LA Times: Is Disney Paying Its Fair Share In Anaheim

[Travel Junkie]

Is there any evidence to suggest the mayor wants Disney and the surrounding businesses to fail? What is the the motive for legit wishing for failure? It feels more like a political tactic to try and suck as much money out of Disney as possible.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Is there any evidence to suggest the mayor wants Disney and the surrounding businesses to fail?

And if so it would be completely counterintuitive to maintaining the city’s status quo as a top destination for tourism in the state and expanding the lucrative tax revenue generated from travel related industries. Holding businesses accountable, especially large corporate interests, shouldn’t be equated with being anti-business. Striking the right balance between the needs of businesses and citizens should be a basic expectation of any mayor and/or city council.

 

[Darkbeer1]

Mayor Tait has shown he is spiteful and full of revenge,

He has major issues with SOAR-PAC, which ran campaigns against him and his chosen disciples, like Dr. Moreno.

He tried to delay the JW Marriott from going forward recently, because he is against the tax rebate approved for the 4 Star Hotels. He can't stop it from happening, so he is doing his best to stall it and put as many roadblocks as he can. Same with the new Westin (he is trying to stop an agreed swap of land for the project, already approved by the Convention Center, because it will help the center more than the Hotel.

And now he is seriously ticked off that Disney found a way around the Eastern Gateway project, and is looking for ways to place hurdles in the way. It is the talk of the local resort businesses.

Anaheim doesn't need more money, the city is stable and has a very steady flow of income.

Would Tait/Moreno like more to spend? Of course, who wouldn't, but the things the residents want, such as more law enforcement, more code enforcement, road improvements, and coyote abatement are not on their list, they need to pay back their campaign donors with favors.

But delaying these projects COST the city in jobs, and new tax revenue when they open.

But scoring political points for the November election is more important to them, and that is a shame.

At least folks outside the current leadership are moving ahead... And they know not to expect anything from the city except permission to lease city owned land that would allow the city to collect part of the revenue made at the new venue.

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/12/0...ts-center-in-anaheim-potentially-500-million/

>>By the numbers
Size: 700,000 to 800,000 square feet

Theaters: 2,000-seat orchestra hall; 1,700-seat performance hall; 600-seat black box theater

Amenities: Art museum, restaurant, outdoor amphitheater, convention and education space

Construction: 2 1/2 to 3 years

Cost: $450 million to $600 million<<

 

[Darkbeer1]

Very good article from Sunday's OC Register's Business section, looking at the overall benefits of tourism in Orange County.

While it is important to note Disneyland is not the only reason for visiting the area, it is the primary reason for many, and a secondary reason for others.

http://www.ocregister.com/2017/12/17/8-reasons-why-tourism-matters-in-orange-county/

>>By the association’s math, tourism-related spending in Orange County from 48.2 million visitors in 2016 totaled $13 billion.

That’s a lot of hotel rooms, airfares, theme park tickets, meals, trinkets and even vacation home investments! And it’s a growth business.

Annual visitor counts are up 5.4 million since 2010, a 13 percent jump. Spending per visitor is up 19 percent in six years to $270 a trip. Overall, Orange County‘s spending growth of 34 percent since 2010 tops statewide growth of 26 percent.<<

>>Despite all the local hotel construction you’ve witnessed, the report says demand for local hotels has far outstripped new room supply.

That’s a good reason why spending on lodging has grown 55 percent since 2010 to $3.2 billion — nearly twice the industry’s overall growth, making it Orange County’s top-grossing tourism niche.

And that adds up to local lodging employing 29,000 people with a $1.1 billion payroll.<<

>>Visitors don’t simply pay for lodging and theme-park tickets.

Two noteworthy economic add-ons from tourism are a visitor’s dining and shopping — away from tourism sites. And Orange County has been a global leader is encouraging “retail tourism” at its high-end malls.

The report ties $3 billion in spending by out-of-town visitors at both local eateries and retail stores. And tourism supports one-third of all local food jobs and 8 percent of retail employment.<<

>>This math shows local tourism paying $1.1 billion in state and local taxes in 2016, which is deftly translated by the report as equating to $835 per Orange County household.<<

>>Orange County tourism bosses directly employ 128,700, according to the report, making the industry the county’s sixth-biggest employer.

