Brewha
3 years ago
It's the frequent rain in Florida.

Every afternoon shower causes a rainbow on the horizon - and it is driving DeSantis over the edge.
Farther, that is.
DrMaddVibe
3 years ago
Anyone Claiming Disney ‘Outmaneuvered’ DeSantis Is Moving Goalposts



Some on the right and left have claimed Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis’ conflict with Disney has been a failed PR stunt. This view requires one to ignore critical context, facts, and the evolution of the dispute. An honest account of events requires one to concede DeSantis’ battle with Disney has been an unabashed victory for the Florida governor.

A little over a year ago, Florida passed a parental rights law that forbade teachers from discussing sexuality with children in third grade and below. The bill also required parents to be made aware of any significant developments with their children regardless of grade level. This law upset the LGBT lobby, which falsely labeled the law as a “Don’t Say Gay” bill despite there being no mention of homosexuality in the text. Predictively, major media platforms co-opted the label in an attempt to paint conservatives as homophobes for refusing to use public schools to secretly “trans the kids” without parental consent and teach kindergarteners about sex.

The Disney CEO at the time, Bob Chapek, caved to a small but vocal group of Disney employees that took issue with parental rights in education bill and vowed to use the full weight of the company to overturn the law and to deny support for Florida Republicans in the future. For those unfamiliar with Florida politics, this represented an unprecedented move for the company that has a history of getting along with Florida Republicans and also getting whatever it wanted from the legislature. An accurate timeline of events makes it undeniable; Disney fired the first shots. Florida conservatives weren’t arbitrarily targeting Disney for a culture war.

What happens next is critical for understanding the Disney versus DeSantis feud.

DeSantis and Florida Republicans responded by stripping (albeit temporarily) Disney’s self-governing authority within its special tax district. The public feud caused Disney’s reputation to sink with the general public, the CEO responsible for injecting the company into local politics was fired, and Disney’s woke movies tanked. To put the cherry on top, in his return to the helm CEO Bob Iger pledged to get the company out of politics (the entire reason for the dispute) and is still getting an earful from shareholders.

Meanwhile, as Disney’s stock sank, DeSantis was reelected by the largest margin seen in over 40 years, with stunning victories in Democratic strongholds like Miami-Dade and Tampa. Republicans gained seats, now having a supermajority in both chambers, and for the first time since the Civil War, no Democrats are holding statewide elected office in Florida. For those unfamiliar with American elections, this is huge regardless of state. Republicans (especially conservatives) seldom win entire metro areas, especially ones as big and ethnically diverse as Miami. Furthermore, Florida Republicans have used this new power to expand the parental rights law to all grades and deliver on other major conservative priorities.

To pretend DeSantis was defeated or outmaneuvered by Disney requires an epic shifting of the goalposts. The objective was never about destroying Disney. That would be stupid. It’s a major employer and economic driver of Florida tourism. Likewise, Disney’s special tax district was always an issue of leverage to get the desired outcome of Disney backing off its plan to inject its left-wing ideals into Florida schools and law.

If one understands this dispute is centered on parental rights and education, not a municipal tax district, it’s dishonest to claim this was anything less than an astounding victory for DeSantis and Florida conservatives. This is true regardless of what happens with Disney’s tax district.
rfenst
  • rfenst
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
3 years ago
Other than a company in bankruptcy, can someone please provide me with a list of the American private/public corporations being required by law to have all that corporation's decisions about that corporation's privately owned property, to be made by partisan, appointed politicians?
(edited)



Capitalism- def- (noun)- an economic and political system in which a country's trade and industry are controlled by private owners for profit.

Communism- def- (noun)- an economic and political system and ideology that positions itself in opposition to democracy and capitalism in which the means of production are owned communally and private property is nonexistent or severely curtailed.

Eminent domain- (noun)- the process by which the government may seize private property with proper compensation, but without the owner's consent.



If you can't see this, at the very least as an eminent domain issue (government taking of property rights without adequate compensation) contrary to the U.S. and state constitution and laws), you are driving blind.
Brewha
3 years ago
Yep - He's blind...
rfenst
  • rfenst
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
3 years ago

Yep - He's blind...

