LA Times: Is Disney Paying Its Fair Share In Anaheim

[Disney Irish]

Remember earlier when I said people were giving Disney a pass? Well here it is. Again.

That is not giving Disney a pass, I would hope you understood that. That is saying that Disney is not the only one, I don't know how that is giving Disney a pass. If I said that Disney has done so much good for the community and is doing their best, that is giving Disney a pass, which I never said. But I'm saying that Disney is just like all the other companies, but should do better. I've already stated now numerous times in this thread that Disney could and should pay their CMs more. I personally just don't believe its going to make a difference in the larger scheme of things. Its not going to change the overall issues in Orange County, which you already admitted. And its not going to change the overall issues across the nation, which again you've already admitted. And in my opinion its only going to change these CMs lives temporarily until the market catches up, which will be real quick. And then we are back in the same boat with the same argument.

While I know this is a Disney focused board, which is why you are singling out Disney, me personally I'd rather tackle and solve the underlying issue which Disney can and should be part of solving.

 

[flynnibus]

Remember earlier when I said people were giving Disney a pass? Well here it is. Again.

No, it's called correcting a incorrect coloration. Disney isn't doing this because it's Disney or the topic... It's a common trait of most industry to prefer freedom from government interference in their ability to make their decisions.

It's not giving Disney a pass - it's actually keeping people from drawing inaccurate inferences.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Meanwhile, in Seattle...

http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/14/news/economy/seattle-business-head-tax-amazon/index.html

A controversial proposal that will tax big businesses in Seattle to alleviate the city's homelessness and affordable housing problems was approved Monday.

The newly passed ordinance, which takes effect in January 2019, will impose a "head tax" on the city's highest grossing businesses. The tax will amount to $275 a year per full-time employee in Seattle. It would raise an estimated $44.7 million a year and expire after five years, according to the Council.

Roughly 60% of the revenue raised would go to building affordable housing, and 40% will be put toward emergency services for the homeless, Councilmember Lorena González said in the Council's public meeting Monday.

In recent years the city has experienced an economic boom, but in tandem with that also an acute affordable housing and homelessness problem.

"People are dying on the doorsteps of prosperity," Councilmember Teresa Mosqueda said in the meeting.

According to the article Amazon, Seattle's largest employer, was not pleased. Hmm.... sounds familiar.

 

[Phroobar]

$44.7 million per year doesn't sound like much. How much housing can $26 million get in Seattle? I would instead put a good amount towards food and emergency services myself. I guess if they get more housing it would be out of sight and out of mind.

 

[Disney Irish]

Meanwhile, in Seattle...

http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/14/news/economy/seattle-business-head-tax-amazon/index.html

A controversial proposal that will tax big businesses in Seattle to alleviate the city's homelessness and affordable housing problems was approved Monday.

The newly passed ordinance, which takes effect in January 2019, will impose a "head tax" on the city's highest grossing businesses. The tax will amount to $275 a year per full-time employee in Seattle. It would raise an estimated $44.7 million a year and expire after five years, according to the Council.

Roughly 60% of the revenue raised would go to building affordable housing, and 40% will be put toward emergency services for the homeless, Councilmember Lorena González said in the Council's public meeting Monday.

In recent years the city has experienced an economic boom, but in tandem with that also an acute affordable housing and homelessness problem.

"People are dying on the doorsteps of prosperity," Councilmember Teresa Mosqueda said in the meeting.

According to the article Amazon, Seattle's largest employer, was not pleased. Hmm.... sounds familiar.

There is a difference, and this is a proposal I can actually get behind.

Seattle is trying to tackle the actual issue by using the money to combat the homeless and affordable housing issue. Its goes across the entire city not just singling out a single company. So the burden is shared by all businesses across the entire city not just a single company. And of course Amazon is not pleased, I'm sure no business being affected is pleased, but the proposal doesn't single out Amazon. If it did, I'd be against it.

Whereas with the "law" proposed in Anaheim, it does nothing to combat the real issues. And it affects only the Resort District, basically singling out Disney, and doesn't raise the minimum wage in the rest of Anaheim.

If the Anaheim City Council wanted to put forth a similar proposal as Seattle. Where they taxed all businesses in Anaheim the same across the board and used that money to tackle the homeless and affordable housing issues, I'd be all for it.

 

[21stamps]

Meanwhile, in Seattle...

http://money.cnn.com/2018/05/14/news/economy/seattle-business-head-tax-amazon/index.html

A controversial proposal that will tax big businesses in Seattle to alleviate the city's homelessness and affordable housing problems was approved Monday.

