News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[Chip Chipperson]

Many of us, of every political leaning, have opinions when the USA sends foreign aid to a country that turns around and trashes the U.S.

It would be no problem for Disney company to battle Florida over Taxing, Zoning, and a whole host of other business related issues. The problem comes in when a small group of company leaders living in an echo chamber in a 10 sq mile area of California wages war on an already passed State Social issue in Florida.
somebody has to take a stand somewhere, profitable or not, against the tyrannical minority.

So just to be clear, you're argument is that of the following choices:

1. Individuals or businesses voicing their opinions
2. Government punishing those who voice their opinions

that #1 is the one that's tyranny?

 

[Stang95svtcobra]

So much for "low taxes" in Florida.

Disney pays taxes to themselves. Orange/ Osceola would get them.

 

[peter11435]

That's correct. Corporations are also expected to make decisions in the best interests of their shareholders. This is why, generally, when a corporation engages in political speech, it's related to an issue that directly impacts their company and you don't see this kind of uproar.

Here, Disney is choosing to take a political side on an issue that doesn't directly impact their company and it's having a negative impact to their business. If the elimination of the RCID were good for Disney, they'd have done it themselves years ago. There's no reason for Disney to be involved other than having individuals in the company who think it would be a good thing if Disney used its power to support their political leanings. Like I said in my original post, that is a BAD precedent to set.

Having the right to engage in political speech doesn't mean that you should in every instance.

Anyone supporting a corporation like Disney wading into politics like this should ask themselves if this is something that they actually support in principle, or if they just support it here because it aligns with their views. My guess is it's the latter for most people.

What you have said is why shareholders/investors can and should hold a company accountable for their actions. but it does not Justify the government in violating the first amendment

 

[peter11435]

Disney pays taxes to themselves. Orange/ Osceola would get them.

Incorrect.

Disney pays taxes to the Reedy Creek improvement district and orange/Osceola counties. Disney will continue to pay taxes to Orange/Osceola Counties. Counties don’t get to just collect the tax formerly collected by RCID

 

[Lilofan]

The ones supporting this probably don’t care or live in affected Orange and Osceola counties with the residents going to deal the eventual increase in property taxes because of the signage of the bill.

 

[DLR92]

DL is not in a better position than WDW as Anaheim became a hostile environment to DL about a decade ago. Despite all the recent turmoil around WDW the business situation for WDW is better than DL. The migration of company assets from DL to WDW will continue.

I’m convinced Disney will be now shopping elsewhere to move their assets away from
FL.

 

[BoardroomBrad]

Expect an official statement somewhere past 4PM EST. They’re waiting for the early financial reactions.

 

[SteveBrickNJ]

I am about to post a photo I took from a Reuters "News" article. Then I will quote myself and comment further.

 

[Gringrinngghost]

Disney government dissolution bill signed by DeSantis

Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has signed a bill dissolving Walt Disney World’s private government, after the entertainment giant criticized a measure that critics have dubbed the “Don’t Say Gay” law.

apnews.com

 

[Stang95svtcobra]

Orange and Osceola counties would have to purchase fire equipment, fire houses, road equipment...from Disney, contract with Disney to supply services or buy and build the stuff on their own.

As of yesterday both the Florida House and Senate passed the bill dissolving Reedy Creek Governor is ready to sign it as soon as it comes across his desk

 

[lazyboy97o]

I don't know about that. They send you to shoot you much more carefully than you state. I would be genuinely understand the delivery You are talking about.
I have seen that is when one state representative said that Disney kicked a hornets nest, but that this has been something that has been brought up many times, The elimination of the reedy Creek improvement district.

Prior to this it wasn't politically advantageous to do so, but now opens the door to finally make that move. I get what that can be but it's not a clear and succinct determination that Disney is being "punished".

I agree that it is, however, I believe the politicians are smarter than just coming out and actually saying that. We're dealing with semantics here but that's what politics is all about. Everybody absolutely knows that this is about punishing Disney, but they're not going to actually say those words.

The motives have been stated very plainly, even in the session. This isn’t a matter of here-say or interpreting actions.

 

[Naplesgolfer]

I’m convinced Disney will be now shopping elsewhere to move their assets away from
FL.

If you mean theme parks, you're totally wrong. Never happen.

 

[Disney Analyst]

This. The unbelievable amount of corporate love in this thread is frightening.