Brewha wrote:


Who?
I wasn't referring to anyone in particular...
Brewha
3 years ago

Who?
I wasn't referring to anyone in particular...

rfenst wrote:



I know. But it seems soooo obvious...

But you are clean, no harm, no foul - a gent as always.
HockeyDad
3 years ago

Other than a company in bankruptcy, can someone please provide me with a decent list showing American historic and economic history of private/public corporations, which have all of those making decisions about the corporation's privately owned land, appointed by a politician or the government, as opposed to the corporation.

rfenst wrote:



That’s easy. Every corporation or individual. It’s a big list!
HockeyDad
3 years ago

Other than a company in bankruptcy, can someone please provide me with a list of the American private/public corporations being required by law to have all that corporation's decisions about that corporation's privately owned property, to be made by partisan, appointed politicians?
(edited)

rfenst wrote:



Even under your edited version, the list is still everyone.

I just bought a lot in Florida. It will take three months for permits.
rfenst
  • rfenst
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
3 years ago

Even under your edited version, the list is still everyone.

I just bought a lot in Florida. It will take three months for permits.

HockeyDad wrote:


Zoning and permitting are a totally different thing than what I am referring to.
This is about the uncompensated taking of corporation's own real property rights.


Congrats about the lot!!!
Look forward to seeing it when you are here.
If you need to fly into O and need a place to stay overnight, we always have a room for you for both of you.
HockeyDad
3 years ago

Zoning and permitting are a totally different thing than what I am referring to.
This is about the uncompensated taking of corporation's own real property rights.


Congrats about the lot!!!
Look forward to seeing it when you are here.
If you need to fly into O and need a place to stay overnight, we always have a room for you for both of you.

rfenst wrote:



But zoning and permitting and other government functions is exactly what RCID and now the new board does. Me and Disney both now have to deal with a government for our real property rights.

When RCID was set up, if Walt Disney wanted to do something he would go to the government which was Roy Disney to get automatic permission. They had different property rights than anyone else in the state.

Next trip will be design studio time while we wait for the government to approve our permit to use our real property rights.
rfenst
  • rfenst
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
3 years ago

When RCID was set up, if Walt Disney wanted to do something he would go to the government which was Roy Disney to get automatic permission. They had different property rights than anyone else in the state.

HockeyDad wrote:


You are 100% correct. That was the agreement.
rfenst
  • rfenst
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
3 years ago
No happily ever after in Disney vs. DeSantis drama



Orlando Sentinel Editorial Board

We all know how much Disney loves sequels. But here’s a safe prediction: “Ron DeSantis and The Multiverse of Madness” is going to be a flop, for everyone involved.

Because while the governor’s attempts to retaliate against the magic kingdom of the Mouse started out as popcorn-worthy entertainment, they are spinning off into real threats to the stability of Florida’s economy.

Tale as old as .. 2022
Our story so far: Way back in January 2022, everything was satisfactual, at least by Florida standards. Disney gave politicians lots of money and swag, and got special privileges in return. That included near-total control of a special, county-like district set up 50-plus years ago that protected its theme parks, resorts and land from inconvenient government intrusion.

Ron DeSantis has spent a lot of time fuming about Mickey Mouse. But while DeSantis fumed, Disney lawyers quietly did their homework, trying to outsmart the governor's legal team. So far, it looks like they succeeded.

But then the Legislature, thoroughly under DeSantis control, rammed through legislation aimed at corporations (well, some corporations) that trained their employees not to be racist or gender-identity biased. Next came a series of attacks on Florida’s gay, lesbian and most of all transgender people that is still escalating. Disney, prodded into action by outraged employees and customers, finally issued a weakly vague complaint and said it was turning off the tap on campaign cash.

DeSantis’ rational response: Global thermonuclear war. He rammed through legislation to kill the Reedy Creek improvement district and took a victory strut, though there was heavy foreshadowing that all might not be well — in the form of a massive tax burden and bond debt that was going to have to be dealt with… somehow. Cliffhanger! Roll credits.