The newly passed ordinance, which takes effect in January 2019, will impose a "head tax" on the city's highest grossing businesses. The tax will amount to $275 a year per full-time employee in Seattle. It would raise an estimated $44.7 million a year and expire after five years, according to the Council.

Roughly 60% of the revenue raised would go to building affordable housing, and 40% will be put toward emergency services for the homeless, Councilmember Lorena González said in the Council's public meeting Monday.

In recent years the city has experienced an economic boom, but in tandem with that also an acute affordable housing and homelessness problem.

"People are dying on the doorsteps of prosperity," Councilmember Teresa Mosqueda said in the meeting.

According to the article Amazon, Seattle's largest employer, was not pleased. Hmm.... sounds familiar.

Every time I read or see this.. all I can think is-

How did we get to a place where we are imposing a tax on JOBS????

It’s so backwards that I can’t even begin to understand it.

 

[DanielBB8]

Every time I read or see this.. all I can think is-

How did we get to a place where we are imposing a tax on JOBS????

It’s so backwards that I can’t even begin to understand it.

You never heard of the payroll tax or Social Security? Those are a tax on jobs. Income tax is a tax on your earnings for working. Everything is tax upon tax. Then you wonder why your paycheck is so little.

 

[21stamps]

You never heard of the payroll tax or Social Security? Those are a tax on jobs. Income tax is a tax on your earnings for working. Everything is tax upon tax. Then you wonder why your paycheck is so little.

Yes, all of that exists.. and now on top of it we’re taxing a certain subset of businesses for nothing more than hiring employees. I’m not a fan... I don’t like the message it sends, and I don’t like what it could lead to. I do hope that it stays contained to places like Seattle.
The only positive is that the original plan did not make it thru.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

How did we get to a place where we are imposing a tax on JOBS????

Maybe you should be asking how did we get to a point where businesses like Disney resist paying workers salaries that kept up with inflation.

 

[MoonRakerSCM]

Get back to me in a couple years with the percentage of that homeless tax that actually GOES toward helping the homeless.

 

[Darkbeer1]

OK, I have a new short term NDA, so not going to make too many personal comments, but let me share this public comment from the city Finance Director.

http://www.anaheimblog.net/2018/05/15/14614/

>>
Last Tuesday, city Finance Director Debbie Moreno gave a budget workshop for the Anaheim City Council. It was an overview of city finances and administration. While the $18 minimum wage initiative sponsored by Anaheim Resort unions wasn’t formally on the agenda, it was clear from the numbers that Anaheim city revenues and services will be negatively impacted if it passes.


Moreno reviewed the sources of general fund revenue and where the money goes. The big three tax revenue sources are Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), sales and use tax and property tax. TOT makes up 39% of general fund revenues, compared to 21% for sales tax and 18% for property tax.


TOT is also the only revenue sources that is both growing robustly and is expected to to continue doing so. TOT revenue grew from $82.6 million in Fiscal Year 2010/11 to $150.3 million in FY 2016/17 – nearly doubling in six years. TOT revenue is projected to hit $195.9 million in FY 2022/23.


By contrast, city revenues from sales and use tax and property tax are relatively flat. Sales tax revenue was $85 million in FY 2010/11 and is projected to be $99.2 million in FY 2022/23. Property tax revenue growth is similarly lethargic.


The online retail revolution will continue to eat away at city sales tax revenue. Cities that bet big on retail-oriented development are going to find themselves in painful financial straits. TOT revenue is largely immune from that trend: you have to physically leave your home and check into a hotel.


Moreno made some other critical points during her presentation. First, she said city “revenues continue to grow but are barely able to keep pace with PERS increases.” She said those increases range from $1.1 million in FY 2018/19 to nearly $12 million in FF 2022/23.


Secondly, factored into those projected revenues are the approved and currently planned 4-Diamond hotels.


79% of general fund revenues go to city services.


Moreno noted that “if any of our assumptions on hotel development don’t materialize, we may need to make adjustments in future years.” Translation, revenues will take a hit of the planned 4-Diamond hotels are cancelled.