In addition, employment due to tourism-related work — numbers that often can be debated within such impact reports — last year totaled 47,100 workers, largely at various business-services endeavors.

When the report combined those two sources of employment, it concluded overall tourism-related work equaled 8 percent of all Orange County jobs.<<

>>My trusty spreadsheet, using the study’s data, shows direct tourism jobs generated an average annual wage of $34,600 in 2016. Curiously, jobs simply tied to tourism by the report averaged $57,500 in pay.

Now, tourism work can be great for folks who need employment flexibility or who simply need a job. And, yes, those who love the trade can advance from entry-level jobs to good-paying supervisory or managerial work.

“This business has strong opportunities for people to grow,” says Ed Fuller, CEO of the Orange County Visitors Association who’s career in tourism started as a security guard.<<

And the full report can be found here.

http://www.visittheoc.com/articles/...-Generates-20-5B-Benefit-to-Local-Economy/64/

>>In addition to providing a strong foundation for Orange County business and employment sectors, the study also found that tourism plays an important role in supporting local, state and federal government through taxes and other fees. In 2016, tourism generated a total of $2.4B in tax revenues, including $690M for the State of California and $404M for local government through sales, lodging and other taxes and fees. These taxes provide important revenues to support public priorities, such as infrastructure, community development and public safety. <<

https://www.dropbox.com/s/prj1cq03jpa1vp0/2016 OCVA Annual Report.pdf?dl=0

 

[Darkbeer1]

http://www.anaheimblog.net/2018/01/02/morenos-2017-accomplishments-review/

>>“Ending corporate tax giveaway programs”

Moreno continues his dishonest description of city policies to attract 4-Diamond hotel development, which generate more tax revenue for the city in both the short-term and long-term and make Anaheim a more competitive convention and tourism destination. And he he overstates his role.

On December 21, 2016, the council did vote 7-0 to end the Hotel Incentive Program, which was open to any developer who built a 4-Diamond hotel in the city. A participating developer received economic assistance equal to 70% of the Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT) generated by their 4-Diamond hotel, for a period of 20 years.

The program was less than two years old when the council ended it. By that time, three 4-Diamond hotels projects had applied and been approved, and no additional projects were on the horizon.

This hasn’t prevented Moreno from beating this dead horse all year long as a “giveaway,” which it isn’t. The city doesn’t lose any current tax dollars, nor does it contribute financially to the development of the hotels. The rebate doesn’t kick in until the first guests pay their bills, and the 30% of TOT from a 4-Diamond meets or exceeds 100% of what a 3-Diamond hotel would generate in TOT.

But it’s an easy, effective lie that takes more time to rebut than to tell, so count on Moreno to continue blaming it for any failure to keep other campaign promises.

It’s also fair to ask if Moreno would still oppose these as “corporate tax giveaways” if the Hotel Incentive Program were modeled on what Santa Ana adopted last year: TOT rebates coupled with “labor peace agreements”: mandatory unionization for both hotel construction and operation. Santa Ana’s subsidy model was strongly supported by key Moreno allies UNITE-HERE Local 11 and OCCORD (Moreno was a long-time member of the OCCORD Board of Directors). Next time Moreno complains about the 4-Diamond hotel deals, someone should ask if he would support them if they included labor peace agreements.<<

Very good point, why are Santa Ana's TOT acceptable, but not Anaheim's?

Why are the citizens of Anaheim only voting on the Wincome TOT projects, and not Disney's?

>> Closer examination of Moreno’s accomplishment list reveals a highly-ideological councilman pursuing a political agenda more geared to advancing his ideology than meeting the bread-and-butter needs of constituents.<<

Would it be nice if Disney paid more? Of course, but then the stockholders, which in a large part, pension funds, would get paid less.

But it is clear, Disney does pay its fair share to the city of Anaheim, and also does a lot of good charity/volunteer/civic projects that they are not required to do.

 

[Darkbeer1]

http://www.anaheimblog.net/2018/01/18/team-tait-polling-in-anaheim-races/

>>
Respondents were asked if they had time to participate in a poll “about Anaheim politics.” They asked if they held a favorable or unfavorable view of declared and undeclared candidates for Anaheim mayor and city council; about candidates for the 39th Congressional district, 4th District Supervisor and District Attorney, as well as political figures such as former Anaheim Mayor Curt Pringle.