The Woke Strikes Back
A year later, the sequel came out. DeSantis had finally realized that he’d made a pretty big mistake, but didn’t realize how big: While his staff was scribbling out fix-it legislation that let him seize control of the Reedy Creek Improvement District and put his cronies in power, Disney struck back in the dead of night (by which we mean, at open-to-the-public meetings of the district, backed with plans that were available to anyone who asked).

Disney's official word on Reedy Creek
In the weeks before the DeSantis takeover, outgoing board members signed a pile of contracts and covenants that boiled down to this: While DeSantis was claiming a win, the mouse was stealing most of the cheese. The first meeting of the new, DeSanctified board featured some of their many, many attorneys saying that the board had very little power left.

That led to last week’s goofy press conference, where DeSantis threatened Disney with all kinds of retaliation. Most of it involved the significant assets the company had stashed in the Reedy Creek governmental shell, including thousands of acres of Disney property currently serving as conservation land — which DeSantis suggested might be a dandy venue for a competing theme park. Or a state park. Or a state prison. Was he joking? Who knows?

Then there were the financial attacks: The new board would force Disney to pay off its $1 billion in bond debt. The new board would raise property taxes (Disney, which owns nearly every square inch of the property inside the district, already taxes itself more than double the maximum that would be allowed if the district didn’t exist.) The new board would sell off Disney’s highly efficient and specialized utilities.

Some of the “vengeance” clearly hadn’t been very well thought out. Higher tolls on roads around Disney would only hurt the families who visited the park and the thousands of workers who toiled there, and could actually benefit Disney’s bottom line by keeping guests on-property when they might have instead visited non-Disney restaurants and other theme parks.

Speaking of other theme parks, DeSantis wants state Agriculture Commissioner Wilton Simpson to take over inspections of Disney rides and investigations of injuries. That’s something we’ve been pushing for for years, so, OK. But how do DeSantis and Simpson justify not doing the same for SeaWorld, Busch Gardens and Universal? When asked, DeSantis muttered something about “special districts” and the press conference was over.

But we can’t help but wonder about something the governor has said all along: He believes the district was never legally set up in the first place. He believes the district could and should be erased. If he pursues that train of thought, it sparks a whole new world of questions: Doesn’t that make everything listed above technically and legally impossible?

Not feeling the love
It’s safe to say that this latest release is not getting the best of reviews. In fact, it turns out the global business community is not that enchanted with a governor who thinks it’s OK to go around seizing control of private corporations. Or one who thinks it’s OK to cobble together a plan of attack on one of his own state’s biggest economic drivers over a week or maybe three.

They’re starting to become alarmed. You can tell by the way that campaign contributions are shriveling, and people are starting to edge away from DeSantis’ camp in his all-but-announced plan to run for president in 2024. He’s making Donald look calm and rational by comparison, and in this case we mean Trump and Duck.

The governor demonstrably doesn’t listen to a word we say, but he needs to look at his own box office: This franchise is played out. He’s already made a mess that hundreds of trial attorneys will be feasting on for years, and turned #AccidentalCommunist into a tag on Twitter.
rfenst
  • rfenst
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
3 years ago
Disney sues DeSantis, alleging ‘government retaliation’ in Reedy Creek feud



Orlando Sentinel


LAKE BUENA VISTA — The Walt Disney Co. is suing Gov. Ron DeSantis and state officials in federal court, accusing them of engaging in a “targeted campaign of government retaliation” in the feud over the Reedy Creek Improvement District.

The entertainment giant filed the lawsuit on Wednesday as DeSantis’ hand-picked tourism oversight board declared Disney’s agreements seeking to retain control over development in Central Florida were null and void.

“A targeted campaign of government retaliation — orchestrated at every step by Gov. DeSantis as punishment for Disney’s protected speech — now threatens Disney’s business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights,” the suit filed in Tallahassee reads.

The tourism oversight board’s lawyers say the previous Disney-friendly Reedy Creek Improvement District board failed to follow procedural requirements and properly notify affected property owners of the development agreements.