Keep in mind the developers of those projects have made it clear they will not proceed with their 4-Diamond hotel projects if the $18 minimum wage initiative passes. If that happens, Anaheim would end up losing millions in future TOT revenues, according the to city’s forecast.<<

 

[Disney Irish]

OK, I have a new short term NDA, so not going to make too many personal comments, but let me share this public comment from the city Finance Director.

http://www.anaheimblog.net/2018/05/15/14614/

>>
Last Tuesday, city Finance Director Debbie Moreno gave a budget workshop for the Anaheim City Council. It was an overview of city finances and administration. While the $18 minimum wage initiative sponsored by Anaheim Resort unions wasn’t formally on the agenda, it was clear from the numbers that Anaheim city revenues and services will be negatively impacted if it passes.


Moreno reviewed the sources of general fund revenue and where the money goes. The big three tax revenue sources are Transient Occupancy Tax (TOT), sales and use tax and property tax. TOT makes up 39% of general fund revenues, compared to 21% for sales tax and 18% for property tax.


TOT is also the only revenue sources that is both growing robustly and is expected to to continue doing so. TOT revenue grew from $82.6 million in Fiscal Year 2010/11 to $150.3 million in FY 2016/17 – nearly doubling in six years. TOT revenue is projected to hit $195.9 million in FY 2022/23.


By contrast, city revenues from sales and use tax and property tax are relatively flat. Sales tax revenue was $85 million in FY 2010/11 and is projected to be $99.2 million in FY 2022/23. Property tax revenue growth is similarly lethargic.


The online retail revolution will continue to eat away at city sales tax revenue. Cities that bet big on retail-oriented development are going to find themselves in painful financial straits. TOT revenue is largely immune from that trend: you have to physically leave your home and check into a hotel.


Moreno made some other critical points during her presentation. First, she said city “revenues continue to grow but are barely able to keep pace with PERS increases.” She said those increases range from $1.1 million in FY 2018/19 to nearly $12 million in FF 2022/23.


Secondly, factored into those projected revenues are the approved and currently planned 4-Diamond hotels.


79% of general fund revenues go to city services.


Moreno noted that “if any of our assumptions on hotel development don’t materialize, we may need to make adjustments in future years.” Translation, revenues will take a hit of the planned 4-Diamond hotels are cancelled.


Keep in mind the developers of those projects have made it clear they will not proceed with their 4-Diamond hotel projects if the $18 minimum wage initiative passes. If that happens, Anaheim would end up losing millions in future TOT revenues, according the to city’s forecast.<<

In other words, Anaheim is in major trouble if the hotel projects don't materialize directly as a result of the passage of the Resort District Minimum Wage law.

 

[Old Mouseketeer]

In other words, Anaheim is in major trouble if the hotel projects don't materialize directly as a result of the passage of the Resort District Minimum Wage law.

Anaheim is in major trouble because they've been giving away the milk for free for years. Disney is like an abusive spouse. They have beat the city into submission. There was no need to place a moratorium on a gate tax. If Disney didn't reinvest in the resort, they would suffer more than the city or local businesses.

Essentially the argument is that Anaheim businesses can't pay a living wage and remain profitable. Well, if that's the case, they deserve to fail. Propping up your business by having the government subsidize your employees through public assistance is NOT a free market--it's corporate welfare. Face it--Disney is the biggest welfare queen in the state!

 

[Disney Irish]

Anaheim is in major trouble because they've been giving away the milk for free for years. Disney is like an abusive spouse. They have beat the city into submission. There was no need to place a moratorium on a gate tax. If Disney didn't reinvest in the resort, they would suffer more than the city or local businesses.

Essentially the argument is that Anaheim businesses can't pay a living wage and remain profitable. Well, if that's the case, they deserve to fail. Propping up your business by having the government subsidize your employees through public assistance is NOT a free market--it's corporate welfare. Face it--Disney is the biggest welfare queen in the state!

You'll get no argument from me about corporate welfare. I understand why it was done, but don't agree with it. However that ship has sailed already. No use crying over that spilled milk now.

The issue now is what this new initiative that is aimed at just the Resort District will do to the rest of Anaheim. For a city that relies heavily for majority of their tax revenue from the TOT, pushing something that will directly hit and affect future revenues is foolish.