​

Team Tait has used the “giveaways” line of attack in every council election cycle since 2012, and if this poll is any guide, they intend to roll it out again this year. Respondents were asked if they would vote for a candidate who supported “giveaways” to hotel developers and “giveaways” to the Angels (noting that the team has not left the city).

​

The poll also tested whether hitting Disney would be a profitable line of attack: respondents were asked if they would vote for a candidate who was supported by Disney; if they felt that Disney “paid its fair share” and whether Disney had “too much power.”<<

Look at that, a political slogan just like the one the LA Times used...

 

[Darkbeer1]

Of course, to some in Anaheim, Disney could never do enough...

https://www.ocweekly.com/will-disneyland-become-the-happiest-homeless-shelter-on-earth/

>>
“Those who have signed the Care2 petition are asking Disneyland to step up and help its community, since it clearly has the means to do so,” says Rebecca Gerber, Care2’s senior director of Engagement, in an email. “Disney could make a real impact by providing shelter in one of its hotels, or donating money for shelter.”


Care2 points out the the Walt Disney Co. is a multi-billion dollar concern that, besides two theme parks and the Downtown Disney retail/restaurant/entertainment area, owns three hotels in Anaheim’s Disneyland Resort District, which is just around the corner from the doomed homeless camps.<<

I can't wait to see paying guests at the three DLR Hotels finding out who is sharing the hallways and pool area....

But in good News, Orange County got permission to clear out the Homeless Encampment next to Angel Stadium.

http://ktla.com/2018/02/20/judge-gi...-clearing-homeless-out-of-santa-ana-riverbed/

I love the response Federal Judge David Carter gives to one of the Homeless Activist Attorneys in the outdoor hearing.

I am impressed that the Orange County Board of Supervisors got the Federal Judge's approval to act. Something that San Francisco and Los Angeles needs to learn from.

And it looks like the top two replacement candidates for Mayor in Anaheim will not get Mayor's Tait support, and that Councilmember Moreno will not be the favorite in the fight for his seat.

 

[Ismael Flores]

I can't believe that someone would suggest putting homeless people in hotels packed with tourist. These are hotels that cost a few hundred dollars a night to stay in and are filled with families and children.
Lets also not forget that many of these homeless people that at times have mental health problems and others have issues with alcohol and drug abuse.
Some people really have no sense of reality.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

Not everyone who ends up on the street is an alcoholic or drug addict..?

PS I've been on the streets many times and it's always laughably uncomfortable when other people, who have usually lived a life of comfort, decide to put in their two cents when it comes to homelessness.

 

[Curious Constance]

Not everyone who ends up on the street is an alcoholic or drug addict..?

PS I've been on the streets many times and it's always laughably uncomfortable when other people, who have usually lived a life of comfort, decide to put in their two cents when it comes to homelessness.

Does everyone have to have mental issues or addiction problems that are homeless in order to bring up these issues/potential problems, or should we use available data and statistics to get an idea of how many homeless people likely have mental health or drug/alcohol addictions and take that into consideration?

Just because not everyone fits this scenario, doesn't mean that the average or a large percentage don't.

Even if 4 out of 10 homeless people were homeless due to mental or addiction problems, that's still 40% and a large number which should be taken into consideration when deciding how to construct possible solutions to the homeless problem.

 

[Ismael Flores]

Not everyone who ends up on the street is an alcoholic or drug addict..?

PS I've been on the streets many times and it's always laughably uncomfortable when other people, who have usually lived a life of comfort, decide to put in their two cents when it comes to homelessness.

That is why i said many, maybe should have said some but we have found otherwise.
I am involved at the moment with the homeless situation in riverside and yes not everyone has mental issues or have issues with substance abuse but a large majority are. Riverside is actually looking into whether it make sense or not to even consider housing for the homeless population before addressing the issue with mental instability and substance abuse. a couple groups actually found that a large percentage of homeless people in riverside county have even refused help and prefer to live on the streets. Interesting thing was that they found that several of them actually were not homeless or in need of money but because of mental illness preferred the life on the streets and made a profitable income while doing it.

sadly The homeless population is getting worse with a larger percentage of younger people now roaming the streets, in Riverside there is a growing concern because many groups have started creating encampments along the protected wildlife sanctuary along the Santa Ana river. Along with that is the issue that breeding grounds for many animals are being destroyed because of fires started by homeless people and the disregard for polluting.

