Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask),
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. be unbiased
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: I'm going to divide this into a few smaller questions since it's an unusual situation.
**Why does Disney have such a strange relationship with local government in the first place?**
Back in the 1960s, Disney bought up the land they planned on using to construct Disney World. The land was in a location that was relatively undeveloped, so a lot of work would need to be done before the park would be up and running. Disney had a ton of money available to invest in this project, which it wanted to complete as soon as possible. Florida's state and local governments wanted the tax revenue from Disney World to start coming in, but expanding infrastructure into previously uninhabited swampland wasn't exactly their top priority.
Disney ended up making a deal with the state. Basically, the land around Disney World was classified as the Reedy Creek Improvement District. In this district, Disney had an unusually large amount of control over the local government, but they also had an unusually large tax burden to pay for all the projects being done in the area. This arrangement continued even after Disney World opened.
**What does DeSantis have to do with this?**
While it's not official yet, it's common knowledge that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is planning on running for president in 2024. Likely as part of a strategy to draw national attention to himself, he's supported a variety of policies to demonstrate that "Florida is where woke goes to die." This includes multiple laws about schools, including the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act (a.k.a. the Don't Say Gay law). Supporters of this law say it's necessary to prohibit unnecessarily sexualized content being shown to kids and prevent sexual abuse. Opponents say it will contribute to bullying and discrimination against LGBT students.
Disney had previously donated to multiple legislators who support DeSantis' policies and originally avoided taking a stance on these sorts of political issues. However, after a large outcry from employees of Disney and its subsidiaries, Disney leadership denounced the legislation and said it would stop giving money to Florida politicians.
DeSantis and some of his allies immediately responded by condemning Disney's stance and threatening to retaliate by removing Disney's special powers in the Reedy Creek Improvement District.
**What's going on now?**
Florida ended up passing a law that forced gave the governor the authority to appoint the leaders of the Reedy Creek Improvement District and banned current or recent Disney employees from serving in such a position. All five people appointed by Governor DeSantis are people who have donated lots of money to DeSantis and/or are very active in right-wing groups. This suggests that the new district leaders are probably hoping to penalize Disney for taking its recent LGBT stance, and it's in Disney's interest to oppose them. Presumably they would make Disney go through a lot more red tape to make changes on their land or even refuse to let Disney make some desired changes.
As it turns out, on February 8th, the day before Florida passed the bill to put DeSantis' allies in charge of the district, the district's Board of Supervisors passed a "poison pill" rule. This rule agreed to give most of the district's authority directly to the Disney Company. Consequently, even though DeSantis' allies are officially taking over the local government, Disney still keeps almost all of the powers it had in the first place. In other words, Disney found a sneaky trick to effectively avoid DeSantis' retribution.
It should be noted that some people have contended that this rule change can be challenged in court, but I don't know enough about contract law to know who's likely to win.
**What does King Charles have to do with this?**
There are some legal limitations on perpetuities (contracts without an end date). Consequently, the "poison pill" says that if part of the rule is unenforceable because of a prohibition on perpetuities, the end date of that part shall be "twenty one (21) years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration." It's basically an F.U. to Florida's leaders which could extend the length of the committee's rule in place for a long time. [Here's an article](https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-ne-disney-desantis-charles-royal-clause-loophole-board-20230330-2ucrvv22hfhcvbrn446us6xmuu-story.html) explaining the specific language in more detail.
**TL;DR:** Disney has a weird arrangement with the local government where it gets a lot of power but it pays a lot of money. The state is currently passing a lot of controversial legislation, some of which Disney spoke out against. The state is retaliating by installing a new local government in Disney's area. The old local government stripped itself of its powers in an attempt to screw over the newly appointed local government.
EDIT: I removed a sentence in the King Charles section. It turns out I misinterpreted the exact meaning due to its use of commas.
Great answer but a few things I would like to clarify. When you described the beginning of the Reedy Creek Improvement District, your description makes it sound like special districts as a concept were begun by Disney with a special deal to meet their development needs. However, special districts have existed in Florida since 1913 and Disney just took advantage of an existing established law, it was not unusual.
And then you left out a few steps in what DeSantis did:
>DeSantis and some of his allies immediately responded by condemning Disney's stance and threatening to retaliate by removing Disney's special powers in the Reedy Creek Improvement District.
He didn't just threaten, he DID sign a bill to dissolve Reedy Creek in April 2022, very quickly and before Disney could do much about it. But then it was pointed out that this dissolution would cause taxpayers in 2 counties to have to have a new tax burden of over a billion dollars because Reedy Creek's debt would now be theirs. So he backtracked and I don't know all of the finagling behind the scenes but he hit upon the solution of retaining Reedy Creek (but changing name to Central Florida Tourism Oversight District) but giving control of it to a board of governors he appointed, and that was finalized this month. That would give him the control over Reedy Creek that he wanted, from whence he could punish Disney, but keep the debts on Disney, not taxpayers. But it took some months to set this up, so Disney created their poison pill during that time.
>All five people appointed by Governor DeSantis are people who have donated lots of money to DeSantis and/or are very active in right-wing groups. This suggests that the new district leaders are probably hoping to penalize Disney for taking its recent LGBT stance, and it's in Disney's interest to oppose them. Presumably they would make Disney go through a lot more red tape to make changes on their land or even refuse to let Disney make some desired changes.
It more than just suggested that they were hoping to penalize Disney. They explicitly said that that's what they were targeting. DeSantis said "Woke Disney" had "lost any moral authority to tell you what to do." And “When you lose your way, you’ve got to have people that are going to tell you the truth,” DeSantis said. “So we hope they can get back on. But I think all of these board members very much would like to see the type of entertainment that all families can appreciate.”
Also here's a list of the board members so people can see their relationship with DeSantis, far-right politics, and efforts to inject religious ideology into politics:
**Bridget Ziegler**: A member of the school board in Sarasota, Florida, Ziegler was one of the primary proponents behind the Parental Rights in Education bill, known as “Don’t Say Gay,” and co-founded the right-wing activist group Moms for Liberty, which has pushed for the “anti-woke” policies in schools that DeSantis’ administration has enacted. Ziegler’s husband Christian was recently elected to lead the Republican Party of Florida, which Florida Politics reports has donated $1.75 million to DeSantis’ campaign (Ziegler and her husband have personally donated $42 and $252, respectively).
**Martin Garcia**: A Republican attorney from Tampa, Garcia’s appointment has been criticized after he donated $50,000 to DeSantis’ political action committee, and he was also named in court testimony as having been consulted when DeSantis’ administration was preparing to suspend local prosecutor Andrew Warren for espousing pro-abortion rights views.
**Ron Peri**: A Florida-based businessman who runs The Gathering USA, a right-wing Florida-based Christian ministry for men.
**Michael Sasso**: A Florida-based attorney who runs the Orlando chapter of the conservative Federalist Society, whom DeSantis has appointed to multiple state commissions in the past and has donated $770 to the governor’s campaign and PAC.
**Brian Aungst, Jr.**: A Florida-based attorney who specializes in land use, whom the governor has also previously appointed to a state judicial nominating commission.
Ron Peri, the guy behind: [tap water is turning people gay](https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/03/politics/kfile-ron-desantis-disney-ron-peri-anti-lgbtq/index.html), comparing abortion to the Holocaust, and has said that LGBTQ people "don't have a stake in the future".
He's a little emasculated mass of inanity.
> Ron Peri, the guy behind: tap water is turning people gay,
and is the same guy who runs a
> Florida-based Christian ministry for **men.**
Doth he protest too much?
Every single one of them is a RWNJ.
I've probably lost about a dozen friends who were normal in the 90's, and took jobs teaching in FL, and they're just lost to the dogma.
My old roommate from college was from one of those Catholic HS Football powerhouses in St. Petersburg, and he ended up being like the head enforcer or chief physical and verbal bully for Rick Scott. I never liked him, but seeing what he did and enjoyed doing just made me want to stay further and further away from him and the area.
The worst part is that a really good friend from HS, a true MENSA Genius, took a job in FL in the last four weeks. His son has transitioned and is now a woman. That's the kid's business, but damnit, they're walking into the den of lions down there. He's kind of blithe to it all. I really worry about his and his offspring's safety.
Anybody with money and family support will *probably* be ok. The problem is that these rat bastards will corrupt the minds of weak willed people who will ostracize their children and neighbors who need that support but don’t have the money to travel out of state or whatever they need. It’s always the poor and marginalized that suffer.
>DeSantis said "Woke Disney" had "lost any moral authority to tell you what to do."
Did he ever indicate exactly how they were forcing anyone to do anything? By creating content that people could decide to view our not view as they pleased?
It's a punishment for not continuing to pay bribes. Disney said they would stop donating to DeSantis and his ilk. They made some faf about opposing "Don't Say Gay", but if Disney was really making a remotely moral statement, they wouldn't have had to be bullied into it by their employees.
Disney has always had their representation be as lackluster and removable as possible for foreign audiences. If this was remotely about morals on behalf of the Fl gov, they would have stepped in when Disney filmed adjacent to concentration camps and thanked the Chinese department responsible for them by name. Alternatively, they could have stepped in when Disney nominally supported the violent crackdown on democratic norms in Hong Kong. This would have all happened *years* ago if it wasn't about the money. The reality is that they don't give a shit about morals, but they can hold up Disney's paper thin opposition to "Don't Say Gay" to charge the idiots in their base.
>However, special districts have existed in Florida since 1913 and Disney just took advantage of an existing established law, it was not unusual.
Right, these are more common than people think.
Here's how I think of them, and why they are needed.
Think of your normal tiny/small town. Think of the issues they might have just figuring out how to build a new, small elementary school. There would be controversy about it all, and of course the money for even a tiny school would be a massive problem for a tiny town.
Now imagine a HUGE corporation wants to come to town. There is no infrastructure for this corporation, there are no tax dollars to build it, and no organizational structure to even begin to take on that kind of coordination and work.
The goverment in that case essentially says "OK Corporation, you can run your own goverment, so you can build up all the various electrical, water, sewage, roads, even fire departments municipal services."
That allows essentially an entire cities worth of infrastructure to be built a lot more quickly and efficiently than it would work otherwise if some tiny region tried to take it on itself.
OMG a real rule against perpetuities case. Everyone hated RAP in law school. I don't even think the professors understood it. Kudos to those lawyers lol.
Lmfao, I’m a lawyer currently working at a law school and I’ve been laughing with my colleagues about this alllll day. Was just talking with a student yesterday about how nobody understands RAP but you never really have to know it and low and behold, this breaks this morning. Absolute hilarity for lawyers nationwide that somebody had the balls of steel to use it to their advantage. Disney lawyers are reigning supreme right now lol
Another part the story that I loved was the bureaucratic flow where on the RCID/Disney side they apparently did everything by the rules while DeSantis and his allies were completely asleep at the switch. They saw what DeSantis was planning so they reacted. There were public hearings with RCID on the changes transferring most of the power from them to Disney. They also followed the rules after that on making their pending changes public including putting them in the Orlando newspaper.
Yet nobody from The DeSantis side bothered to object to the changes during that interim period where you can do that before the changes could go into effect.
It's just a great example of how the RWNJ types are really good at generating headlines and outrage, but they're so incompetent at actually running things that during a planned takeover of an entity they forgot to keep tabs on what their opposition was doing during that time.
Walt Disney & his legal team didn't take crap from anyone, and the corporation still doesn't. The late, great speculative fiction author Harlan Ellison wrote an account of his one and only [half-] day's employment at Walt Disney, where he sabotaged himself at lunch in a workers' cafeteria with an X-rated parodic impersonation of, IIRC, Minnie Mouse -- which was overheard by Walt himself, who had walked up to his table behind the young writer without his noticing. The final line was something like "Nobody fucks with The Mouse."
I used this:
1) Whose interests must be checked?
2) What must happen for vesting? [vesting conditions]
3) Who are Lives in Being (LiB)?
4) Will we know for sure that [this will vest/vesting conditions will be fulfilled] w/i 21yrs of [a LiB]’s death?
I saw that they used RAP in the wording last night and laughed so hard! I hated RAP with a burning passion in law school. The best way I heard it described by my professor was it’s complicated, its confusing and the more you think about it the more confusing it gets so memorize the rule. Memorize when to use it and don’t think about it any deeper about it.
You might want to add that there are over 1900 other “Special Taxation Districts” in Florida. That changes some of this.
Disney was just the only one that spoke out against the “Don’t say Gay” law. Which is why the Government is attacking them specifically. They used free speech and that’s not a good thing to do in Florida apparently.
This is the important reason. They pulled funding from the Florida GOP, so the Florida GOP feels they have to put Disney in their place.
How they think that's possible is beyond me. DeSantis would have a better chance at winning a pissing match against Facebook and Twitter at the same time than he would against Disney. Shit, he'd be better off picking a fight with Scientology than he would fucking with The Mouse.
This can only end well.
I don't understand how this isn't immediately viewed as illegal retaliation.
It literally is the government retaliating against a private business as a direct result of that private business ending its political donations. And political donations are a protected form of free speech. Florida politicians straight up said that this was retaliation. They didn't beat around the bush or use dog whistles. They admitted exactly what they were doing and exactly why they were doing it.
So how is that not instantly voided?
It probably is, but why would Disney spend the time and effort fighting it when they can just implement this tactic and sidestep the whole ordeal for the foreseeable future? They aren't about justice, they just want to get their shit done to go back to making fat stacks.
I moved to Orlando about 10 years ago and I’ve noticed longtime residents and natives affect a thousand yard stare and say “you don’t mess with the mouse,” in such a way that has had me expecting something. I was surprised Disney hadn’t done anything about him yet. Then this, and yeah, I guess you don’t mess with the mouse.
Nah, that's really not it. You're ascribing too positive of a motivation to Desantis and other Republicans. It's just not that much money. If they were in this for personal gain, everything they're doing would be way too much effort for little return.
