance authority of the special district to the new board. Turley is right. A battle against the state, which has immense tax and regulatory power, is obviously not in Disney’s best interest.

 

[SgtSpiderMan]

Disney management is accountable to its shareholders. They will do what‘s necessary to protect market share, revenue growth, and margins. That might mean ceding full governance authority of the special district to the new board. Turley is right. A battle against the state, which has immense tax and regulatory power, is obviously not in Disney’s best interest.

Which is probably why Disney isn’t battling with the state.

 

[HisArpy]

Did that post make sense in your head?

It's not my fault that not only aren't you very clever, but you're actually very very humorless.

 

[HisArpy]

Disney knows their market. There’s no money in MAGA and catering to them alienates other people. I don’t kid myself that Disney is acting “woke” out of the goodness of their heart. That’s where the money is.

Tell it to Anheuser Bush and Bud Light...

 

[ll74]

Tell it to Anheuser Bush and Bud Light...

They are experiencing a spike in sales because dipshits are buying boatloads in order to virtue signal online.

 

[RobDownSouth]

I understand it’s valid and binding agreement. Both parties could agree to terminate or amend it, no? The state’s power to tax and regulate is potent leverage.

Both parties COULD, in theory, terminate or amend it. Disney has no compelling reason to do so....they've legally acquired the right to regulate their properties as they see fit for the next 80-or-so years. Punitive taxation would likely be frowned upon by the courts and at best a Pyhrric victory for DeSantis.

 

[Comshaw]

I understand it’s valid and binding agreement. Both parties could agree to terminate or amend it, no? The state’s power to tax and regulate is potent leverage.

It is definitely a contract. As such it is subject to Article I, Section 10 of the Florida Constitution, IE; Prohibited laws.—No bill of attainder, ex post facto law or law impairing the obligation of contracts shall be passed.

Any such taxation as purposed could also violate Atricle I, section 25 of Florida's constitution: Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights.—By general law the legislature shall prescribe and adopt a Taxpayers’ Bill of Rights that, in clear and concise language, sets forth taxpayers’ rights and responsibilities and government’s responsibilities to deal fairly with taxpayers under the laws of this state. This section shall be effective July 1, 1993.

Additionally, while the state's power to tax and regulate is potent it is not infinite. And doing so for retributional purposes could run it afoul of the U.S. Constitutions' 8th. Amendment against cruel and unusual punishments.

Disney management is accountable to its shareholders. They will do what‘s necessary to protect market share, revenue growth, and margins. That might mean ceding full governance authority of the special district to the new board. Turley is right. A battle against the state, which has immense tax and regulatory power, is obviously not in Disney’s best interest.

Disney's management is responsible to its shareholders. A state overreaching its power, trying to dominate a business that has been good to it for many, many years (and if left alone would do so for many more) because that business spoke out on a social issue, is both wrong and dangerous. That's what Disney is trying to avoid.

again, to be clear, this has NOTHING to do with Disney trying to get over on the state of Florida. They weren't trying to ditz the state on taxes. The taxing district is one of the most well-maintained and well-regulated in the state, so they weren't trying to run some sleazy operation. It has to do with one thing and one thing only, trying to make Disney keep its mouth shut and not voice an opinion on a social issue.

De Santis needs to just back off and admit he was out-maneuvered and out-smarted. Disney isn't going to be moving out of state anytime soon. That would entail billions of dollars on their part. But they aren't going to roll over and let De Santis do what he wants either. Disney also isn't going to do an "I told you so!" thing. That isn't in their best interest. All along they have been trying (and will continue) to do this in a low-key manner. You notice they didn't announce what they had done, the state did. De Santis is the one trying to stir the pot and keep it visible to make points with the voters. It will backfire on him if he insists on continuing with this action.

Comshaw

 

[ll74]

Disney's management is responsible to its shareholders. A state overreaching its power, trying to dominate a business that has been good to it for many, many years (and if left alone would do so for many more) because that business spoke out on a social issue, is both wrong and dangerous. That's what Disney is trying to avoid.

again, to be clear, this has NOTHING to do with Disney trying to get over on the state of Florida. They weren't trying to ditz the state on taxes. The taxing district is one of the most well-maintained and well-regulated in the state, so they weren't trying to run some sleazy operation. It has to do with one thing and one thing only, trying to make Disney keep its mouth shut and not voice an opinion on a social issue.

I wonder if Disney has discussed suing internally. It seems to be a rock solid case of abuse of government to me. I might be wrong .or perhaps Disney is just focused on stabilizing things.

 

[Comshaw]

I wonder if Disney has discussed suing internally. It seems to be a rock solid case of abuse of government to me. I might be wrong .or perhaps Disney is just focused on stabilizing things.

The way they have gone about it so far they are trying to retain as much as they can from the old agreement without doing too much damage to the Disney legacy or public image. I'm sure it was discussed. I'm also sure that EVERY avenue was discussed and a direction was chosen that wouldn't do too much damage to the corporation. Just like De Santis who is trying to build a public image of a politician that won't be pushed around by "woke" corporations, Disney also has a public image they have to protect, a warm, fuzzy, family-friendly one. That's why when they made their move they didn't broadcast it or brag about it. They would rather not publicly engage in a "gotcha" game with De Santis. But they will make every move possible to protect both Disney World and the Disney Corporation.