Just to clarify your position.

Should a corporation, any corporation, have no say or role in politics? No opinion permitted?

Are you in favour of removing corporate lobbying, and corporate donations to politicians? Ending the stronghold of the NRA? Health Insurance Companies?

Or are you only saying this because Disney took a socially liberal position...

 

[castlecake2.0]

Disney pays taxes to themselves. Orange/ Osceola would get them.

Have you read anything?

 

[networkpro]

I’m convinced Disney will be now shopping elsewhere to move their assets away from
FL.

Just as they were busily moving operations out of CA due to taxes and politics.

 

[SteveBrickNJ]

I am about to post a photo I took from a Reuters "News" article. Then I will quote myself and comment further.View attachment 634810

This "news" article states as if it is a "fact" that Gov. DeSantis is retaliating. Does Reuters or the media have a quote from the Governor that he is RETALIATING? In the good old days "reporters" would use words to qualify something...words like "allegedly" or "seemingly". Yet Reuters is supposed to be neutral...like The Associated Press....is that true? Shouldn't they report down the middle and not just openly lean left?

 

[Squishy]

Meanwhile:

 

[lazyboy97o]

That's correct. Corporations are also expected to make decisions in the best interests of their shareholders. This is why, generally, when a corporation engages in political speech, it's related to an issue that directly impacts their company and you don't see this kind of uproar.

Here, Disney is choosing to take a political side on an issue that doesn't directly impact their company and it's having a negative impact to their business. If the elimination of the RCID were good for Disney, they'd have done it themselves years ago. There's no reason for Disney to be involved other than having individuals in the company who think it would be a good thing if Disney used its power to support their political leanings. Like I said in my original post, that is a BAD precedent to set.

Having the right to engage in political speech doesn't mean that you should in every instance.

Anyone supporting a corporation like Disney wading into politics like this should ask themselves if this is something that they actually support in principle, or if they just support it here because it aligns with their views. My guess is it's the latter for most people.

I believe freedom of speech is a fundamental human right. Not a constitutional right merely granted by the First Amendment, an inalienable right of all people regardless of where they live. People should be free to express themselves, to organize themselves and make similar expressions. I find the idea of using government to attack political opponents abhorrent.

I have also been very consistent regarding the District. I have long provided detailed explanation of unique aspects of how it operates, particularly in regards to building and development. I am more than willing to have a good faith discussion on the specifics of the District and how it’s powers effects the counties. I even recommended people read a book highly critical of the District.

 

[flynnibus]

Expect an official statement somewhere past 4PM EST. They’re waiting for the early financial reactions.

Meh - expect "we don't think this has merit and the involved parties will pursue the appropriate legal actions" statement at best.

 

[GoofGoof]

Disney went out of its way to involve itself in a political issue that didn't directly impact its business and attempted to use its power and influence to pressure the politicians who passed it.

The politicians are now using their power and influence to strip Disney of a special privilege that it held because it acted (in this case) as a purely political entity and not a neutral corporation.

I think both actions have some pretty dire consequences if they set a precedent, but so does letting the first one stand without any reaction. It's bad enough that corporations have massive political influence over areas that impact their business. This country doesn't need corporations flexing their power on issues just to support the political priors of their leadership... THAT should worry everyone, regardless of where your politics lie.

My hope is that this interaction causes corporations and politicians alike to think twice and avoid issues like this in the future... because apparently they weren't smart enough to use common sense and avoid it in the present. This is bad for business.

Chapek absolutely (and unnecessarily) stepped in it here and he 100% deserves what comes next.

Politicians using their political power to attack a person or entity who has an opposing view is inherently wrong in a democracy. Their power only exists because the people elected them. Their job is to serve. If the government leaders believe they are passing a bill that is in the best interest of their constituents then they should stand by it and not worry about what a person or corporation says about it. Disney has no power to overturn the bill or stop the government and anyone who is paying attention knows that’s not what this is about. In Russia if you speak out against Putin the government comes after you and silences you. Is that what we want for the United States? It frightens me that people are so quick to sign up for and support this type of action because they happen to fall on one side of an issue. Remember that the next time the government may come for you or your business because you dared to speak out against something they did. This is the government of the state of FL and not a Facebook group argument. It has nothing to do with Chapek “getting what he deserves”. We’re better than that as a people and a country.