But in the federal lawsuit, Disney’s lawyers say the agreements were lawfully approved, and DeSantis and his allies are “employing the machinery of the state in a coordinated campaign to damage Disney’s ability to do business in Florida” because it opposed what critics called the “don’t say gay” law.

“There is no room for disagreement about what happened here: Disney expressed its opinion on state legislation and was then punished by the state for doing so,” the lawsuit states.

DeSantis’ office defended its position in a statement.

“We are unaware of any legal right that a company has to operate its own government or maintain special privileges not held by other businesses in the state,” said Taryn Fenske, a DeSantis spokeswoman. “This lawsuit is yet another unfortunate example of their hope to undermine the will of the Florida voters and operate outside the bounds of the law.”

Disney filed the lawsuit against DeSantis, the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District’s Board of Supervisors and other state officials. The suit asks the court to block the oversight board’s actions voiding the development agreements and a state law putting DeSantis in charge of the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which oversees government services for Disney World.

It alleges the state violated Disney’s First Amendment rights and clauses dealing with contracts, due process and the taking of private property without just compensation.

Battle began a year ago
The clash between Disney and DeSantis started in March 2022 when the entertainment giant vowed to work to overturn legislation that limits classroom instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in public schools. DeSantis responded by calling Disney a “woke” corporation and vowing to end what he considered to be “special privileges” the corporation enjoyed in Florida.

DeSantis’ oversight board outlined its position during a meeting Wednesday.

At issue are a development agreement and restrictive covenants approved on Feb. 8 by the Reedy Creek Improvement District’s Board of Supervisors ahead of the state takeover. State lawmakers voted to put DeSantis in charge of appointing the five members of Reedy Creek’s board, replacing an arrangement that essentially allowed Disney to hand-pick the board and self-govern its theme parks and resorts.

The pact preserved Disney’s control over growth and planning, according to an analysis by the new board’s lawyers. A separate declaration of restrictive covenants spelled out that Disney must review aesthetic changes to the district’s buildings, among other stipulations.

Although the Disney deals were publicly advertised and approved in public meetings, an investigation found no record of those notices being sent by mail as required by law to affected property owners, the new board’s lawyers said.

The board’s resolution includes accusations of other faults with Disney’s agreements, including self-dealing and one-sided contract terms. Lake Buena Vista and Bay Lake didn’t hold public hearings on the deals, even though they affected property inside their city limits, and the district didn’t post the entire text of the agreements on its website until the new board took over in March, according to the resolution.

The district also did not have the authority under Florida law to give up its governmental powers through restrictive covenants, the resolution alleges.

Central Florida Tourism Oversight District Board of Supervisors chairman Martin Garcia delivers remarks in support of a resolution to invalidate Disney’s final agreement with the previous board in Lake Buena Vista, Fla., Wednesday, April 26, 2023.

The new board members wanted to work with Disney’s leadership but were blindsided by the Disney deals that they only discovered after they took control of the district in March, Martin Garcia, chairman of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District’s Board of Supervisors, said at Wednesday’s meeting.

“They did this at the 11th hour. ... They decided that a couple of weeks before this board takes action that they are going to tell the Florida Legislature and the governor and this board that they can’t act according to Florida state law,” Garcia said.

Told of the lawsuit after the meeting, Garcia said he had no comment.

Disney did not respond to a request for comment on the board’s actions, but its communications office sent out a copy of the lawsuit.

In the suit, Disney’s lawyers take issue with the tourism board’s characterization of the agreements, which they say are vital for a development plan that will put $17 billion and 13,000 new jobs into Central Florida’s economy over the next decade.

“[N]othing about these contracts was a surprise: They were discussed and approved after open, noticed public forums in compliance with Florida law,” Disney’s lawyers wrote. “And in the very same legislation that replaced the elected board governing Disney with board members picked by the Governor, the State Legislature reaffirmed the enforceability of all prior contracts, including those here.”

Disney also wanted to avoid fighting with Florida’s government but had no choice because of “a relentless campaign to weaponize government power,” the lawyers wrote.