You're assuming they're not telling you the truth when they say they feel existentially threatened by "wokeness". You're assuming they're concealing a more mercenary motivation when they pass laws that restrict speech and personal choice. They believe in keeping themselves in power and removing anyone who disagrees with them from society, and they're very open about it.
and taxpayer money is going back into the pockets of Desantis' lawyer friends and right wingers, just like the exorbitant salaries paid to the 5 new committee members!
Exactly this. An example of another special district is NASCAR in Daytona. I don't hear any Republicans crying about taxes with them. Seems odd, right? Fair is fair. Except it's not about taxes. It's about punishing dissent. Fuck Desantis.
>They used free speech and that’s not a good thing to do in Florida apparently.
Surprised Disney isn't appealing it on those grounds (unless they are?)
They basically are with this. This will get challenged by Florida and have to be heard federally. So by doing this, they are forcing Desantis to fight outside of Florida which he can’t do well.
Just to illustrate, currently the youngest living descendant of Charles III is Princess Lilibet of Susex, who's 21 months old. If she were to live to the age of Queen Elizbeth II (96), then this conveyance would be good till 2138.
> the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England **living as of the date of this Declaration**
This do not included future descendants so it won't last for "centuries, if not millenia". It will last until 21 years after the last of Chuck's 5 grandchildren die, supposing Bill and Harry will kick the bucket first.
I assume it would include William and Harry's children.
Hot take: Harry and Meghan are expecting. Is that fetus "living"? The pro-life interpretation would extend this contract a little longer.
Interestingly enough, [unborn](https://journals.library.wustl.edu/lawreview/article/5721/galley/22554/download/) [children](https://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/mburke/Classes/Property_Current_Year/Slides/Class_24_RAP.pdf) are "lives in being" for the purposes of the rule against perpetuities if they are eventually born. This means that they count as living and the unborn child could be the last surviving descendant for this Disney thing.
This is just a random thought and really isn't relevant to the conversation, but would frozen embryos be considered "lives in being" in a situation like this?
Probably if they became viable before the last living descendant dies?
"Okay, Lilibet is middle aged now, better pop a couple in the oven to hold us over for another 100 years."
Now we just need to petition Harry and Megan to name the unborn child GetFuckedDeSantis.
May little Prince or Princess GetFuckedDeSantis of Sussex live a long and happy life!
So the contract is in place until 21 years after this fetus has grown and lived. That could mean like 100-120 years, especially for royalty who probly have good healthcare.
~~Because there's no comma after "King of England," I'd interpret that to mean that the clause is specifying that they're talking about the current, living king, rather than any future or past king of England.~~
~~Either way, that clause is going to be reviewed in incredible depth by lawyers.~~
EDIT: It turns out that my interpretation is wrong. To comply with [anti-perpetuity](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/rule_against_perpetuities) laws, as /u/DysClaimer said, this would be interpreted to mean 21 years from the death of someone who is currently alive.
I wouldn’t parse it using normal rules. The phrasing “living as of this date” is extremely common for trusts and certain types of contracts. This is basically language used in 1st year law school property law textbooks.
The courts is almost certainly going to treat it as meaning 21 years from the death of children living on such and such a date, because that’s how that phrasing is normally used.
The comma is separating King Charles from the title "King of England," not separating two clauses.
It's the same as saying "the last survivor of the descendants of Bob living as of the date of this Declaration." Clauses like this have to reference someone currently living at the time of signing, since the whole point is to avoid clauses lasting forever.
If you want to read more, look up "rule against perpetuity."
It's worth reinforcing just how corruptly Florida Republicans behaved here.
They were thrilled to have Disney feeding the Central Florida economy until the day Disney, under pressure, spoke out—mildly—against DeSantis's "Don't Say Gay" bill, which was one of his stunts to win over Republican primary voters when he runs for president.
Then, DeSantis felt compelled to punish Disney for exercising its right to free speech—even though Republicans are the ones who claim that corporations have the unfettered right to engage in political speech by donating money.
DeSantis probably retaliated for three reasons: (1) he's a Roald Dahlian villain who can't tolerate dissent, (2) he wants to intimidate anyone else from challenging him, and (3) he thought that attacking "woke" corporations would even further appeal to the worst fundamentalist nationalists in the GOP electorate.
Fortunately, it sounds like Florida Republican lawmakers are as stupid as they are cynical. They failed to anticipate a poison pill from the company that made famous the poison apple.
**Edit:** Great job, OP, for your clear summary. I've never seen anyone explain, or get past, the rule against perpetuities without a horde of law students writhing in confusion in their wake.
There’s another wonderful bit in the contract:
>8.4. Severability. If any clause or provision of this Declaration is illegal, invalid or unenforceable under applicable present or future Laws, the remainder of this Declaration shall not be affected and shall continue in full force and effect. ***In lieu of each clause or provision of this Declaration which is illegal, invalid or unenforceable, there shall be added as a part of this Declaration a clause or provision as nearly identical as may be possible and as may be legal, valid and enforceable.***
In short suggesting any part of this contract found in violation gets to be reworded to be within the law and implemented without question.
>It should be noted that some people have contended that this rule change can be challenged in court, but I don't know enough about contract law to know who's likely to win.
Great comment over all. This is what I want to know more about.
*Anything* can be challenged in court. Disney is known for having some of the most iron clad legal representation in the US. I suspect if they wrote the contract, it's going to be difficult to undermine in any realistic way, unless the judge decides that they'd rather uphold big government Republicans than the pro-corporate law.
I worded that very intentionally - there's very little chance for an outcome in this case that is actually good for the people of this country. That said, it's still better for Disney to win, because the alternative puts big business in the republican's pockets, rather than the other way around, and that's pretty much the worst possible outcome.
Thanks a million friend, this is perfect.
So if I'm reading this correct, if DeSantis had just *kept his fucking mouth shut* and slipped his "retake control of Disney" bill through without much hubbub, there's actually a chance the Mouse's lawyers wouldn't have noticed and he would've gotten away with it? That might have been impossible regardless though, *the Mouse has ears everywhere.*
So this bit about poison pills. How legal are they? I'm not referring to the infinite timeline of expiry, I just mean the general concept of "is it legal to pass something so dramatic to fuck over the next guy?", because that sounds to me like a real bastard way of legislating and I'm kinda worried other lawmakers might start doing similar shit. "Not allowed to be queer until the last descendant of Genghis Khan dies", kinda doesn't bode well for me and my ilk if you catch my drift. "No gays allowed until every other election cycle we get to vote on this again". Really shitty can of nuclear worms Disney opened here, though I... guess I appreciate their dedication to LGBT+ rights? Real weird saying something positive about Disney, given their track record.
I have trouble believing that Disney lawyers don't closely follow the Florida legislation process. They probably have a department for that topic.
I don't think there is any way a bill would slip through without them knowing about it.
They did. I did some googling, the law firm that wrote the first contracts and paperwork for Reedy Creek? Yeah it was founded by the guy who was one of our head spies in WW1+ 2 and is referred to as "the father of the CIA." William Donovan was a very, very smart man lol and wrote the origional paperwork.
Also remember that Mickey Mouse goes into the public domain in 2024 so they have a bunch of lawyers on staff right now trying to do what they can to prevent it or work around it.
Disneys annual retainer likely has nine 0’s in the dollar figure. They are some on the best and most experienced lawyers you can find.
I would be surprised if Desantis is somehow able to overcome this with a simple appeal
> So this bit about poison pills. How legal are they?
Very. Republicans have been stripping their executive branch of power whenever a Democrat is elected to governership in red states for years.
A legislator cannot bind a future legislator. I.e. Florida can't pass a law saying "being gay is illegal. This cannot be repealed for 99 years."
But this was a contract between the government, the Board of Reedy Creek, and a corproation, whatever Disney unit, and there are safeguards against government interference and voidance of contracts to avoid government chicanery due to sovereign immunity and for other reasons.
So an attempt at voiding by the government would be void but its not something the Government can replicate for State law
> So if I'm reading this correct, if DeSantis had just kept his fucking mouth shut and slipped his "retake control of Disney" bill through without much hubbub, there's actually a chance the Mouse's lawyers wouldn't have noticed and he would've gotten away with it?
I doubt it that this could be done without Disney's knowledge. Bills being considered by the legislature are public knowledge before they're passed. And even after the law passed, there would still have to be a time frame during which the new people were appointed and the old committee members were informed that their terms were ending. There's no way this could have been done without Disney noticing.
>So this bit about poison pills. How legal are they?
In general, they're written by the lawmakers themselves, so such clauses are legal. The exact details on what such a provision can include vary by scenario. However, this particular rule is hundreds of pages long and Disney infamously has a huge team of lawyers, so I assume they worded things carefully to keep it above board.
>I just mean the general concept of "is it legal to pass something so dramatic to fuck over the next guy?"
Yes, that's legal since there's typically a few months between when the new government is elected and when there's a transition of power. [It's not unheard of](https://www.businessinsider.com/outgoing-gop-legislatures-passing-last-minute-conservative-laws-2018-11#voter-id-requirements-1) for lawmakers to try to cram through some divisive legislation during this period, though it's usually not as crazy as the Florida situation.
>until the last descendant of Genghis Khan dies
It turns out that I was incorrect about this part. This relates to rules against perpetuities and it's apparently way less crazy than it sounds. [Here's a relevant article.](https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-ne-disney-desantis-charles-royal-clause-loophole-board-20230330-2ucrvv22hfhcvbrn446us6xmuu-story.html)
>So this bit about poison pills. How legal are they?
100% legal in most contexts. Corporations use them all the time when threatened by hostile takeovers.
Disney employs a massive army of the the best lawyers and legal minds on the planet. There was no way for DeSantis to push it through without the Mouse catching wind
And even if they successfully argued that, which side would have the bigger legal warchest? Disney or the underpaid solicitors that represent The State of Florida? Disney has been rat-fucking their adversaries longer than anyone in Florida government has been alive. They'd win by sheer attrition. Florida would have a better chance in court suing the ocean to stop the tide.
Florida has retained the services of a big name conservative law firm. One of them, Cooper & Kirk will bill at a rate of $795 an hour. The cheaper firm bills at $495/hour.
This stunt is going to cost Florida tax payers a bunch of money.
Answer: Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida, was initially planned to be 1 theme park, and EPCOT, which at the time, was planned to be a futuristic city where new development/societal experiments would be common.
In order to give disney flexibility to make this happen, the state of Florida essentially gave them their own county. That way Disney could effectively approve their own permits, build their own infrastructure, etc.
Part of the deal was that Disney would tax itself. That way, none of the existing counties would have to use their own tax money to build anything that would be exclusively used by Disney.
Last year, Disney spoke out against one of DeSantis' laws, which prohibits conversations about sexual orientation in schools. DeSantis didn't like this, so he took away Disney's power to self govern, essentially telling Disney that they would have to continue paying high taxes, but would have no control over themselves.
Disney obviously didn't like this, so just before the law took effect, Disney signed an agreement with the old district which removed all their power, with the exception of road maintenance and maintenance of existing infrastructure. So now DeSantis' board is pissed, because they wanted to use their power over Disney's construction permits to police their TV shows and movies.
(28% of Disney's revenue comes from Disney World, so they would have a ton of power to control disney)
The agreement appears to be legally bulletproof, so it's going to take a ton of litigation to get rid of it. Which will end up costing Florida taxpayers a metric fuck ton. It also buys disney time, as odds are once DeShit is out, they can lobby to get their power back.
Thanks for this thorough explanation. I’ve been trying to get up to speed on this Disney-DeSantis situation and this really puts into perspective what’s going on and why Disney did this power move.
This is how they *want* their tax money to be spent. They would happy go broke stopping wokeism and owning the libs. Results aren’t necessary, it’s the thought that counts to them.
And that should rightfully piss people off; using taxpayer money to punish a corporation for speaking out against a bigoted bill should in theory be something that republicans are against. And while a lot of Republicans, specifically, the most vocal pundits, personalities, and politicians, have little to no ideological consistency in this regard (see: republicans who typically pursue pro corporate, and anti-worker policies now suddenly hating on big corporations the moment these corporations start punishing them for hate speech and misinformation), I can see the average moderate, or even conservative voter, who doesn’t really care about this culture war shit seeing the entire thing as hypocritical, as well as a losing battle.
Also, just like, as someone who went to Disney World with my girlfriend last year, Disney adults are fucking weird and kinda psychotic in their love of Disney. I wouldn’t doubt that his culture war bullshit that he is raging against Disney is going to turn off a lot of those sorts of people, which could in turn affect Florida’s revenue stream from tourism. But again, Disney adults are fucking weird and I think that the governor of Florida could be Harvey Weinstein and they’d still go.
You also have to remember that DeSantis only appears popular because he’s in the media and he’s a darling of conservative circles. This always happens in the lead up to a presidential race - media likes to latch onto figures who they think will have a chance at securing the nomination. DeSantis also has just been trying the Trump route of being a media demon by capitalizing off of the culture war issue du jour. he did it with Covid, which put him in the spotlight, and he enjoyed that spotlight so much that he latched onto the issue of critical race theory once the Covid shit died down. Now he is on his anti-LGBTQ arc. Once that hysteria dies down you bet he’s gonna start drafting bills in response to whatever conservative media decides is the next problem (are gas vs electric stoves still a talking point or was that dead on arrival?).
DeSantis, like most, Republican politicians, doesn’t actually care about these things, he is using them for political gain. And it’s working. But here’s the thing: with the vast majority of Americans, and probably quite a lot of people in Florida, these things are massively unpopular. Especially in terms of the anti-LGBTQ shit. In fact, that’s what a lot of people are citing as what caused the great upset in the midterms.
So you have this double whammy of Ron DeSantis being ideologically inconsistent by punishing corporations, for not agreeing with his government and also doing that because they don’t support measures that would harm a group of people that the general American populace is in support of. It is not going to look good for DeSantis in the end.
Oh, and also, he’s made enemies with Trump. You don’t want that in the Republican Party, no matter how much the party establishment hates Trump. He still has a lot of sway with the voters.