 

[sirstude]

Just a point of view from an Old Guy. When I was a minimum wage worker, it was never planned to be a "Living Wage" and was not, at $1.35 an hour, (that is 8.32 an hour now, by the calculator I used). We planned on moving on to a better job and better pay. I realize that Disney has a lot of minimum wage positions, but again when I went to Disneyland for the first time (1973) those positions were mostly staffed by kids. I realize that the entire business world seems to have more long term minimum wage type positions but not sure what the answer is for that. I have never worked at Disney so can't say what the requirements for many of the jobs are, but up here in Montana, $15.00 and hour is pretty good pay for a college educated technical (computer support) person. The starting pay range at the "State of Montana" and at a couple of the Hospitals is about 19-21k a year, and that is for a 4 year degree. In my opinion, California has a distorted view because of the insanely high property values. Probably mostly a bit of rambling on my part, but I hope food for thought.

 

[Old Mouseketeer]

Just a point of view from an Old Guy. When I was a minimum wage worker, it was never planned to be a "Living Wage" and was not, at $1.35 an hour, (that is 8.32 an hour now, by the calculator I used). We planned on moving on to a better job and better pay. I realize that Disney has a lot of minimum wage positions, but again when I went to Disneyland for the first time (1973) those positions were mostly staffed by kids. I realize that the entire business world seems to have more long term minimum wage type positions but not sure what the answer is for that. I have never worked at Disney so can't say what the requirements for many of the jobs are, but up here in Montana, $15.00 and hour is pretty good pay for a college educated technical (computer support) person. The starting pay range at the "State of Montana" and at a couple of the Hospitals is about 19-21k a year, and that is for a 4 year degree. In my opinion, California has a distorted view because of the insanely high property values. Probably mostly a bit of rambling on my part, but I hope food for thought.

The part you are missing is that Disney was historically ABOVE minimum wage with increases due to longevity. The union contracts recognized the value of experienced workers who would be a backbone of front-line workers. Disney's culture no longer values experience or expertise above the corporate-mandated level of "just good enough". This is different from Walt. Today Disney says they want workers to "make magic" and take initiative with guests, but they don't want to pay for it.

Let me state this again: Since the 1980s Disney (like much of corporate America) has artificially depressed wages. Disney workers' pay has dramatically declined in adjusted dollars. I'm an old guy, too, and I've seen this change.

 

[October82]

When I was a minimum wage worker, it was never planned to be a "Living Wage" and was not, at $1.35 an hour, (that is 8.32 an hour now, by the calculator I used).

The minimum wage has fluctuated in its relation to the poverty level, but has typically been at or near that level. Although the poverty level has been treated by policy makers as a "living wage", it is worth noting that economists generally think that the living wage is higher than the usual definition of the poverty level. Although I don't think anyone intends to work at minimum wage throughout their careers, that doesn't mean that those who do work in these positions should be stuck in poverty.

I have never worked at Disney so can't say what the requirements for many of the jobs are, but up here in Montana, $15.00 and hour is pretty good pay for a college educated technical (computer support) person. The starting pay range at the "State of Montana" and at a couple of the Hospitals is about 19-21k a year, and that is for a 4 year degree

This reflects the fact that these individuals are underpaid, not that others (say Disneyland resort workers, but this applies to many industries) should not see wage increases. The better debate to be having is about how we can ensure that people receive the pay that they're worth - especially highly skilled individuals.

 

[Deleted member 107043]

Let me state this again: Since the 1980s Disney (like much of corporate America) has artificially depressed wages. Disney workers' pay has dramatically declined in adjusted dollars. I'm an old guy, too, and I've seen this change.

Exactly. And the situation has been exacerbated by the skyrocketing cost of living in Orange County. Meanwhile Disney's theme park revenues have shot through the roof.

Although society may evolve and shift a company's core values should stay constant. Disneyland was once known as a business that made paying decent wages a priority because it valued its cast members and the experience they provided to guests. To me that should always be the goal as long as the resort is able to do so financially. Disneyland also used to be considered a leader in people resource management, and now I sometimes find myself cringing when I hear or read some of the callus statements coming from Disney spokespeople today on this subject.

 

[flynnibus]

Disneyland was once known as a business that made paying decent wages a priority because it valued its cast members and the experience they provided to guests

When was that? Disneyland has never been known as a high paying place in my knowledge. Disney was admired as having quality employees, great perks, and a place people loved to work at. That came from CULTURE and approach - not wages.

 

[Phroobar]

When was that? Disneyland has never been known as a high paying place in my knowledge. Disney was admired as having quality employees, great perks, and a place people loved to work at. That came from CULTURE and approach - not wages.

I think higher paying wages stopped about the time Eisner came in. They raised park prices and got rid of the ticket system. Disneyland was not profitable since Walt died. They never even raised the price of parking until the 80s. Disneyland (Disney in general) was bleeding money back then.