Last meeting several of us were surprised to hear someone actually use the this is "A free country" card to approve of homeless camps using the river area as a dumping ground and taking over the bike routes and blocking pathways and insisting the people give them charity to pass.

Work needs to be done to help people in need but suggesting that Hotel owners take the responsibility just because they are huge corporations is not an answer. All these people are doing is moving a problem from one side to another without fixing the root of the cause of which some are mental health issues and substance abuse

 

[Curious Constance]

I think when people devise possible solutions to the homeless problem, they have an image of a mom clutching several small children to her side who just need some help getting back on their feet. And while this definitely exists, and there definitely should be assistance for these people in this situation, I think reality is overwhelmingly an entirely different situation.

Denying that a large portion of people are homeless due to mental health or addiction problems doesn't make it not true, and putting these people in a hotel will do absolutely NOTHING to assist them and potentially put a lot of others in danger.

Sometimes I feel like the world has gone mad, and no one can see reality anymore. But instead will claim that I feel and think this way because I hate homeless people.

 

[Darkbeer1]

A couple of good editorials in regards to the Anaheim Homeless issue.

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/02/14/faux-compassion-is-only-worsening-homeless-crisis/

>>
For years California voters have been nothing but compassionate towards the state’s homeless population, repeatedly voting to tax ourselves to provide more resources for affordable housing, mental health services, public transportation and addiction treatment facilities. In return, we’ve lost control of park space, rivers, public transit systems, downtown commercial hubs, and even residential neighborhoods. It seems today like we have somehow traded the California paradise we remember for something more akin to a zombie apocalypse movie.

And the problems we’ve been trying to solve are only getting worse.

Politicians, advocates for the homeless and the courts have to understand that compassion is a two-way street. Their institutional lack of empathy, care or concern for the residents who are forced to suffer the consequences, as well as pay the bills, for their failed programs is beyond appalling.<<

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/02/...ion-for-the-homeless-here-are-real-solutions/

>>
Finally, I would repeal the Lanterman-Petris-Short Act of 1967, which, in effect, ended all involuntary hospital commitments by the judicial system. We clearly, desperately need places where those incapable or unwilling to care for themselves can be sent, whether they like it or not.

I’m certainly no fan of taxes, but we’ve reached beyond the point of insanity on this issue. I’m more than willing to raise my own taxes if it means we can commit the mentally ill, incarcerate lawbreakers, give the willing the help they want and rescue our neighborhoods from squalor and misery.

But we must be honest; simply throwing more and more money at new homeless housing and services will accomplish nothing. We must address the public policy failures at the root of this disaster to prevent more waste, and more homeless, in our streets.<<

 

[Phroobar]

Bring back the sanitariums? As long as they don't torture the patients like they use to.

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

It seems today like we have somehow traded the California paradise we remember for something more akin to a zombie apocalypse movie.

You call that a good editorial?

 

[Ismael Flores]

A couple of good editorials in regards to the Anaheim Homeless issue.

https://www.ocregister.com/2018/02/14/faux-compassion-is-only-worsening-homeless-crisis/

>>
For years California voters have been nothing but compassionate towards the state’s homeless population, repeatedly voting to tax ourselves to provide more resources for affordable housing, mental health services, public transportation and addiction treatment facilities. In return, we’ve lost control of park space, rivers, public transit systems, downtown commercial hubs, and even residential neighborhoods. It seems today like we have somehow traded the California paradise we remember for something more akin to a zombie apocalypse movie.

And the problems we’ve been trying to solve are only getting worse.