DeSantis, widely seen as a 2024 GOP presidential contender, vowed to get the agreements voided, which he says runs contrary to his desire to end Disney’s control over the Reedy Creek district.

To bolster the state’s case, state legislators are moving to amend state law to stipulate that the development agreement can be voided by the new board.

‘This is huge’
The lawsuit drew swift reactions from politicians and Disney analysts.

Former South Carolina Gov. Nikki Haley, a GOP presidential contender, told Fox News she would welcome Disney’s “hundreds of thousands of jobs” and “billions of dollars” into her state.

Disney analyst Len Testa called Disney’s decision to sue DeSantis and the state a significant escalation over matters the corporation must think are vital to its business interests.

“This is huge,” he said. “This is not your typical dispute with the local taxing authority or the City Council of Anaheim. Suing a governor in federal court is unprecedented.”

Both sides have stocked up on legal firepower. The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District has hired four outside law firms, including the politically connected Cooper & Kirk firm.

Cooper & Kirk’s lawyers will bill $795 an hour, according to the firm’s engagement letter. The boutique firm’s roster of lawyers includes Adam Laxalt, who roomed with DeSantis when he was training at the Naval Justice School in 2005 and made an unsuccessful bid for U.S. Senate last year in Nevada.

Disney’s complaint was filed by the high-powered Los Angeles attorney Daniel Petrocelli, who defended former President Donald Trump in a class-action lawsuit filed against Trump University, among other high-profile clients. The litigator is also known for his work in a 1997 wrongful death civil suit against the former NFL star O. J. Simpson.

In other business, the oversight district is considering hiring Glen Gilzean, president and CEO of the Central Florida Urban League, as its new administrator, Garcia said. The present administrator, John Classe, would stay on as a special adviser.

“It’s still up in the air,” Gilzean said. “I’m really excited about the opportunity, and I’m looking forward to working with the board.”

Board members also adopted a resolution declaring that Disney and other businesses in the district cannot require customers to be vaccinated against COVID-19 or undergo COVID-19 testing as a condition of entry. State law already makes it illegal for businesses to require customers show immunization credentials known as vaccine passports.

Business owners worry
The ongoing feud between DeSantis and Disney has sparked concerns from some business owners at the Disney Springs entertainment complex. Several owners told the new board members on Wednesday they should consider how their decisions could affect their operations.

“The discussion of additional taxes and additional utilities has been very concerning for us,” said Stephen Lombardo III, CEO of Gibsons Restaurant Group and owner of The Boathouse at Disney Springs. “I want you to just please understand when you make these decisions it impacts far more than just Disney.”

DeSantis said the state may have to look at toll roads and hotel taxes as he escalated his battle with Disney.

The district may have to consider raising taxes to pay for legal work needed to undo Disney agreements, Garcia said.

“Disney picked the fight with this board,” he said. “We were not looking out for a fight.”

But one public speaker told the board they think the board’s actions are motivated by DeSantis’ presidential ambitions, rather than doing what’s best for Central Florida.

“We are the laughingstock,” said Debie McDonald, a resident of Celebration. “Let people do what they do. Don’t come in with your lawyers from Tallahassee and turn our world upside down.”
HockeyDad
3 years ago
Go ahead and dismiss that lawsuit. Disney thinks RCID is their private property and it was taken without just compensation. Disney is claiming a government is their property.
DrafterX
3 years ago
Jerry Springer should host a beer summit... 😟
RayR
3 years ago

Jerry Springer should host a beer summit... 😟

DrafterX wrote:



He'd be hosting his sleazy, trashy beer summit from hell since he just died at 79.
DrafterX
rfenst
  • rfenst
  • Herf-A-Holic Topic Starter
3 years ago

Jerry Springer should host a beer summit... 😟

DrafterX wrote:


I think he just died like yesterday or today, in case you didn't know.
DrMaddVibe
3 years ago

I don't think that is the right legal analysis. Disney's property, no matter how titled, makes Disney its beneficial owner.

Giving Disney special status (Reedy Creek), regardless of its fairness when compared to other businesses/theme parks, was a business decision agreed to in writing by Disney and the state, contract or not, that Disney had a reasonable right to rely on in its past and future actions.