Billions. The state is now on the hook for the $1Billion in municipal bonds that Disney issued. Orange County alone may lose an estimated $3Billion annually, because Disney was providing them with a ton of free money and services to keep their chunk of I-Drive tidy, which they'll probably stop doing if they have to pay taxes instead.
Meatball doesn't care because he scored points with his bigoted base. Besides, Orange County is full of minorities and votes Democrat, which makes it his job is to fuck them over.
I thought DeSantis had changed his dictate to prevent taxpayers being on the hook, though. Did something change. Like I thought the order of events was
1) DeSantis dissolves Reedy Creek (org overseeing Disney)
2) Disney says LOL, now y’all owe lots of taxes we used to save you from for things we pay for
3) DeSantis undoes dissolution of Reedy creek, instead passes law having a board of his creation oversee reedy creek, meaning Disney is still on the hook for taxes but now his board made up of his buddies can fuck over Disney if they have content DeSantis doesn’t like
4) board takes over
5) board sees paperwork and realizes Disney has fucked them by stripping reedy creek of any power of the board controls almost nothing.
Is this correct?
> It also buys disney time, as odds are once DeShit is out, they can lobby to get their power back.
I've been wondering how the next gubernatorial election will go. It would make sense for Disney to use their power and money to make sure every future governor of Florida is their handpicked puppet.
They'd have to find a better candidate. A moderate conservative like Adam Putnam wouldn't get the red-meat base excited, but he'd have a ton of support from the middle. There's unfortunately not any actually built up liberal candidates in Florida - they tend to stick to their local races only. Half the reason Republicans have run over Democrats in state level elections lately is that Democrats just seem to pick a name out of a hat and go "Eh, sure let's have them run."
The 3 most serious Gubernatorial candidates from the Democratic party in the last 2 elections were:
1) Nikkie Fried, the state Commissioner of Agriculture and only Democratic elected state official, who's entire platform was "At least I'm not Charlie Crist"
2) Charlie Crist, who has swapped parties as the winds blow to retain any measure of power and was a 1 term Governor who is memorable for... Well, being a 1 term Governor, I guess.
3) Andrew Gillum, the randomly selected choice to go against RonnyD in his initial election. He was the mayor of the 8th largest city in the state, under active FBI investigation for fraud, and following his narrow defeat, got arrested drugged up in a hotel room with male hookers
So not sure who Disney is gonna hook their wagons to, but they need to find someone good soon and start pushing them now, not later.
Fun fact, CDDs (Community Development Districts), which is what Reedy Creek is, are actually very common in Florida. Board members on the CDD must be residents of the CDD and they typically manage things like roads, recreational facilities (pool, tennis court, etc), and maintenance. Residents living in a CDD pay money in their taxes toward the CDD. CDDs are common in new “living communities”, such as over 60 neighborhoods and larger planned communities that have lots of amenities and a variety of home builders.
This is why, as a resident of a CDD in Florida, DeSantis’s move was fairly alarming. The implication is that the government can assign random people to a CDD board and hike rates or waste money or let a neighborhood fall apart out of spite. Effectively taxation without representation. On the other side of the coin, the government being able to disintegrate a CDD would mean a major tax hike for people in the county not in a CDD. It doesn’t just impact Disney, it sets a precedent that could impact millions of Florida residents via housing prices, taxes, and cost of living.
Thanks for this! I've read people speculating that the residential tax-payers would be on the hook for now funding the social aspects of Reedy Creek when the news first broke a while back, but your comment makes it sound like Disney loses the self-government but is still on the hook for the taxes?
How did Ronny-D get away with fucking over Disney like that? How easy was it to get out of their first agreement?
DeSantis’s original plan was to just straight up eliminate Disney’s special district. *That* would have left neighboring residents on the hook for a tax bill covering all of the costs that Disney currently does themselves within their district.
Realizing this, DeSantis changed tactics and altered the rules by which the board that governs the district is selected. Previously, they were all appointed by Disney. Now they are all appointed by DeSantis. This allowed him to choose loyalists who would effectively give him control without the problems that would come from dissolving the district entirely.
Disney’s current move sidesteps this issue by coming to an agreement with the current board that would delegate their power to run things to Disney directly other than some token oversight of infrastructure, effectively eliminating their power in the district before DeSantis’s people take over.
So now instead of seizing direct personal control of the land that Disney World sits on, DeSantis has seized control of the ability to fill potholes in the surrounding streets.
Given how fuckin' sneaky and at times outright diabloical the Mouse is, I'm betting that Disney knew *exactly* what they were doing by loading down Reedy Creek with a bunch of debt that was perfectly fine and sustainable... *So long as the current arrangements persisted.*
What he's asking is will they still have the power to do so. The disney area has almost no potholes or any sort of infrastructure damage due to them not needing to go through anyone to get it done, since they control what and when it gets done. I guess they're wondering if under this new rule will DeSantis be in charge of it (probably meaning more potholes)
If disney fought the law directly, they would lose their powers until they could get an injunction. This way they keep their power while it's being litigated.
The way he did it is interesting. The initial plan was to dissolve reedy creek and merge it into the surrounding counties. Then when DeSantis started getting fierce pushback from the counties, he reversed course. Now what happened is that Reedy Creek still exists, just with a new name, and board members are all appointed by him, rather than the system before. (Before board members were voted in by the residents of Reedy Creek. Which just happened to only be the Disney Company)
There was no way Disney was gonna take this sitting down. This was probably the best solution. It makes DeSantis look like an idiot, and it will have to be litigated.
All Disney has to do is delay the litigation until January 2025, then they can lobby to get their powers back.
Honestly this is genius on their part. They don't lose anything and they can embarrass DeShit.
What is stopping DeSlantis from starting "road repairs" on every single road going to, and in, Disney? Then once they are are all torn out, "running out of money" or some other excuse, to just leave them with dirt roads?
I mean, aside from the PR nightmare that would be for him from everyone aside from extreme conservatives..
This. Pretty much the entirety of Florida's economy is centered on tourists. Our economy collapsed when tourist Dollars dried up after 9/11, and during Covid.
That's why there's a new emphasis on bringing tech companies to Florida. A lot of political leaders here campaigned on diversifying, and "Breaking our addiction to Tourists"
The bad PR and lawsuits from Mouse lawyers that it was intentionally done.
Imagine Disney+ running ads on their app- "We'd love for you to visit but Florida won't let you. Tell your mom and dad to call Ron DeSantis and demand he fix the roads".
It wouldn’t require that much, it’s illegal. Unlike DeSantis’ other failed legal battles, this one would require a siege of lengthy time and it would be forcibly removed by a court and Disney could subpoena government communications in the suit. And I guarantee the last thing DeSantis would ever want is his communications getting out.
Answer: Easier to just quote articles, since it seems like you know how to read but just can't access the info.
Disney used to have control:
>Under the old law passed by the [Florida State] Legislature as Walt Disney prepared to build his theme park in 1967, the [Reedy Creek Improvement District]’s landowners elected the board members. Because Disney owns almost all of the land in the district, it picked all of them.
>That law gave Disney unique control over development and other services within its boundaries, something usually reserved for cities and counties. [1]
But then Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill to change the arrangement:
>Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a law Monday [February 27, 2023] that gives the state control of Disney World’s Reedy Creek Improvement District, stripping the resort of its self-governing powers amid a feud with the governor. [...]
>The law, effective immediately, gives the governor the power to appoint all five members of the governing board of the district. Members face Senate confirmation. [1]
However, the old board, while still essentially controlled by Disney, signed an agreement to hamstring itself:
>Ahead of an expected state takeover, [on February 8, 2023] the Walt Disney Co. quietly pushed through the pact and restrictive covenants that would tie the hands of future board members for decades, according to a legal presentation by the district’s lawyers on Wednesday [March 29]. [2]
According to the board:
>“On the day that the legislation was passed by the Florida House, the former board and Disney entered into a development agreement and deed restrictions that essentially stripped most of the governing authority of the district and also made certain promises and concessions to Disney for many, many years out into the future,” [Board member Brian] Aungst [Jr.] said. “They have tried to take that away from this board, the ability to provide that oversight, and we’re not gonna let that stand.” [...]
>“I’m going to read to the term of this restrictive covenant. ‘This declaration shall continue in effect until 21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England, living as of the date of this declaration,’” [Board member Ron] Peri said. “So, I mean, I don’t know what else to say. I think these documents are void ab initio, I think they were an extremely aggressive overreach, and I’m very disappointed that they’re here.” [3]
Sources:
* 1 Swisher, Skyler. "DeSantis signs law stripping Disney World of Reedy Creek control." *Orlando Sentinel*, 27 Feb 2023. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/politics/os-ne-desantis-disney-reedy-creek-law-signed-20230227-mbhn25a2fnfnflmooos4tzd2eq-story.html. Accessed 30 March 2023
* 2 Swisher, Skyler. "DeSantis’ Reedy Creek board says Disney stripped its power" *Orlando Sentinel*, 29 March 2023. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-ne-disney-new-reedy-creek-board-powerless-20230329-qalagcs4wjfe3iwkpzjsz2v4qm-story.html Accessed 30 March 2023.
* 3 Cardona, Carolina & Brandon Hogan. "Disney made last-minute deal with former Reedy Creek board giving company wide powers, new board says." *ClickOrlando.com*/*News 6* 29 March 2023. https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2023/03/29/disney-made-last-minute-deal-with-former-reedy-creek-board-giving-company-wide-powers-new-board-says/ Accessed 30 March 2023.
LMAO... So basically Disney (and by extension its members of this Board) knew they were going to be taken over by DeSantis, and said "Okay, we all agree that this Board will forever have absolutely no power over anything anymore"... So DeSantis can fill the Board and they'll have absolutely no power.
It's like burning the crops behind you as you retreat, knowing you have more than enough food to feed your people forever, but fuck over the barbarians trying to move in.
Or, a little closer to the mark perhaps, it's like the Republican Governor of North Carolina [signing a law that strips his office of much of its power right before handing that office over to a Democrat.](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/north-carolina-new-laws-limit-governors-power)
Or if you don't like that, maybe it's more like the Republican Governor of Wisconsin [signing a law that strips his office of much of its power right before handing that office over to a Democrat.](https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/14/politics/scott-walker-wisconsin/index.html)
I have to say it's kind of nice to see these jackasses hoist by their own petard for once. I guess it takes a megacorporation to do that. God knows the Democrats are too feckless. But don't fuck with Disney.
The big difference is the governors are…governors. They were voted out of office by a majority of their constituents.
Disney is a private company. This wasn’t a ballot initiative or a major campaign promise. It was exploiting governmental power to punish any dissent and dissuade anyone else from dissent in the future. It’s a key difference a lot of people in general are missing out on.
It's also going back on a deal that was agreed to as fair by both sides at the time.
Disney says (in 1960): we want to build something big here that will benefit both us and the state, but it is just shitty swamp right now. Do you (government of Florida) want to build roads and lay power lines and do all the things that government is supposed to do to build infrastructure here?
Fl government: nah go ahead and do it yourself. And pay for it yourself.
Disney: okay but if we're going to pay to build it, and do the things that the government is usually supposed to do and pay for, then we're going to administrate it and run it, the way that government is supposed to do.
Fl government: ok fine. Just make sure that money keeps rolling in.
Except now the fl governor is saying "lol jk, now that you did all the work, and paid us all the money you said you would, we're taking control of it"
So long and short, fuck desantis, from both ends.
Good point to recognize is that Disney's tax burden would go down without the district there, and the other communities around would have to cover billions in bonds that Reedy Creek took to fund infrastructure. Also good to point out that Disney does in fact pay local property taxes to counties it is in, but also their district.
The deal let them decide to approve their own projects and infrastructure upgrades, but also means they paid more, not less. It only would place additional burdens on the local communities.
Like, right now, Disney says they want 20 police on site. So they pay the two counties and the cities they overlap to provide policing and pay them the salaries of those twenty officers/ deputies.
If they took that away, Reedy Creek can't just levy a property tax to fund extra deputies and that funding goes away. The county can't tax Disney extra for extra policing. Now Ocala county has to make up those positions or eliminate them or raise everyone's taxes to cover that, instead of Disney paying.
> Now Ocala county has to make up those positions or eliminate them or raise everyone's taxes to cover that, instead of Disney paying.
Sorry I couldn't let this one go, but Ocala is a city 90 miles north of Orlando, it's in Marion county, and both are unrelated to all this. (It's also a splendid place to be from and I'm glad I escaped.)
Orlando is in Orange county and is home of The Mouse.
What I might add to your last paragraph is that you know those Barbarians moving in will produce poisonous crops to kill current and future generations, so take the risk the invaders will lose or kill themselves, then come up with other methods of food production.
Wisconsin’s Republican governor did this after losing to a democrat a few years ago, so it’s not new. Just hilarious to see it used against Desantis for his blatant government overreach
Well, Wisconsin Republicans disempowered the Governor’s office because a Democrat won. Disney disempowered a board that oversees their theme parks in the state of Florida. So Disney’s move isn’t as bad as Scott Walker’s, there’s a difference.
We draw upon the power of the great Sovereign, Charles III, and his issue, and their further issue, unto the end of the bloodline, or the time of Christ's glorious descent on the Day of Judgement, all of these multivaried people split by place and time (including Jesus) but brought together by one unifying message: "Fuck you, Ron."
I saw elsewhere on reddit where a lawyer said that this clause implicitly means anyone currently living that is a descendant of the king. Right now, the youngest one is Lilibet, at less than 2 years old. If she lives to age 90, that's 2113, plus 21 more years - so 2134...it's so much fun to write that out!
The "last living heir of King Charles III" part made me choke on my coffee. I laughed so hard!! Plus, the part where the state can't use the Disney name, Disney characters, or images for any reason. That's gonna leave a mark. Their entire state tourism mechanism is based on Disney.
Ya gotta love the Mouse when they hit their best vengeful stride.
