LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
But if we all agree on that point, what exactly are people criticising Disney for?
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District
- Thread starter castlecake2.0
- Start date
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Yes for sure. One of the arguments the state may try to make is the legislature passed the bill and not DeSantis. Technically true but where that argument gets flimsy is that he asked for and got a special session called to approve the original bill. It can’t be legislative business as usual and a special session. If the state uses this argument they may say that the Governor’s speech and will is not in question but the legislature still acted in good faith. You don’t have each member who voted yes for the bill writing a book and bragging about it. If there is evidence of the Governor’s team calling or texting or e-mailing members of the legislature and discussion of the real motive for the bill that’s good evidence to introduce. We know from reporting the Governor doesn’t take calls from anyone (even big donors) so it’s likely the communication would be between a staffer and the members of the legislature. That could come out from discovery.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
That is interesting if true. (no saying its not, I just don't know). Disney paid MORE taxes with RCID. Interesting.
What about the RCID bonds? that didn't help TWDC?
I am just asking. I have no idea.
DeSantis is stupider than I thought.
Is his staff stupid too?
Actually, the knee jerk reaction of dissolving RCID left no time for real thought or evaluation by anyone in his circle, I guess.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
There was nothing secret about it.
A passed bill that changes the legal structure is by definition not just for show. A just for show bill is one proclaiming something like "today is state neener neener day".
Impacting, or even the threat to impact operations is what creates the control.
The board in their statements and actions so far has shown that they clearly want to use that threat as leverage to control Disney content. They have specifically said they have a problem with some Disney content and that the company should adjust and stop producing that content.
That the board hasn't found an impact where the mere threat is enough leverage is only because of the moves Disney has made to head them off. The board so far has shown they are likely to keep escalating items and possible threats until they find one that gives them that control. If that requires actual impacts to operations instead of just a threat is yet to be seen.
In a contest to see who blinks first, the Board by stopping escalation or Disney by adjusting content. My bet is neither. Either Disney has the board removed or the board escalates until actual operations impacts occur. It's possible a directive for operations impact occurs and the person who has to actually do it balks. I think their plan is to put a political appointee in that position instead of a career RCID employee to avoid that outcome.
Brian
Well-Known Member
I can't speak for others, but I have criticized Disney's statement against the parental rights legislation. Just because Disney has the right to speak without fear of retaliation doesn't mean they should.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
For speaking out against the original bill. It’s Not saying they couldn’t do it just that people don’t think they should have because they agree with the bill.
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
This comes across as victim blaming, which is why you’re continually met with what you characterise as a bad-faith retort.
Here's the screenshot I posted yesterday of Disney's property tax bill for 2022 JUST for the Magic Kingdom. Not the parking lot, not the TTC - JUST the park.
The relevant parts: They pay to Orange County, Orange County Schools, plus to RCID and RCID's debt service separately.
Anyway, RCID's bonds helped Disney acquire financing at below market rates - that's it. Which realistically they could do without, since Disney wouldn't have issue getting loans if needed from private lenders.
JusticeDisney
Well-Known Member
I didn't say they couldn't. What I did say is that, as of right now, they cannot do a single thing in contravention of the recent agreement.
Figgy1
Well-Known Member
You and everybody who feels that way has the option of not spending any money with Disney entities
LittleBuford
Well-Known Member
I get that, but I don’t understand how someone can simultaneously criticise Disney for speaking out and acknowledge that DeSantis’s reaction is unacceptable. Those seem like mutually exclusive positions to me.
WDW paid $1.1 Billion in local and state taxes in 2022.
On top of that, they then paid hundreds of millions to RCID for the infrastructure on their property which they own with almost no help from the county and state to whom they paid $1.1 Billion in local and state taxes in 2022.
Is that how you define "sweet deal"?
So sweet it's rotting my teeth and giving me diabetes.
Brian
Well-Known Member
Of course. Heck, I did one better: I left Disney after several decades of service and a cushy, well-paying job in middle management primarily because I was unhappy with their politics (along with a couple other secondary reasons).
They're not mutually exclusive because one can disagree with government retaliation while also holding the position that Disney made a PR misstep.
Victim blaming is free speech.
You're right. Notice that the government isn't taking action against you for it, rather private individuals with no state powers are just criticizing you.
That's free speech.
You can say something and I - a private citizen - can call you out on it. That is free speech.
But when you say it, and then you are arrested or other legal action is taken against you by those in power, that is NOT free speech.
I'm glad you understand the difference.
Well done!
Florida law contains a provision to remove an elected official - it's called a RECALL election. She holds the office because the voters in the Ninth Judicial District of the state put her there. Let THEM decide if she should be removed and who to replace her with.