Comshaw

 

[RobDownSouth]

Disney has some expertise threading the public relations needle.

Since 1991, LBQBT+ organizations have been holding unofficial "gay weeks" at Disney World the first week in June. Disney didn't sanction the event, but didn't prohibit it either.

The Southern Baptist Convention (aka "Bigots 'r Us") demanded Disney prohibit gays on their property and Disney said "nah". The SBC then urged a boycott of Disney World, which had absolutely no affect on park attendance. The SBC eventually got over their hissy fit.

 

[Bigboobbabe]

Lol, sure. Try that as a defense the next time a cop pulls you over. Or the IRS tells you to pay taxes. Or that you have to move along because you can't camp under the bridge anymore.

When that cop pulls you over, it's too late. They told you not to drive 55 mph in a residential zone. You responded they can't tell me what to do. So you did it.
Now there are consequences.
In the meantime, if that speed limit changes, they will probably throw out the pending action.
The reverse is not true. If the limit was 55, you drove 55 then it changed to 35 mph, the actions before the change are not held to the standard after the change.
DeSantis picked the wrong hill to die one. He didn't realize it was a volcano. And it is erupting in his face.

BTW - Be kind, I am not a lawyer or poli-sci graduate. Just a fairly logical American.

 

[schism666]

BTW - Be kind, I am not a lawyer or poli-sci graduate. Just a fairly logical American.

you're miles up the evolution ladder than him, then.

 

[HisArpy]

When that cop pulls you over, it's too late. They told you not to drive 55 mph in a residential zone. You responded they can't tell me what to do. So you did it.
Now there are consequences.
In the meantime, if that speed limit changes, they will probably throw out the pending action.
The reverse is not true. If the limit was 55, you drove 55 then it changed to 35 mph, the actions before the change are not held to the standard after the change.
DeSantis picked the wrong hill to die one. He didn't realize it was a volcano. And it is erupting in his face.

BTW - Be kind, I am not a lawyer or poli-sci graduate. Just a fairly logical American.

The issue is that people are saying the State can't tell them what to do. Yet the State tells you what to do all the time and failure to obey results in consequences.

A simple example is that you can't speed. Another is that you have to stop at stop signs. Do you really believe that the very first speeding ticket or failure to stop violation successfully argued that the law was changed ex post facto and therefore the new law doesn't apply to the offender AT ALL? Simply because the State can't tell you what to do?

Can you logically say that the argument you just made is any different?

Unlike Disney anyone who got that first ticket could try argue that they didn't know of the change in the law but that gets them nowhere because ignorance is no excuse. However Disney can't argue that because they unequivocally knew of the change in the law prior to their actions. Which means that what they did was try to nullify or circumvent compliance with the law.

Which implies a criminal intent and mindset on the part of the Reedy Creek Board as well as Disney Corporate.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Timbits, Disney complied with the rules in place under the previous group of government officials. Claiming that they should have held back until the newly appointed group of government officials took power is disingenuous. They took full LEGAL advantage of the "lame duck" session and no amount of retconning on your part will change that underlying fact.

 

[RobDownSouth]

Desantis telegraphs "surrender" by sending "B team" of attorneys to symbolically protest Disney dealmaking with previous commission members.

Kabuki theater
"Goin' through the motions".

 

[Comshaw]

Hmmmmm...
Florida Attorney General Ashley Moody came up empty on a public records request that sought to gain insight into agreements the Reedy Creek Improvement District’s board made with Disney ahead of a state takeover.

Moody sought “documents discussing an intention or goal of circumventing, avoiding, frustrating, mitigating or otherwise attempting to avoid the effects of anticipated actions by the Florida governor and the Florida Legislature.”


Oh damn! Empty-handed again! Who'd of thunk it!


Reedy Creek finds ‘no records exist’ for Moody’s probe into Disney agreements

Comshaw

 

[Lazaran]

I expect BabyBoobs will post a non sequitur meme from the Babylon Bee in response to this latest news.

BabyBoobs

 

[ll74]

I heard Disney World continues to set attendance records.

 

[BabyBoomer50s]

Disney’s financial fairy tale in Florida is coming to an end thanks to Ron DeSantis​

​

https://nypost.com/2023/04/16/disneys-financial-fairy-tale-is-coming-to-an-end-thanks-to-desantis/

 

[RobDownSouth]

Disney’s financial fairy tale in Florida is coming to an end thanks to Ron DeSantis​

​

https://nypost.com/2023/04/16/disneys-financial-fairy-tale-is-coming-to-an-end-thanks-to-desantis/

The editorial in the Post is larded with "might be" and "could be" and "some people say" and all sorts of "weasel words". I can see how MAGA nation is enthralled. The opinion writer, purportedly a lawyer, seems to have less of a grasp on property law than our own HisArpy.

*nods*