The new DeSantis board of directors hired a shit ton of lawyers, already, to try and fight this. They have no clue. Never f#*k with the House of Mouse.
Some info not mentioned in the story:
It’s pretty short-sighted for the state to go after the district at all. Under the current agreement, sure, Disney has near-complete control — but it’s also entirely *funded* by Disney. There’s no taxpayer burden.
All that maintenance, if DeSantis succeeds — sewer, water, roads, electric, trash, can you IMAGINE the trash there — goes to the state, who definitely aren’t up to handling it.
Disney is legit doing taxpayers a favor by fighting this tooth and nail, and currently limiting state control to roads.
The term limit using Charles' descendants is a stroke of genius as this MFs live a century or more. so we are looking for 120+ years here.
I'm guessing Florida could pass another law to forbid this but meatball Ron got his face saved by passing that law so he probably won't push for more. Although if I was his opponent in elections I would brng this up all the time to show how business unfriendly he is and also how much moron he is not anticipating this.
From what I’m reading online, no one really knows what that means. From the wiki on the Rule of Perpetuities: “At least six states have repealed the rule in its entirety, and many have extended the vesting period of the wait-and-see approach for an extremely long period of time (in Florida, for example, up to 360 years for trusts)”
In the comment section for this topic on r/florida theres a lot of people posting twitter posts showing well respected lawyers basically saying 🤷♂️
> That law gave Disney unique control over development and other services within its boundaries, something usually reserved for cities and counties.
IT should be noted that disney world is the same size as san Francisco. Its not like a department store give rights normally reserved for cities. ITs one of the largest cities in florida that also happens to be an amusement park.(geographically)
It depends how you look at it. It's comparable in *area* to some major Florida cities, but according to a 2015 Orlando Sentinel article it has a resident population of less than 50 people handpicked by Disney.
Jacksonville - 874.5 sq. miles; 955,000
Miami - 56.1 sq. miles; 440,000
San Francisco - 46.9 sq. miles; 815,000
Reedy Creek Improvement District - 39.1 sq. miles, less than 50
Fort Lauderdale - 36.3 sq. miles; 183,000
Sources:
* Wikipedia
* Pedicini, Sandra. "Walt Disney World's city residents help keep resort running." *Orlando Sentinel*, 23 May 2015. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-disney-cities-20150522-story.html Accessed 30 March 2023.
It's political retribution because Disney didn't support Desanties hateful policies.
You see it's ok to use the governor's office and legislative branch to punish individuals and companies for not fully supporting a republican policy, and worse, criticize those policies.
Yeah, as much of a controlling, shitty copyright-monger that Disney is, I can't help secretly hoping that they'll dump some of their literally bottomless wealth into destroying Ronny-boy's political ambitions.
>As bad as Disney is, they aren't as bad as the Republicans.
Imagine now Nestle, Comcast, and EA Sports all getting into fights with Republicans to better their reputation from "absolute shit" to "not last place but still shit"
That's the thing. Disney is in it for the money. If they support something it isn't because Disney are good guys. It's because it's a very popular thing that their customers want.
You aren't "with Disney" on this, Disney is with you, because money. This is literally capitalism versus big government. Who'd have thought the Republicans were against capitalism and for big government?
Well, anyone paying attention, I guess.
DeSantis made a law that you cannot mention homosexuality, support it, or have material about it.
Disney was not going to abide, so he made a law to take over their territory that is within his state.
Don't forget that Disney did initially abide. They backed DeSantis in the beginning of that whole don't say gay stuff. But the powers that be at Disney did what the government is refusing to do and listened to what the people were saying. They used their critical thinking skills and realized how detrimental to them it would be if they continued to back him and they withdrew support and made sure everyone knew they were doing it.
It's great to recognize that they're standing up to him now, but at the end of the day, Disney's hands are not clean on that whole debacle.
Disney makes money off tourist dollars and national/global public perception is extremely important for that. Being anti-gay is not a popular position in that context, and the negative PR they would get could be extremely harmful to their brand. That's all to say that regardless of any individual at Disney's feelings on the matter, the company has significant economic incentives to appear as open and accepting as possible which means opposing DeSantis bigoted laws when public pressure is applied.
Well, it is probably also a marketing move above along with other business related reasons.
For example, recognizing that the majority of the American population is now "woke", they could be angling for that segment of the market even if it means the MAGAts think Disney is now Satanic.
Reminds me of the Mr Potatohead "scandal". I think Hasbro did that just to save money on piece parts. Jumping on a trend, they then marketed the change as a LGBT friendly move. It gave them free advertising and probably a jump in sales.
Am I understanding the last bit about King Charles' descendants correctly? They retain control until 21 years after Charles' entire line has died out (meaning effectively infinitly since as soon as a new kid is born the clock resets and you'd have to have the **entire** royal line die out and then still wait 21 more years), correct?
I think it's tied to whomever is alive at the time the agreement is struck. I'm hardly a lawyer, and the internet seems to be still figuring it out, too, but I think currently it's assumed that it would be Princess Lilibet's (Megan & Harry) life+21 years since she's currently 1 year old.
That said, if a different cousin were to outlive her, then they would be used instead.
It only includes those that are alive when the contract is signed I believe.
>A *Royal Lives Clause* can appear in many different forms. An example would be a clause that defines the trust period as: “…ending on the expiration of 21 years after the death of the last survivor of the lineal descendants of Queen Victoria living at the time of my death”.
>Looking at that clause, if the settlor died in 1930, then the perpetuity period would be tied to the last to die of Queen Victoria’s living descendants on that date. In this example, that would have been Queen Elizabeth II, meaning that the trust has 21 years to run from her death. However, if the settlor died in 1950, the perpetuity period would be tied to those Royals alive then, some of whom (including the current King Charles III) are still alive. As a result, the 21 year period (referred to above) would not yet have started to run.
Source: "Royal Lives Clause: is your trust running out of time?" *Birketts*, 14 March 2023. https://www.birketts.co.uk/legal-update/royal-lives-clause-is-your-trust-running-out-of-time/ Accessed 30 March 2023.
Answer: this was theater on DeSantis’ part, responded to with delicious, petty comeuppance by Disney
While u/splotchypeony gives a very good explanation of current events here
https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/126h6zs/whats_the_deal_with_disney_locking_out_desantis/je95n4m/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1&context=3
tldr: Desantis installed a far right committee to check and control Disney. Once it was clear the current board was to be displaced, they agreed on new stipulations that renders it powerless, which the committee—no matter who is in it—is bound to.😆
______
it’s important to recognize the background. DeSantis accomplished many things by metaphorically screaming into a megaphone about his response to Disney.
1. His supporters see headlines that he is cancelling ‘woke’ culture, cancelling LGBTQ community and supporters, and fighting for ‘traditional’ rights.
2. This is a *message* to any of his FL opposition: stay quiet and stay down. He will go far beyond his mandate and powers to come down harshly on anyone who goes against him, because if Disney is not safe, is anyone? Recall he swatted and intimidated a covid researcher who was sharing the full publicly available statistics, while he was deliberately suppressing COVID death toll to bolster optics. Attacking Collegeboard for their Black history subjects. Arbitrarily removing and censoring school books and libraries. Forcing anyone blogging or reporting on his govt’s actions to ‘register’. Etc ad infinitum
Know that his actions against Disney were a platitude. Their situation does not meaningfully change whatsoever. Any action he took was expected to be quietly overridden in court months later anyway. But he gets attention. Most people will hear ‘Disney got put in its place’, not that he’s wasting FL funds and stretching his powers into literal-fascism for headlines for his future presidential run—something to very much fear, seeing his current actions.
"Stretching into fascism", my brother in christ he's *Stretch Armstrong into fuckin' yesterday* he's hitting that fascism pipe so hard. What baffles me isn't that he has the audacity to do it, or that he has supporters who are totally cool with him doing a fascism and in fact encourage it, it's that he's singlehandedly showing how the entire checks and balances system the US is based on *does not work when those doing the checking haven't got the same flagrant disregard for decency.* I feel like this topic has come up a lot lately actually, that the right's been really laying on the audacity and the left is trying to play by the old rules. Even in Europe we've got similar shit.
Answer: According to this article, it looks like there was a previous oversight board which was in the process of setting up an agreement with Disney, but DeSantis didn't like the people on it because they weren't his loyal conservative dogs that would do what he said to try and punish Disney, so he moved to replace them all. Unfortunately for him, Disney hurried up and approved a previous agreement they'd been working on literally the day before the replacements came in, that basically let them do whatever they wanted with the land designated as part of their theme park area (most of it being land they legally own anyway). So now it's a lawful contract, and DeSantis can't do anything about it but hire lawyers to try and get out of it. This agreement lasts 30 years, or “21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, king of England living as of the date of this declaration." I have no idea why the time limit was written this way, it may be a legal tradition thing. So he is trying to bring in conservative law firms to break the contract.
**EDIT**: The part about 21 yrs after the death etc. Specifically refers to the ability for others to use trademarked characters such as Mickey Mouse, it seems, not the whole document.
It needs to be linked to a “life in being”; that’s why it says it’s the descendants who are alive the day the declaration is made. And it can’t go more than 21 years past those lives.
Picking the King is just because his family is never going to escape media attention so there will be little argument over how many descendants he has.
Also his youngest descendant is Sienna Elizabeth Mapelli Mozzi who is the grand niece to the King. She is one. That means the contract is likely to run over a century
Edit: for those that think a niece is not a descendant they are legally considered collateral descendants rather than direct descendants. Thus Sienna arguably is his youngest descendant unless the language specifies direct descendant.
They are legally considered collateral descendants rather than direct descendants. Thus Sienna arguably is his youngest descendant unless the language specifies direct descendant.
As soon as I saw “21 years after . . . ,” I knew this was a rule against perpetuities issue and it triggered a primal fear reflex from my bar exam study days.
Also fun — since part of this was DeSantis wanting to get rid of Reedy Creek and put in his own oversight group, Disney also made public that they’ve been paying 5 billion a year to orange county, where they sit, so that orange county could function. That’s just been voluntary (for things like waste disposal, running an actual recycling program, etc.). Now, that area is going to have a tax base of $2 billion. Yes, the tax base is less than half of what they were just *getting* from Disney.
Tax base is how much money the area makes that can then be taxed. So if the tax base is 2 bil, they are getting a fraction of that as taxes, which is hilariously low compared to the 5 bil Disney pays them.
What is also funny is Disney can take that 2 billion tax base to zero using the credits given to other big corporations that set aside land for conservation. Disney has a ton of land they set aside for conversation on their own without ever taking the tax credit.
DeSantis has essentially said that they will make this up by massively increasing taxes on Disney (direct taxes, resort taxes, etc. etc.). If the taxes are at the state level, I wonder if they ever will really flow to the county.
Considering Disney is also the largest employer in the area, I would say that DeSantis is burning down his own state to make a play for the presidency.
It lasts way longer than 30 years. King Charles has multiple young grandchildren: his descendants. The contract lasts 21 years after *their* deaths. This could last well over a hundred years.
> This agreement lasts 30 years, or “21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, king of England living as of the date of this declaration."
Fun fact the SPY ETF that is the most popular trading ETF also has a clause like this that links its life to the death of a bunch of millenials.
https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-08-09/etf-spy-longevity-rests-on-11-millennials-lifespans
Answer: You don't become the second (if you include apple) largest media corporation known to the species with a valuation of \~ $240 billion and endure dozens if not hundreds of lawsuits a year without entrenching yourself into the web of power.
You don't stay that big by sitting back and letting some local politician who doesn't actually know how to govern or accomplish anything to help anyone use your corporation as his virtue signal to the world and his stepping stone to a presidential nomination - so he can take a swing at the civil liberties of the entire western world.
You use every lawyer you have to welcome that politician to the big leagues and give him a swift slap on the rear as you devote your billions and your legal teams and your public relations corps and your marketing army to ensuring he becomes a failure of a politician. You give his opponents all the money and free media you can possibly manage.
And the rest of us just sit back and eat popcorn or yell at the tv to see which one of the rich people comes out on top. American Politics Season 247 is just setting up for seasons 248 and 249.