Politicians, advocates for the homeless and the courts have to understand that compassion is a two-way street. Their institutional lack of empathy, care or concern for the residents who are forced to suffer the consequences, as well as pay the bills, for their failed programs is beyond appalling.<<

interesting editorial because this is the issue Riverside is having.

park space and rivers have been lost for use by most residents because of the ever growing homeless population taking over and creating and insecurity to families with children and just this past year the Greyhound transportation hub closed after 70 years because of the huge complains of the area being used as a rest area for the homeless and drug trafficking. the station starting declining and even stopped paying the $1.00 yearly lease for the land and eventually the city force them out.
greyhound decided to relocate in several neighboring cities and every location was shut down because no one wanted the migration of homeless people to move along with the station.
Now people that need to use greyhound have to find a way of transportation to get them to the San Bernardino hub.

A new issue is now starting to hit neighborhoods related to the homeless issue and it will be interesting how that is handled. the night before trash day, homeless people are going around and dumping out the recycle bins and trash bins into the streets in order to collect plastic bottles that can be turned in for cash. I'm glad that they are recycling but which they would no just leave the trash in streets to get spread around the neighborhood by the usual winds in riverside areas.

 

[Curious Constance]

interesting editorial because this is the issue Riverside is having.

park space and rivers have been lost for use by most residents because of the ever growing homeless population taking over and creating and insecurity to families with children and just this past year the Greyhound transportation hub closed after 70 years because of the huge complains of the area being used as a rest area for the homeless and drug trafficking. the station starting declining and even stopped paying the $1.00 yearly lease for the land and eventually the city force them out.
greyhound decided to relocate in several neighboring cities and every location was shut down because no one wanted the migration of homeless people to move along with the station.
Now people that need to use greyhound have to find a way of transportation to get them to the San Bernardino hub.

A new issue is now starting to hit neighborhoods related to the homeless issue and it will be interesting how that is handled. the night before trash day, homeless people are going around and dumping out the recycle bins and trash bins into the streets in order to collect plastic bottles that can be turned in for cash. I'm glad that they are recycling but which they would no just leave the trash in streets to get spread around the neighborhood by the usual winds in riverside areas.

Also something I've noticed is parking decades old campers on neighborhood streets until the cops make them move to another location.

 

[Darkbeer1]

A new issue is now starting to hit neighborhoods related to the homeless issue and it will be interesting how that is handled. the night before trash day, homeless people are going around and dumping out the recycle bins and trash bins into the streets in order to collect plastic bottles that can be turned in for cash. I'm glad that they are recycling but which they would no just leave the trash in streets to get spread around the neighborhood by the usual winds in riverside areas.

We have that problem throughout Anaheim, along with folks going through neighborhoods looking for unlocked cars, garage doors open, packages on the porch, etc.

Also, there is a racket where folks buy run down RV's and rent them out to the homeless or near homeless.

Solutions seem to add security motion lighting, video cameras like the Ring Doorbell, better communication with neighbors, walking at night more often, etc. Calling the police, well, they do suggest you report it online at the app.

And due to the way our city borders are drawn, we are having street racing issues, including some whose finish line is near the west side of the DLR (Cerritos and Walnut).

 

[Darkbeer1]

https://patch.com/california/lakefo...-dumped-santa-ana-riverbed-supervisor-do-says

>>
"This is an issue near and dear to my heart in terms of trying to help people," Do said. "We have people trying to migrate into this area to take advantage of the offer of help and we actually have concrete incidents where some advocates are transporting people from other areas and are dumping them into the riverbed."

Do alleged that one homeless advocate brought two transients to the riverbed on Tuesday. Both were wheelchair-dependent and one "recently had a stroke," Do said. "And then the advocate gleefully looked at (county homeless czar) Susan Rice and said, 'What are you going to do now, Susan?"'

"What (homeless advocates have) done by bringing people with disabilities to the riverbed is not only make our lives difficult, but they put their clients at risk," Do said. "You don't drop people like that out in the hope they get services. To me, that's completely irresponsible."<<

>>
In some cases, transients have been offered shelter and refuse it and leave the riverbed, Do said.

"They turn and run off because they're there for a 30-day stay at a motel."<<

By the way, there was a strong movement by the Anaheim Business folks (including Disney) to build a shelter, but ran into a major snag with some Homeless Advocates, that didn't want it....

 

[George Lucas on a Bench]

It doesn't read to me like the issue is the homeless. It's law enforcement.