Detrimental reliance is a defense to the claim of no binding agreement/contract.

Retaliatory changes to an agreement by a governmental body is unconstitutional.

Nikki Haley has already offered to help Disney if it wants to start up anything in her state. So will others...

rfenst wrote:



Then like you choose to ignore, Disney decided to ramp up and stated (posts on this very thread detail what you ignore or cannot comprehend, IDK because you never seem to read them!) they would attack the state for what you and other DNC operatives called the "Don't Say Gay" bill. Despite the word "gay" is NEVER mentioned in the 3 page article of legislation. It's called "The Parental Rights in Education Act" otherwise known as Florida House Bill 1557. Then Disney said they would blast their media empire with LGBTQABCDEFG!@#$%^&+ content...because. Taking the high ground the governor of Florida decided he'd had enough of a California company meddling in state business and acting in a threatening and insulting manner. The state rescinded what was theirs to take away. A sweetheart deal that Walt was able to secure with the state of Florida under the guise that only if they gave him what he wanted, the parks could be built there. It was a ruse that nobody else in the state was ever able to secure.

You can bring in the mumbo jumbo but its not going to fly. Pretty sure Gov. DeSantis can hold his own in a courtroom!


DeSantis: Disney Lawsuit Against Florida is ‘Political’, Lacks Merit


Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis has described Disney’s lawsuit against his state as lacking in merit, instead being “political” in nature.

DeSantis has dismissed a Disney lawsuit against the state of Florida as being prompted by politics rather than consisting of any real substance.

The governor's administration revoked the company’s control of the Reedy Creek district in Orlando — the location where the organization's Walt Disney World Resort is located — after the company began a political war against the state after it decided to ban the teaching of transgenderism to young children in Elementary Schools.

Disney is suing the state for what it calls a “targeted campaign of government retaliation” over the company’s progressive politics, with the multi-billion dollar media organization having repeatedly come to verbal blows with the DeSantis administration in the past.

However, according to a report by Reuters, DeSantis has largely dismissed the suit, arguing that it is more built on politics than on any reasonable grievance the company has with the state.

“I don’t think the suit has merit, I think it’s political,” the Republican Party governor told reporters during a visit to Jerusalem.

The Republican governor went on to say that his administration’s plan to strip Disney of its self-governing powers was instead the result of concerns regarding a lack of accountability for the company within the state.

“They had no transparency, no accountability, none of that, and that arrangement was not good for the state of Florida,” DeSantis said regarding Disney’s control of the Reedy Creek district.


“We did not think that that should continue, so we now have brought accountability,” he went on to say.

https://www.breitbart.com/europe/2023/04/27/desantis-disney-lawsuit-against-florida-is-political-lacks-merit/ 


What court in Florida is this California bad actor going to get their wishes in? [frypan] [frypan] [frypan]

Iger was brought in to save the company, and he'll be lucky to save his own job because just like the last CEO...he wanted to defend that which did not exist. Hope it was worth it.

Their stock price and the revenue lost doesn't look like it was. The The Happiest Place on Earth is a sewer.

https://www.wfla.com/news/florida/disney-worker-took-upskirt-videos-of-guests-for-years-deputies-say/ 
drglnc
3 years ago

I don't think that is the right legal analysis. Disney's property, no matter how titled, makes Disney its beneficial owner.

Giving Disney special status (Reedy Creek), regardless of its fairness when compared to other businesses/theme parks, was a business decision agreed to in writing by Disney and the state, contract or not, that Disney had a reasonable right to rely on in its past and future actions.

Detrimental reliance is a defense to the claim of no binding agreement/contract.

Retaliatory changes to an agreement by a governmental body is unconstitutional.

Nikki Haley has already offered to help Disney if it wants to start up anything in her state. So will others...

rfenst wrote:




And the Big D even said it outload on tape... he specifically said the reason he is doing all of this is because of the public statements Disney made related to the "Parental Rights in Education" bill. seems like an attack by the government on free speech to me... i think we have a document that forbids that or something...
Users browsing this topic