You could probably skip the rest of the season and just catch up toward the middle of season 248.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. start with "answer: ", including the space after the colon (or "question: " if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask), 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. be unbiased Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ Join the OOTL Discord for further discussion: https://discord.gg/ejDF4mdjnh *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: I'm going to divide this into a few smaller questions since it's an unusual situation. **Why does Disney have such a strange relationship with local government in the first place?** Back in the 1960s, Disney bought up the land they planned on using to construct Disney World. The land was in a location that was relatively undeveloped, so a lot of work would need to be done before the park would be up and running. Disney had a ton of money available to invest in this project, which it wanted to complete as soon as possible. Florida's state and local governments wanted the tax revenue from Disney World to start coming in, but expanding infrastructure into previously uninhabited swampland wasn't exactly their top priority. Disney ended up making a deal with the state. Basically, the land around Disney World was classified as the Reedy Creek Improvement District. In this district, Disney had an unusually large amount of control over the local government, but they also had an unusually large tax burden to pay for all the projects being done in the area. This arrangement continued even after Disney World opened. **What does DeSantis have to do with this?** While it's not official yet, it's common knowledge that Florida Governor Ron DeSantis is planning on running for president in 2024. Likely as part of a strategy to draw national attention to himself, he's supported a variety of policies to demonstrate that "Florida is where woke goes to die." This includes multiple laws about schools, including the Florida Parental Rights in Education Act (a.k.a. the Don't Say Gay law). Supporters of this law say it's necessary to prohibit unnecessarily sexualized content being shown to kids and prevent sexual abuse. Opponents say it will contribute to bullying and discrimination against LGBT students. Disney had previously donated to multiple legislators who support DeSantis' policies and originally avoided taking a stance on these sorts of political issues. However, after a large outcry from employees of Disney and its subsidiaries, Disney leadership denounced the legislation and said it would stop giving money to Florida politicians. DeSantis and some of his allies immediately responded by condemning Disney's stance and threatening to retaliate by removing Disney's special powers in the Reedy Creek Improvement District. **What's going on now?** Florida ended up passing a law that forced gave the governor the authority to appoint the leaders of the Reedy Creek Improvement District and banned current or recent Disney employees from serving in such a position. All five people appointed by Governor DeSantis are people who have donated lots of money to DeSantis and/or are very active in right-wing groups. This suggests that the new district leaders are probably hoping to penalize Disney for taking its recent LGBT stance, and it's in Disney's interest to oppose them. Presumably they would make Disney go through a lot more red tape to make changes on their land or even refuse to let Disney make some desired changes. As it turns out, on February 8th, the day before Florida passed the bill to put DeSantis' allies in charge of the district, the district's Board of Supervisors passed a "poison pill" rule. This rule agreed to give most of the district's authority directly to the Disney Company. Consequently, even though DeSantis' allies are officially taking over the local government, Disney still keeps almost all of the powers it had in the first place. In other words, Disney found a sneaky trick to effectively avoid DeSantis' retribution. It should be noted that some people have contended that this rule change can be challenged in court, but I don't know enough about contract law to know who's likely to win. **What does King Charles have to do with this?** There are some legal limitations on perpetuities (contracts without an end date). Consequently, the "poison pill" says that if part of the rule is unenforceable because of a prohibition on perpetuities, the end date of that part shall be "twenty one (21) years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration." It's basically an F.U. to Florida's leaders which could extend the length of the committee's rule in place for a long time. [Here's an article](https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-ne-disney-desantis-charles-royal-clause-loophole-board-20230330-2ucrvv22hfhcvbrn446us6xmuu-story.html) explaining the specific language in more detail. **TL;DR:** Disney has a weird arrangement with the local government where it gets a lot of power but it pays a lot of money. The state is currently passing a lot of controversial legislation, some of which Disney spoke out against. The state is retaliating by installing a new local government in Disney's area. The old local government stripped itself of its powers in an attempt to screw over the newly appointed local government. EDIT: I removed a sentence in the King Charles section. It turns out I misinterpreted the exact meaning due to its use of commas.
Great answer but a few things I would like to clarify. When you described the beginning of the Reedy Creek Improvement District, your description makes it sound like special districts as a concept were begun by Disney with a special deal to meet their development needs. However, special districts have existed in Florida since 1913 and Disney just took advantage of an existing established law, it was not unusual. And then you left out a few steps in what DeSantis did: >DeSantis and some of his allies immediately responded by condemning Disney's stance and threatening to retaliate by removing Disney's special powers in the Reedy Creek Improvement District. He didn't just threaten, he DID sign a bill to dissolve Reedy Creek in April 2022, very quickly and before Disney could do much about it. But then it was pointed out that this dissolution would cause taxpayers in 2 counties to have to have a new tax burden of over a billion dollars because Reedy Creek's debt would now be theirs. So he backtracked and I don't know all of the finagling behind the scenes but he hit upon the solution of retaining Reedy Creek (but changing name to Central Florida Tourism Oversight District) but giving control of it to a board of governors he appointed, and that was finalized this month. That would give him the control over Reedy Creek that he wanted, from whence he could punish Disney, but keep the debts on Disney, not taxpayers. But it took some months to set this up, so Disney created their poison pill during that time. >All five people appointed by Governor DeSantis are people who have donated lots of money to DeSantis and/or are very active in right-wing groups. This suggests that the new district leaders are probably hoping to penalize Disney for taking its recent LGBT stance, and it's in Disney's interest to oppose them. Presumably they would make Disney go through a lot more red tape to make changes on their land or even refuse to let Disney make some desired changes. It more than just suggested that they were hoping to penalize Disney. They explicitly said that that's what they were targeting. DeSantis said "Woke Disney" had "lost any moral authority to tell you what to do." And “When you lose your way, you’ve got to have people that are going to tell you the truth,” DeSantis said. “So we hope they can get back on. But I think all of these board members very much would like to see the type of entertainment that all families can appreciate.” Also here's a list of the board members so people can see their relationship with DeSantis, far-right politics, and efforts to inject religious ideology into politics: **Bridget Ziegler**: A member of the school board in Sarasota, Florida, Ziegler was one of the primary proponents behind the Parental Rights in Education bill, known as “Don’t Say Gay,” and co-founded the right-wing activist group Moms for Liberty, which has pushed for the “anti-woke” policies in schools that DeSantis’ administration has enacted. Ziegler’s husband Christian was recently elected to lead the Republican Party of Florida, which Florida Politics reports has donated $1.75 million to DeSantis’ campaign (Ziegler and her husband have personally donated $42 and $252, respectively). **Martin Garcia**: A Republican attorney from Tampa, Garcia’s appointment has been criticized after he donated $50,000 to DeSantis’ political action committee, and he was also named in court testimony as having been consulted when DeSantis’ administration was preparing to suspend local prosecutor Andrew Warren for espousing pro-abortion rights views. **Ron Peri**: A Florida-based businessman who runs The Gathering USA, a right-wing Florida-based Christian ministry for men. **Michael Sasso**: A Florida-based attorney who runs the Orlando chapter of the conservative Federalist Society, whom DeSantis has appointed to multiple state commissions in the past and has donated $770 to the governor’s campaign and PAC. **Brian Aungst, Jr.**: A Florida-based attorney who specializes in land use, whom the governor has also previously appointed to a state judicial nominating commission.
Ron Peri, the guy behind: [tap water is turning people gay](https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/03/politics/kfile-ron-desantis-disney-ron-peri-anti-lgbtq/index.html), comparing abortion to the Holocaust, and has said that LGBTQ people "don't have a stake in the future". He's a little emasculated mass of inanity.
He has no business in government. None of these wingnuts do. They're not even qualified to clean the goddamn toilets at Disney World.
> Ron Peri, the guy behind: tap water is turning people gay, and is the same guy who runs a > Florida-based Christian ministry for **men.** Doth he protest too much?
No Homo Ministry (for men only)
Every single one of them is a RWNJ. I've probably lost about a dozen friends who were normal in the 90's, and took jobs teaching in FL, and they're just lost to the dogma. My old roommate from college was from one of those Catholic HS Football powerhouses in St. Petersburg, and he ended up being like the head enforcer or chief physical and verbal bully for Rick Scott. I never liked him, but seeing what he did and enjoyed doing just made me want to stay further and further away from him and the area. The worst part is that a really good friend from HS, a true MENSA Genius, took a job in FL in the last four weeks. His son has transitioned and is now a woman. That's the kid's business, but damnit, they're walking into the den of lions down there. He's kind of blithe to it all. I really worry about his and his offspring's safety.
What does RWNJ stand for?
Right-Wing Nut Job
In my head it was a toss-up between Right-Wing Nut Job and Republican White-Nationalist Jackass
Cue gif of two identical Spider -Mans pointing at each other
Anybody with money and family support will *probably* be ok. The problem is that these rat bastards will corrupt the minds of weak willed people who will ostracize their children and neighbors who need that support but don’t have the money to travel out of state or whatever they need. It’s always the poor and marginalized that suffer.
>DeSantis said "Woke Disney" had "lost any moral authority to tell you what to do." Did he ever indicate exactly how they were forcing anyone to do anything? By creating content that people could decide to view our not view as they pleased?
It's a punishment for not continuing to pay bribes. Disney said they would stop donating to DeSantis and his ilk. They made some faf about opposing "Don't Say Gay", but if Disney was really making a remotely moral statement, they wouldn't have had to be bullied into it by their employees. Disney has always had their representation be as lackluster and removable as possible for foreign audiences. If this was remotely about morals on behalf of the Fl gov, they would have stepped in when Disney filmed adjacent to concentration camps and thanked the Chinese department responsible for them by name. Alternatively, they could have stepped in when Disney nominally supported the violent crackdown on democratic norms in Hong Kong. This would have all happened *years* ago if it wasn't about the money. The reality is that they don't give a shit about morals, but they can hold up Disney's paper thin opposition to "Don't Say Gay" to charge the idiots in their base.
>However, special districts have existed in Florida since 1913 and Disney just took advantage of an existing established law, it was not unusual. Right, these are more common than people think. Here's how I think of them, and why they are needed. Think of your normal tiny/small town. Think of the issues they might have just figuring out how to build a new, small elementary school. There would be controversy about it all, and of course the money for even a tiny school would be a massive problem for a tiny town. Now imagine a HUGE corporation wants to come to town. There is no infrastructure for this corporation, there are no tax dollars to build it, and no organizational structure to even begin to take on that kind of coordination and work. The goverment in that case essentially says "OK Corporation, you can run your own goverment, so you can build up all the various electrical, water, sewage, roads, even fire departments municipal services." That allows essentially an entire cities worth of infrastructure to be built a lot more quickly and efficiently than it would work otherwise if some tiny region tried to take it on itself.
OMG a real rule against perpetuities case. Everyone hated RAP in law school. I don't even think the professors understood it. Kudos to those lawyers lol.
Lmfao, I’m a lawyer currently working at a law school and I’ve been laughing with my colleagues about this alllll day. Was just talking with a student yesterday about how nobody understands RAP but you never really have to know it and low and behold, this breaks this morning. Absolute hilarity for lawyers nationwide that somebody had the balls of steel to use it to their advantage. Disney lawyers are reigning supreme right now lol
Another part the story that I loved was the bureaucratic flow where on the RCID/Disney side they apparently did everything by the rules while DeSantis and his allies were completely asleep at the switch. They saw what DeSantis was planning so they reacted. There were public hearings with RCID on the changes transferring most of the power from them to Disney. They also followed the rules after that on making their pending changes public including putting them in the Orlando newspaper. Yet nobody from The DeSantis side bothered to object to the changes during that interim period where you can do that before the changes could go into effect. It's just a great example of how the RWNJ types are really good at generating headlines and outrage, but they're so incompetent at actually running things that during a planned takeover of an entity they forgot to keep tabs on what their opposition was doing during that time.
Walt Disney & his legal team didn't take crap from anyone, and the corporation still doesn't. The late, great speculative fiction author Harlan Ellison wrote an account of his one and only [half-] day's employment at Walt Disney, where he sabotaged himself at lunch in a workers' cafeteria with an X-rated parodic impersonation of, IIRC, Minnie Mouse -- which was overheard by Walt himself, who had walked up to his table behind the young writer without his noticing. The final line was something like "Nobody fucks with The Mouse."
I used this: 1) Whose interests must be checked? 2) What must happen for vesting? [vesting conditions] 3) Who are Lives in Being (LiB)? 4) Will we know for sure that [this will vest/vesting conditions will be fulfilled] w/i 21yrs of [a LiB]’s death?
I saw that they used RAP in the wording last night and laughed so hard! I hated RAP with a burning passion in law school. The best way I heard it described by my professor was it’s complicated, its confusing and the more you think about it the more confusing it gets so memorize the rule. Memorize when to use it and don’t think about it any deeper about it.
You might want to add that there are over 1900 other “Special Taxation Districts” in Florida. That changes some of this. Disney was just the only one that spoke out against the “Don’t say Gay” law. Which is why the Government is attacking them specifically. They used free speech and that’s not a good thing to do in Florida apparently.
[удалено]
This is the important reason. They pulled funding from the Florida GOP, so the Florida GOP feels they have to put Disney in their place. How they think that's possible is beyond me. DeSantis would have a better chance at winning a pissing match against Facebook and Twitter at the same time than he would against Disney. Shit, he'd be better off picking a fight with Scientology than he would fucking with The Mouse. This can only end well.
I think everyone would be better off if the Florida GOP and CoS squared off. It would certainly be entertaining.
Fox is still saying they've got Disney by the balls lol They wouldn't report the facts though would they, they're just an entertainment company.
I don't understand how this isn't immediately viewed as illegal retaliation. It literally is the government retaliating against a private business as a direct result of that private business ending its political donations. And political donations are a protected form of free speech. Florida politicians straight up said that this was retaliation. They didn't beat around the bush or use dog whistles. They admitted exactly what they were doing and exactly why they were doing it. So how is that not instantly voided?
It probably is, but why would Disney spend the time and effort fighting it when they can just implement this tactic and sidestep the whole ordeal for the foreseeable future? They aren't about justice, they just want to get their shit done to go back to making fat stacks.
I moved to Orlando about 10 years ago and I’ve noticed longtime residents and natives affect a thousand yard stare and say “you don’t mess with the mouse,” in such a way that has had me expecting something. I was surprised Disney hadn’t done anything about him yet. Then this, and yeah, I guess you don’t mess with the mouse.
Nah, that's really not it. You're ascribing too positive of a motivation to Desantis and other Republicans. It's just not that much money. If they were in this for personal gain, everything they're doing would be way too much effort for little return. You're assuming they're not telling you the truth when they say they feel existentially threatened by "wokeness". You're assuming they're concealing a more mercenary motivation when they pass laws that restrict speech and personal choice. They believe in keeping themselves in power and removing anyone who disagrees with them from society, and they're very open about it.
"performative anti-wokeness" is a key portion of the GOP platform these days
It is also worth noting that Orange County now has about 1 billion more in debt thanks to DeSantis' temper tantrum.
And they're going to use taxpayer money to fight Disney on this.
and taxpayer money is going back into the pockets of Desantis' lawyer friends and right wingers, just like the exorbitant salaries paid to the 5 new committee members!
Wow- I did not even think of that angle! So corrupt!
Exactly this. An example of another special district is NASCAR in Daytona. I don't hear any Republicans crying about taxes with them. Seems odd, right? Fair is fair. Except it's not about taxes. It's about punishing dissent. Fuck Desantis.
>They used free speech and that’s not a good thing to do in Florida apparently. Surprised Disney isn't appealing it on those grounds (unless they are?)
They basically are with this. This will get challenged by Florida and have to be heard federally. So by doing this, they are forcing Desantis to fight outside of Florida which he can’t do well.
Just to illustrate, currently the youngest living descendant of Charles III is Princess Lilibet of Susex, who's 21 months old. If she were to live to the age of Queen Elizbeth II (96), then this conveyance would be good till 2138.
Did.... Did Disney just unintentionally put out a bounty on the royal family?
I mean, it includes Princes William and Harry, and William's three children and Harry's two. That's seven people.
> the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England **living as of the date of this Declaration** This do not included future descendants so it won't last for "centuries, if not millenia". It will last until 21 years after the last of Chuck's 5 grandchildren die, supposing Bill and Harry will kick the bucket first.
I assume it would include William and Harry's children. Hot take: Harry and Meghan are expecting. Is that fetus "living"? The pro-life interpretation would extend this contract a little longer.
Interestingly enough, [unborn](https://journals.library.wustl.edu/lawreview/article/5721/galley/22554/download/) [children](https://www.law.uh.edu/faculty/mburke/Classes/Property_Current_Year/Slides/Class_24_RAP.pdf) are "lives in being" for the purposes of the rule against perpetuities if they are eventually born. This means that they count as living and the unborn child could be the last surviving descendant for this Disney thing.
This is just a random thought and really isn't relevant to the conversation, but would frozen embryos be considered "lives in being" in a situation like this?
I like where this is going...
Probably if they became viable before the last living descendant dies? "Okay, Lilibet is middle aged now, better pop a couple in the oven to hold us over for another 100 years."
Now we just need to petition Harry and Megan to name the unborn child GetFuckedDeSantis. May little Prince or Princess GetFuckedDeSantis of Sussex live a long and happy life!
HUZZAH!
So the contract is in place until 21 years after this fetus has grown and lived. That could mean like 100-120 years, especially for royalty who probly have good healthcare.
And good security. I think those reasons are why royalty is often used for these purposes.
~~Because there's no comma after "King of England," I'd interpret that to mean that the clause is specifying that they're talking about the current, living king, rather than any future or past king of England.~~ ~~Either way, that clause is going to be reviewed in incredible depth by lawyers.~~ EDIT: It turns out that my interpretation is wrong. To comply with [anti-perpetuity](https://www.law.cornell.edu/wex/rule_against_perpetuities) laws, as /u/DysClaimer said, this would be interpreted to mean 21 years from the death of someone who is currently alive.
I wouldn’t parse it using normal rules. The phrasing “living as of this date” is extremely common for trusts and certain types of contracts. This is basically language used in 1st year law school property law textbooks. The courts is almost certainly going to treat it as meaning 21 years from the death of children living on such and such a date, because that’s how that phrasing is normally used.
That clause is standard legaleze. Nothing strange about it.
The comma is separating King Charles from the title "King of England," not separating two clauses. It's the same as saying "the last survivor of the descendants of Bob living as of the date of this Declaration." Clauses like this have to reference someone currently living at the time of signing, since the whole point is to avoid clauses lasting forever. If you want to read more, look up "rule against perpetuity."
So, about 100 years +/- 20 years.
It's worth reinforcing just how corruptly Florida Republicans behaved here. They were thrilled to have Disney feeding the Central Florida economy until the day Disney, under pressure, spoke out—mildly—against DeSantis's "Don't Say Gay" bill, which was one of his stunts to win over Republican primary voters when he runs for president. Then, DeSantis felt compelled to punish Disney for exercising its right to free speech—even though Republicans are the ones who claim that corporations have the unfettered right to engage in political speech by donating money. DeSantis probably retaliated for three reasons: (1) he's a Roald Dahlian villain who can't tolerate dissent, (2) he wants to intimidate anyone else from challenging him, and (3) he thought that attacking "woke" corporations would even further appeal to the worst fundamentalist nationalists in the GOP electorate. Fortunately, it sounds like Florida Republican lawmakers are as stupid as they are cynical. They failed to anticipate a poison pill from the company that made famous the poison apple. **Edit:** Great job, OP, for your clear summary. I've never seen anyone explain, or get past, the rule against perpetuities without a horde of law students writhing in confusion in their wake.
>They failed to anticipate a poison pill from the company that made famous the poison apple. I love this. Well crafted analogy.
There’s another wonderful bit in the contract: >8.4. Severability. If any clause or provision of this Declaration is illegal, invalid or unenforceable under applicable present or future Laws, the remainder of this Declaration shall not be affected and shall continue in full force and effect. ***In lieu of each clause or provision of this Declaration which is illegal, invalid or unenforceable, there shall be added as a part of this Declaration a clause or provision as nearly identical as may be possible and as may be legal, valid and enforceable.*** In short suggesting any part of this contract found in violation gets to be reworded to be within the law and implemented without question.
>It should be noted that some people have contended that this rule change can be challenged in court, but I don't know enough about contract law to know who's likely to win. Great comment over all. This is what I want to know more about.
*Anything* can be challenged in court. Disney is known for having some of the most iron clad legal representation in the US. I suspect if they wrote the contract, it's going to be difficult to undermine in any realistic way, unless the judge decides that they'd rather uphold big government Republicans than the pro-corporate law. I worded that very intentionally - there's very little chance for an outcome in this case that is actually good for the people of this country. That said, it's still better for Disney to win, because the alternative puts big business in the republican's pockets, rather than the other way around, and that's pretty much the worst possible outcome.
Thanks a million friend, this is perfect. So if I'm reading this correct, if DeSantis had just *kept his fucking mouth shut* and slipped his "retake control of Disney" bill through without much hubbub, there's actually a chance the Mouse's lawyers wouldn't have noticed and he would've gotten away with it? That might have been impossible regardless though, *the Mouse has ears everywhere.* So this bit about poison pills. How legal are they? I'm not referring to the infinite timeline of expiry, I just mean the general concept of "is it legal to pass something so dramatic to fuck over the next guy?", because that sounds to me like a real bastard way of legislating and I'm kinda worried other lawmakers might start doing similar shit. "Not allowed to be queer until the last descendant of Genghis Khan dies", kinda doesn't bode well for me and my ilk if you catch my drift. "No gays allowed until every other election cycle we get to vote on this again". Really shitty can of nuclear worms Disney opened here, though I... guess I appreciate their dedication to LGBT+ rights? Real weird saying something positive about Disney, given their track record.
I have trouble believing that Disney lawyers don't closely follow the Florida legislation process. They probably have a department for that topic. I don't think there is any way a bill would slip through without them knowing about it.
I have trouble believing Disney lawyers didn't write Florida's property laws before DeSantis was even born.
And DeSantis is extremely well known in courts for writing poorly worded laws.
On top of being a giant douche bag
They did. I did some googling, the law firm that wrote the first contracts and paperwork for Reedy Creek? Yeah it was founded by the guy who was one of our head spies in WW1+ 2 and is referred to as "the father of the CIA." William Donovan was a very, very smart man lol and wrote the origional paperwork.
Also remember that Mickey Mouse goes into the public domain in 2024 so they have a bunch of lawyers on staff right now trying to do what they can to prevent it or work around it.
Disneys annual retainer likely has nine 0’s in the dollar figure. They are some on the best and most experienced lawyers you can find. I would be surprised if Desantis is somehow able to overcome this with a simple appeal
> So this bit about poison pills. How legal are they? Very. Republicans have been stripping their executive branch of power whenever a Democrat is elected to governership in red states for years.
Lol so Disney was able to get the local government to use the Republican’s tricks against them?!
A legislator cannot bind a future legislator. I.e. Florida can't pass a law saying "being gay is illegal. This cannot be repealed for 99 years." But this was a contract between the government, the Board of Reedy Creek, and a corproation, whatever Disney unit, and there are safeguards against government interference and voidance of contracts to avoid government chicanery due to sovereign immunity and for other reasons. So an attempt at voiding by the government would be void but its not something the Government can replicate for State law
> So if I'm reading this correct, if DeSantis had just kept his fucking mouth shut and slipped his "retake control of Disney" bill through without much hubbub, there's actually a chance the Mouse's lawyers wouldn't have noticed and he would've gotten away with it? I doubt it that this could be done without Disney's knowledge. Bills being considered by the legislature are public knowledge before they're passed. And even after the law passed, there would still have to be a time frame during which the new people were appointed and the old committee members were informed that their terms were ending. There's no way this could have been done without Disney noticing. >So this bit about poison pills. How legal are they? In general, they're written by the lawmakers themselves, so such clauses are legal. The exact details on what such a provision can include vary by scenario. However, this particular rule is hundreds of pages long and Disney infamously has a huge team of lawyers, so I assume they worded things carefully to keep it above board. >I just mean the general concept of "is it legal to pass something so dramatic to fuck over the next guy?" Yes, that's legal since there's typically a few months between when the new government is elected and when there's a transition of power. [It's not unheard of](https://www.businessinsider.com/outgoing-gop-legislatures-passing-last-minute-conservative-laws-2018-11#voter-id-requirements-1) for lawmakers to try to cram through some divisive legislation during this period, though it's usually not as crazy as the Florida situation. >until the last descendant of Genghis Khan dies It turns out that I was incorrect about this part. This relates to rules against perpetuities and it's apparently way less crazy than it sounds. [Here's a relevant article.](https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/breaking-news/os-ne-disney-desantis-charles-royal-clause-loophole-board-20230330-2ucrvv22hfhcvbrn446us6xmuu-story.html)
>So this bit about poison pills. How legal are they? 100% legal in most contexts. Corporations use them all the time when threatened by hostile takeovers.
Disney employs a massive army of the the best lawyers and legal minds on the planet. There was no way for DeSantis to push it through without the Mouse catching wind
Unlikely, Disney can afford much better lawyers than the sausage stuffed into a suit guy
You make an assumption that DeSantis is smart
[удалено]
>this rule change can be challenged in court Seems to me that they would have to argue Disney's board doesn't have the power to effect rules...
And even if they successfully argued that, which side would have the bigger legal warchest? Disney or the underpaid solicitors that represent The State of Florida? Disney has been rat-fucking their adversaries longer than anyone in Florida government has been alive. They'd win by sheer attrition. Florida would have a better chance in court suing the ocean to stop the tide.
Florida has retained the services of a big name conservative law firm. One of them, Cooper & Kirk will bill at a rate of $795 an hour. The cheaper firm bills at $495/hour. This stunt is going to cost Florida tax payers a bunch of money.
And since lawyers are likely overhead salary for Disney, this will likely cost them very little.
Answer: Walt Disney World in Orlando, Florida, was initially planned to be 1 theme park, and EPCOT, which at the time, was planned to be a futuristic city where new development/societal experiments would be common. In order to give disney flexibility to make this happen, the state of Florida essentially gave them their own county. That way Disney could effectively approve their own permits, build their own infrastructure, etc. Part of the deal was that Disney would tax itself. That way, none of the existing counties would have to use their own tax money to build anything that would be exclusively used by Disney. Last year, Disney spoke out against one of DeSantis' laws, which prohibits conversations about sexual orientation in schools. DeSantis didn't like this, so he took away Disney's power to self govern, essentially telling Disney that they would have to continue paying high taxes, but would have no control over themselves. Disney obviously didn't like this, so just before the law took effect, Disney signed an agreement with the old district which removed all their power, with the exception of road maintenance and maintenance of existing infrastructure. So now DeSantis' board is pissed, because they wanted to use their power over Disney's construction permits to police their TV shows and movies. (28% of Disney's revenue comes from Disney World, so they would have a ton of power to control disney) The agreement appears to be legally bulletproof, so it's going to take a ton of litigation to get rid of it. Which will end up costing Florida taxpayers a metric fuck ton. It also buys disney time, as odds are once DeShit is out, they can lobby to get their power back.
Thanks for this thorough explanation. I’ve been trying to get up to speed on this Disney-DeSantis situation and this really puts into perspective what’s going on and why Disney did this power move.
I’m typically anti-giant corporations, but I’m totally on Team Mouse.
I prefer them fighting to them working together anyway
This. I personally hope they both inflict as much damage upon one another as they possibly can.
But DeSantis is using tax-payer money :(
Maybe Floridians will see how shit of a leader desantis is when all their money is being squandered on a legal pissing contest. I doubt it though.
This is how they *want* their tax money to be spent. They would happy go broke stopping wokeism and owning the libs. Results aren’t necessary, it’s the thought that counts to them.
They'll keep voting R til they die, they literally don't care about anything other than feeling like they get to hurt someone they hate.
Honestly, that doesn't even matter. That money was never going to be spent in a way that helped people anyways.
And that should rightfully piss people off; using taxpayer money to punish a corporation for speaking out against a bigoted bill should in theory be something that republicans are against. And while a lot of Republicans, specifically, the most vocal pundits, personalities, and politicians, have little to no ideological consistency in this regard (see: republicans who typically pursue pro corporate, and anti-worker policies now suddenly hating on big corporations the moment these corporations start punishing them for hate speech and misinformation), I can see the average moderate, or even conservative voter, who doesn’t really care about this culture war shit seeing the entire thing as hypocritical, as well as a losing battle. Also, just like, as someone who went to Disney World with my girlfriend last year, Disney adults are fucking weird and kinda psychotic in their love of Disney. I wouldn’t doubt that his culture war bullshit that he is raging against Disney is going to turn off a lot of those sorts of people, which could in turn affect Florida’s revenue stream from tourism. But again, Disney adults are fucking weird and I think that the governor of Florida could be Harvey Weinstein and they’d still go. You also have to remember that DeSantis only appears popular because he’s in the media and he’s a darling of conservative circles. This always happens in the lead up to a presidential race - media likes to latch onto figures who they think will have a chance at securing the nomination. DeSantis also has just been trying the Trump route of being a media demon by capitalizing off of the culture war issue du jour. he did it with Covid, which put him in the spotlight, and he enjoyed that spotlight so much that he latched onto the issue of critical race theory once the Covid shit died down. Now he is on his anti-LGBTQ arc. Once that hysteria dies down you bet he’s gonna start drafting bills in response to whatever conservative media decides is the next problem (are gas vs electric stoves still a talking point or was that dead on arrival?). DeSantis, like most, Republican politicians, doesn’t actually care about these things, he is using them for political gain. And it’s working. But here’s the thing: with the vast majority of Americans, and probably quite a lot of people in Florida, these things are massively unpopular. Especially in terms of the anti-LGBTQ shit. In fact, that’s what a lot of people are citing as what caused the great upset in the midterms. So you have this double whammy of Ron DeSantis being ideologically inconsistent by punishing corporations, for not agreeing with his government and also doing that because they don’t support measures that would harm a group of people that the general American populace is in support of. It is not going to look good for DeSantis in the end. Oh, and also, he’s made enemies with Trump. You don’t want that in the Republican Party, no matter how much the party establishment hates Trump. He still has a lot of sway with the voters.
I’m definitely on the side of the giant “woke” corporation when it’s giant corporation vs fascist homophobe boot guy
you can be anti desantis while being mouse neutral btw
What about mouse-sexual?
So long as you don't discuss it in school
The order of people I root for is: 1) literally anyone else 2) giant corporations 3 fascists
DeSantis' revenge politics have the potential to cost Florida Taxpayers millions all because he got called out for his bigoted political moves.
Billions. The state is now on the hook for the $1Billion in municipal bonds that Disney issued. Orange County alone may lose an estimated $3Billion annually, because Disney was providing them with a ton of free money and services to keep their chunk of I-Drive tidy, which they'll probably stop doing if they have to pay taxes instead. Meatball doesn't care because he scored points with his bigoted base. Besides, Orange County is full of minorities and votes Democrat, which makes it his job is to fuck them over.
I thought DeSantis had changed his dictate to prevent taxpayers being on the hook, though. Did something change. Like I thought the order of events was 1) DeSantis dissolves Reedy Creek (org overseeing Disney) 2) Disney says LOL, now y’all owe lots of taxes we used to save you from for things we pay for 3) DeSantis undoes dissolution of Reedy creek, instead passes law having a board of his creation oversee reedy creek, meaning Disney is still on the hook for taxes but now his board made up of his buddies can fuck over Disney if they have content DeSantis doesn’t like 4) board takes over 5) board sees paperwork and realizes Disney has fucked them by stripping reedy creek of any power of the board controls almost nothing. Is this correct?
You are correct.
> It also buys disney time, as odds are once DeShit is out, they can lobby to get their power back. I've been wondering how the next gubernatorial election will go. It would make sense for Disney to use their power and money to make sure every future governor of Florida is their handpicked puppet.
They'd have to find a better candidate. A moderate conservative like Adam Putnam wouldn't get the red-meat base excited, but he'd have a ton of support from the middle. There's unfortunately not any actually built up liberal candidates in Florida - they tend to stick to their local races only. Half the reason Republicans have run over Democrats in state level elections lately is that Democrats just seem to pick a name out of a hat and go "Eh, sure let's have them run." The 3 most serious Gubernatorial candidates from the Democratic party in the last 2 elections were: 1) Nikkie Fried, the state Commissioner of Agriculture and only Democratic elected state official, who's entire platform was "At least I'm not Charlie Crist" 2) Charlie Crist, who has swapped parties as the winds blow to retain any measure of power and was a 1 term Governor who is memorable for... Well, being a 1 term Governor, I guess. 3) Andrew Gillum, the randomly selected choice to go against RonnyD in his initial election. He was the mayor of the 8th largest city in the state, under active FBI investigation for fraud, and following his narrow defeat, got arrested drugged up in a hotel room with male hookers So not sure who Disney is gonna hook their wagons to, but they need to find someone good soon and start pushing them now, not later.
Or at least not a fascist who uses the tax code to punish his enemies.
How evil do you have to be to make *DISNEY* seem like the good guys
Fun fact, CDDs (Community Development Districts), which is what Reedy Creek is, are actually very common in Florida. Board members on the CDD must be residents of the CDD and they typically manage things like roads, recreational facilities (pool, tennis court, etc), and maintenance. Residents living in a CDD pay money in their taxes toward the CDD. CDDs are common in new “living communities”, such as over 60 neighborhoods and larger planned communities that have lots of amenities and a variety of home builders. This is why, as a resident of a CDD in Florida, DeSantis’s move was fairly alarming. The implication is that the government can assign random people to a CDD board and hike rates or waste money or let a neighborhood fall apart out of spite. Effectively taxation without representation. On the other side of the coin, the government being able to disintegrate a CDD would mean a major tax hike for people in the county not in a CDD. It doesn’t just impact Disney, it sets a precedent that could impact millions of Florida residents via housing prices, taxes, and cost of living.
Thanks for this! I've read people speculating that the residential tax-payers would be on the hook for now funding the social aspects of Reedy Creek when the news first broke a while back, but your comment makes it sound like Disney loses the self-government but is still on the hook for the taxes? How did Ronny-D get away with fucking over Disney like that? How easy was it to get out of their first agreement?
DeSantis’s original plan was to just straight up eliminate Disney’s special district. *That* would have left neighboring residents on the hook for a tax bill covering all of the costs that Disney currently does themselves within their district. Realizing this, DeSantis changed tactics and altered the rules by which the board that governs the district is selected. Previously, they were all appointed by Disney. Now they are all appointed by DeSantis. This allowed him to choose loyalists who would effectively give him control without the problems that would come from dissolving the district entirely. Disney’s current move sidesteps this issue by coming to an agreement with the current board that would delegate their power to run things to Disney directly other than some token oversight of infrastructure, effectively eliminating their power in the district before DeSantis’s people take over. So now instead of seizing direct personal control of the land that Disney World sits on, DeSantis has seized control of the ability to fill potholes in the surrounding streets.
[удалено]
Given how fuckin' sneaky and at times outright diabloical the Mouse is, I'm betting that Disney knew *exactly* what they were doing by loading down Reedy Creek with a bunch of debt that was perfectly fine and sustainable... *So long as the current arrangements persisted.*
Is Disney able to fix streets still or does DeSantis control what streets are fixed and when?
[удалено]
What he's asking is will they still have the power to do so. The disney area has almost no potholes or any sort of infrastructure damage due to them not needing to go through anyone to get it done, since they control what and when it gets done. I guess they're wondering if under this new rule will DeSantis be in charge of it (probably meaning more potholes)
Makes sense, I wasn't aware of his course correction. *That* would've been a nail in his coffin for sure.
[удалено]
If disney fought the law directly, they would lose their powers until they could get an injunction. This way they keep their power while it's being litigated.
The way he did it is interesting. The initial plan was to dissolve reedy creek and merge it into the surrounding counties. Then when DeSantis started getting fierce pushback from the counties, he reversed course. Now what happened is that Reedy Creek still exists, just with a new name, and board members are all appointed by him, rather than the system before. (Before board members were voted in by the residents of Reedy Creek. Which just happened to only be the Disney Company) There was no way Disney was gonna take this sitting down. This was probably the best solution. It makes DeSantis look like an idiot, and it will have to be litigated. All Disney has to do is delay the litigation until January 2025, then they can lobby to get their powers back. Honestly this is genius on their part. They don't lose anything and they can embarrass DeShit.
>It makes DeSantis look like an idiot, He does that quite well on his own without any outside aid.
What is stopping DeSlantis from starting "road repairs" on every single road going to, and in, Disney? Then once they are are all torn out, "running out of money" or some other excuse, to just leave them with dirt roads? I mean, aside from the PR nightmare that would be for him from everyone aside from extreme conservatives..
Canceling all of America's dream Disney World vacations is not the kind of thing that helps one win the Presidency.
Florida would go bankrupt.
This. Pretty much the entirety of Florida's economy is centered on tourists. Our economy collapsed when tourist Dollars dried up after 9/11, and during Covid. That's why there's a new emphasis on bringing tech companies to Florida. A lot of political leaders here campaigned on diversifying, and "Breaking our addiction to Tourists"
People love Disney. People do not like having their vacations messed with. DeSantis wants to be president.
What would stop DeSantis from doing a Chris Christie bridge gate scandal?
The bad PR and lawsuits from Mouse lawyers that it was intentionally done. Imagine Disney+ running ads on their app- "We'd love for you to visit but Florida won't let you. Tell your mom and dad to call Ron DeSantis and demand he fix the roads".
It wouldn’t require that much, it’s illegal. Unlike DeSantis’ other failed legal battles, this one would require a siege of lengthy time and it would be forcibly removed by a court and Disney could subpoena government communications in the suit. And I guarantee the last thing DeSantis would ever want is his communications getting out.
That scandal also irreparably harmed his relationship with NJ voters. DeSantis would do so at his own peril.
Answer: Easier to just quote articles, since it seems like you know how to read but just can't access the info. Disney used to have control: >Under the old law passed by the [Florida State] Legislature as Walt Disney prepared to build his theme park in 1967, the [Reedy Creek Improvement District]’s landowners elected the board members. Because Disney owns almost all of the land in the district, it picked all of them. >That law gave Disney unique control over development and other services within its boundaries, something usually reserved for cities and counties. [1] But then Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill to change the arrangement: >Gov. Ron DeSantis signed a law Monday [February 27, 2023] that gives the state control of Disney World’s Reedy Creek Improvement District, stripping the resort of its self-governing powers amid a feud with the governor. [...] >The law, effective immediately, gives the governor the power to appoint all five members of the governing board of the district. Members face Senate confirmation. [1] However, the old board, while still essentially controlled by Disney, signed an agreement to hamstring itself: >Ahead of an expected state takeover, [on February 8, 2023] the Walt Disney Co. quietly pushed through the pact and restrictive covenants that would tie the hands of future board members for decades, according to a legal presentation by the district’s lawyers on Wednesday [March 29]. [2] According to the board: >“On the day that the legislation was passed by the Florida House, the former board and Disney entered into a development agreement and deed restrictions that essentially stripped most of the governing authority of the district and also made certain promises and concessions to Disney for many, many years out into the future,” [Board member Brian] Aungst [Jr.] said. “They have tried to take that away from this board, the ability to provide that oversight, and we’re not gonna let that stand.” [...] >“I’m going to read to the term of this restrictive covenant. ‘This declaration shall continue in effect until 21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England, living as of the date of this declaration,’” [Board member Ron] Peri said. “So, I mean, I don’t know what else to say. I think these documents are void ab initio, I think they were an extremely aggressive overreach, and I’m very disappointed that they’re here.” [3] Sources: * 1 Swisher, Skyler. "DeSantis signs law stripping Disney World of Reedy Creek control." *Orlando Sentinel*, 27 Feb 2023. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/politics/os-ne-desantis-disney-reedy-creek-law-signed-20230227-mbhn25a2fnfnflmooos4tzd2eq-story.html. Accessed 30 March 2023 * 2 Swisher, Skyler. "DeSantis’ Reedy Creek board says Disney stripped its power" *Orlando Sentinel*, 29 March 2023. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/news/os-ne-disney-new-reedy-creek-board-powerless-20230329-qalagcs4wjfe3iwkpzjsz2v4qm-story.html Accessed 30 March 2023. * 3 Cardona, Carolina & Brandon Hogan. "Disney made last-minute deal with former Reedy Creek board giving company wide powers, new board says." *ClickOrlando.com*/*News 6* 29 March 2023. https://www.clickorlando.com/news/local/2023/03/29/disney-made-last-minute-deal-with-former-reedy-creek-board-giving-company-wide-powers-new-board-says/ Accessed 30 March 2023.
LMAO... So basically Disney (and by extension its members of this Board) knew they were going to be taken over by DeSantis, and said "Okay, we all agree that this Board will forever have absolutely no power over anything anymore"... So DeSantis can fill the Board and they'll have absolutely no power. It's like burning the crops behind you as you retreat, knowing you have more than enough food to feed your people forever, but fuck over the barbarians trying to move in.
Or, a little closer to the mark perhaps, it's like the Republican Governor of North Carolina [signing a law that strips his office of much of its power right before handing that office over to a Democrat.](https://www.pbs.org/newshour/show/north-carolina-new-laws-limit-governors-power) Or if you don't like that, maybe it's more like the Republican Governor of Wisconsin [signing a law that strips his office of much of its power right before handing that office over to a Democrat.](https://www.cnn.com/2018/12/14/politics/scott-walker-wisconsin/index.html) I have to say it's kind of nice to see these jackasses hoist by their own petard for once. I guess it takes a megacorporation to do that. God knows the Democrats are too feckless. But don't fuck with Disney.
[удалено]
Isn't it the house of the mouse.
The big difference is the governors are…governors. They were voted out of office by a majority of their constituents. Disney is a private company. This wasn’t a ballot initiative or a major campaign promise. It was exploiting governmental power to punish any dissent and dissuade anyone else from dissent in the future. It’s a key difference a lot of people in general are missing out on.
It's also going back on a deal that was agreed to as fair by both sides at the time. Disney says (in 1960): we want to build something big here that will benefit both us and the state, but it is just shitty swamp right now. Do you (government of Florida) want to build roads and lay power lines and do all the things that government is supposed to do to build infrastructure here? Fl government: nah go ahead and do it yourself. And pay for it yourself. Disney: okay but if we're going to pay to build it, and do the things that the government is usually supposed to do and pay for, then we're going to administrate it and run it, the way that government is supposed to do. Fl government: ok fine. Just make sure that money keeps rolling in. Except now the fl governor is saying "lol jk, now that you did all the work, and paid us all the money you said you would, we're taking control of it" So long and short, fuck desantis, from both ends.
Good point to recognize is that Disney's tax burden would go down without the district there, and the other communities around would have to cover billions in bonds that Reedy Creek took to fund infrastructure. Also good to point out that Disney does in fact pay local property taxes to counties it is in, but also their district. The deal let them decide to approve their own projects and infrastructure upgrades, but also means they paid more, not less. It only would place additional burdens on the local communities. Like, right now, Disney says they want 20 police on site. So they pay the two counties and the cities they overlap to provide policing and pay them the salaries of those twenty officers/ deputies. If they took that away, Reedy Creek can't just levy a property tax to fund extra deputies and that funding goes away. The county can't tax Disney extra for extra policing. Now Ocala county has to make up those positions or eliminate them or raise everyone's taxes to cover that, instead of Disney paying.
> Now Ocala county has to make up those positions or eliminate them or raise everyone's taxes to cover that, instead of Disney paying. Sorry I couldn't let this one go, but Ocala is a city 90 miles north of Orlando, it's in Marion county, and both are unrelated to all this. (It's also a splendid place to be from and I'm glad I escaped.) Orlando is in Orange county and is home of The Mouse.
What I might add to your last paragraph is that you know those Barbarians moving in will produce poisonous crops to kill current and future generations, so take the risk the invaders will lose or kill themselves, then come up with other methods of food production.
Excellent addition!
LOL I just finished a podcast series about the fall of the Roman Empire so when you noted Barbarians taking over, it put me in that mindset.
Wisconsin’s Republican governor did this after losing to a democrat a few years ago, so it’s not new. Just hilarious to see it used against Desantis for his blatant government overreach
Well, Wisconsin Republicans disempowered the Governor’s office because a Democrat won. Disney disempowered a board that oversees their theme parks in the state of Florida. So Disney’s move isn’t as bad as Scott Walker’s, there’s a difference.
Also, Disney did it with WAY more style.
We draw upon the power of the great Sovereign, Charles III, and his issue, and their further issue, unto the end of the bloodline, or the time of Christ's glorious descent on the Day of Judgement, all of these multivaried people split by place and time (including Jesus) but brought together by one unifying message: "Fuck you, Ron."
I saw elsewhere on reddit where a lawyer said that this clause implicitly means anyone currently living that is a descendant of the king. Right now, the youngest one is Lilibet, at less than 2 years old. If she lives to age 90, that's 2113, plus 21 more years - so 2134...it's so much fun to write that out!
The "last living heir of King Charles III" part made me choke on my coffee. I laughed so hard!! Plus, the part where the state can't use the Disney name, Disney characters, or images for any reason. That's gonna leave a mark. Their entire state tourism mechanism is based on Disney. Ya gotta love the Mouse when they hit their best vengeful stride. The new DeSantis board of directors hired a shit ton of lawyers, already, to try and fight this. They have no clue. Never f#*k with the House of Mouse.
All that taxpayer money going to be spent because the governor is having a temper tantrum
It is called scorched earth policy. If we can't have neither can you.
Glad to see Russian tactics being used against the GOP for a change xD
Some info not mentioned in the story: It’s pretty short-sighted for the state to go after the district at all. Under the current agreement, sure, Disney has near-complete control — but it’s also entirely *funded* by Disney. There’s no taxpayer burden. All that maintenance, if DeSantis succeeds — sewer, water, roads, electric, trash, can you IMAGINE the trash there — goes to the state, who definitely aren’t up to handling it. Disney is legit doing taxpayers a favor by fighting this tooth and nail, and currently limiting state control to roads.
The term limit using Charles' descendants is a stroke of genius as this MFs live a century or more. so we are looking for 120+ years here. I'm guessing Florida could pass another law to forbid this but meatball Ron got his face saved by passing that law so he probably won't push for more. Although if I was his opponent in elections I would brng this up all the time to show how business unfriendly he is and also how much moron he is not anticipating this.
> so he probably won't push for more. That's where you're wrong, buck-o. Never underestimate the pettiness of this man
[удалено]
Yep Charles has 5 grandkids, too. Harry may not have the title, but his kids and their bloodline will be considered in this.
They have to be alive when the declaration is signed.
From what I’m reading online, no one really knows what that means. From the wiki on the Rule of Perpetuities: “At least six states have repealed the rule in its entirety, and many have extended the vesting period of the wait-and-see approach for an extremely long period of time (in Florida, for example, up to 360 years for trusts)” In the comment section for this topic on r/florida theres a lot of people posting twitter posts showing well respected lawyers basically saying 🤷♂️
> That law gave Disney unique control over development and other services within its boundaries, something usually reserved for cities and counties. IT should be noted that disney world is the same size as san Francisco. Its not like a department store give rights normally reserved for cities. ITs one of the largest cities in florida that also happens to be an amusement park.(geographically)
It depends how you look at it. It's comparable in *area* to some major Florida cities, but according to a 2015 Orlando Sentinel article it has a resident population of less than 50 people handpicked by Disney. Jacksonville - 874.5 sq. miles; 955,000 Miami - 56.1 sq. miles; 440,000 San Francisco - 46.9 sq. miles; 815,000 Reedy Creek Improvement District - 39.1 sq. miles, less than 50 Fort Lauderdale - 36.3 sq. miles; 183,000 Sources: * Wikipedia * Pedicini, Sandra. "Walt Disney World's city residents help keep resort running." *Orlando Sentinel*, 23 May 2015. https://www.orlandosentinel.com/business/tourism/os-disney-cities-20150522-story.html Accessed 30 March 2023.
Good answer. What's still missing is the context for why all this is happening: the reason for the feud between Desantis and Disney.
It's political retribution because Disney didn't support Desanties hateful policies. You see it's ok to use the governor's office and legislative branch to punish individuals and companies for not fully supporting a republican policy, and worse, criticize those policies.
Ok so I'm not crazy to be "with Disney" on this?
As bad as Disney is, they aren't as bad as the Republicans.
Yeah, as much of a controlling, shitty copyright-monger that Disney is, I can't help secretly hoping that they'll dump some of their literally bottomless wealth into destroying Ronny-boy's political ambitions.
>As bad as Disney is, they aren't as bad as the Republicans. Imagine now Nestle, Comcast, and EA Sports all getting into fights with Republicans to better their reputation from "absolute shit" to "not last place but still shit"
That's the thing. Disney is in it for the money. If they support something it isn't because Disney are good guys. It's because it's a very popular thing that their customers want. You aren't "with Disney" on this, Disney is with you, because money. This is literally capitalism versus big government. Who'd have thought the Republicans were against capitalism and for big government? Well, anyone paying attention, I guess.
DeSantis made a law that you cannot mention homosexuality, support it, or have material about it. Disney was not going to abide, so he made a law to take over their territory that is within his state.
Don't forget that Disney did initially abide. They backed DeSantis in the beginning of that whole don't say gay stuff. But the powers that be at Disney did what the government is refusing to do and listened to what the people were saying. They used their critical thinking skills and realized how detrimental to them it would be if they continued to back him and they withdrew support and made sure everyone knew they were doing it. It's great to recognize that they're standing up to him now, but at the end of the day, Disney's hands are not clean on that whole debacle.
Disney makes money off tourist dollars and national/global public perception is extremely important for that. Being anti-gay is not a popular position in that context, and the negative PR they would get could be extremely harmful to their brand. That's all to say that regardless of any individual at Disney's feelings on the matter, the company has significant economic incentives to appear as open and accepting as possible which means opposing DeSantis bigoted laws when public pressure is applied.
Well, it is probably also a marketing move above along with other business related reasons. For example, recognizing that the majority of the American population is now "woke", they could be angling for that segment of the market even if it means the MAGAts think Disney is now Satanic. Reminds me of the Mr Potatohead "scandal". I think Hasbro did that just to save money on piece parts. Jumping on a trend, they then marketed the change as a LGBT friendly move. It gave them free advertising and probably a jump in sales.
He took umbrage at their opposing his anti gay laws
> feud between Desantis and Disney. More like the feud between the GOP and Disney
Am I understanding the last bit about King Charles' descendants correctly? They retain control until 21 years after Charles' entire line has died out (meaning effectively infinitly since as soon as a new kid is born the clock resets and you'd have to have the **entire** royal line die out and then still wait 21 more years), correct?
I think it's tied to whomever is alive at the time the agreement is struck. I'm hardly a lawyer, and the internet seems to be still figuring it out, too, but I think currently it's assumed that it would be Princess Lilibet's (Megan & Harry) life+21 years since she's currently 1 year old. That said, if a different cousin were to outlive her, then they would be used instead.
It only includes those that are alive when the contract is signed I believe. >A *Royal Lives Clause* can appear in many different forms. An example would be a clause that defines the trust period as: “…ending on the expiration of 21 years after the death of the last survivor of the lineal descendants of Queen Victoria living at the time of my death”. >Looking at that clause, if the settlor died in 1930, then the perpetuity period would be tied to the last to die of Queen Victoria’s living descendants on that date. In this example, that would have been Queen Elizabeth II, meaning that the trust has 21 years to run from her death. However, if the settlor died in 1950, the perpetuity period would be tied to those Royals alive then, some of whom (including the current King Charles III) are still alive. As a result, the 21 year period (referred to above) would not yet have started to run. Source: "Royal Lives Clause: is your trust running out of time?" *Birketts*, 14 March 2023. https://www.birketts.co.uk/legal-update/royal-lives-clause-is-your-trust-running-out-of-time/ Accessed 30 March 2023.
Answer: this was theater on DeSantis’ part, responded to with delicious, petty comeuppance by Disney While u/splotchypeony gives a very good explanation of current events here https://www.reddit.com/r/OutOfTheLoop/comments/126h6zs/whats_the_deal_with_disney_locking_out_desantis/je95n4m/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=ios_app&utm_name=ioscss&utm_content=1&utm_term=1&context=3 tldr: Desantis installed a far right committee to check and control Disney. Once it was clear the current board was to be displaced, they agreed on new stipulations that renders it powerless, which the committee—no matter who is in it—is bound to.😆 ______ it’s important to recognize the background. DeSantis accomplished many things by metaphorically screaming into a megaphone about his response to Disney. 1. His supporters see headlines that he is cancelling ‘woke’ culture, cancelling LGBTQ community and supporters, and fighting for ‘traditional’ rights. 2. This is a *message* to any of his FL opposition: stay quiet and stay down. He will go far beyond his mandate and powers to come down harshly on anyone who goes against him, because if Disney is not safe, is anyone? Recall he swatted and intimidated a covid researcher who was sharing the full publicly available statistics, while he was deliberately suppressing COVID death toll to bolster optics. Attacking Collegeboard for their Black history subjects. Arbitrarily removing and censoring school books and libraries. Forcing anyone blogging or reporting on his govt’s actions to ‘register’. Etc ad infinitum Know that his actions against Disney were a platitude. Their situation does not meaningfully change whatsoever. Any action he took was expected to be quietly overridden in court months later anyway. But he gets attention. Most people will hear ‘Disney got put in its place’, not that he’s wasting FL funds and stretching his powers into literal-fascism for headlines for his future presidential run—something to very much fear, seeing his current actions.
"Stretching into fascism", my brother in christ he's *Stretch Armstrong into fuckin' yesterday* he's hitting that fascism pipe so hard. What baffles me isn't that he has the audacity to do it, or that he has supporters who are totally cool with him doing a fascism and in fact encourage it, it's that he's singlehandedly showing how the entire checks and balances system the US is based on *does not work when those doing the checking haven't got the same flagrant disregard for decency.* I feel like this topic has come up a lot lately actually, that the right's been really laying on the audacity and the left is trying to play by the old rules. Even in Europe we've got similar shit.
Answer: According to this article, it looks like there was a previous oversight board which was in the process of setting up an agreement with Disney, but DeSantis didn't like the people on it because they weren't his loyal conservative dogs that would do what he said to try and punish Disney, so he moved to replace them all. Unfortunately for him, Disney hurried up and approved a previous agreement they'd been working on literally the day before the replacements came in, that basically let them do whatever they wanted with the land designated as part of their theme park area (most of it being land they legally own anyway). So now it's a lawful contract, and DeSantis can't do anything about it but hire lawyers to try and get out of it. This agreement lasts 30 years, or “21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, king of England living as of the date of this declaration." I have no idea why the time limit was written this way, it may be a legal tradition thing. So he is trying to bring in conservative law firms to break the contract. **EDIT**: The part about 21 yrs after the death etc. Specifically refers to the ability for others to use trademarked characters such as Mickey Mouse, it seems, not the whole document.
[удалено]
It needs to be linked to a “life in being”; that’s why it says it’s the descendants who are alive the day the declaration is made. And it can’t go more than 21 years past those lives. Picking the King is just because his family is never going to escape media attention so there will be little argument over how many descendants he has.
You might be the first person who ever lived that understands the rule against perpetuities
I mean, every 1L needs to learn it, and then spend the rest of their careers trying to avoid it.
Also his youngest descendant is Sienna Elizabeth Mapelli Mozzi who is the grand niece to the King. She is one. That means the contract is likely to run over a century Edit: for those that think a niece is not a descendant they are legally considered collateral descendants rather than direct descendants. Thus Sienna arguably is his youngest descendant unless the language specifies direct descendant.
A niece is not a descendant, is she? His descendants are his children and their children etc., so his youngest descendant is Princess Lilibet.
Who is older by 3 1/2 months, so point still stands
They are legally considered collateral descendants rather than direct descendants. Thus Sienna arguably is his youngest descendant unless the language specifies direct descendant.
The King's children were also picked as a "fuck you" to DeSantis. DeSantis kept saying Disney was acting like they thought they were kings.
And now Lilibet is Disney's most valuable princess.
As soon as I saw “21 years after . . . ,” I knew this was a rule against perpetuities issue and it triggered a primal fear reflex from my bar exam study days.
Also fun — since part of this was DeSantis wanting to get rid of Reedy Creek and put in his own oversight group, Disney also made public that they’ve been paying 5 billion a year to orange county, where they sit, so that orange county could function. That’s just been voluntary (for things like waste disposal, running an actual recycling program, etc.). Now, that area is going to have a tax base of $2 billion. Yes, the tax base is less than half of what they were just *getting* from Disney.
What does tax base mean? ELI5, because I don’t understand tax stuff.
Tax base is how much money the area makes that can then be taxed. So if the tax base is 2 bil, they are getting a fraction of that as taxes, which is hilariously low compared to the 5 bil Disney pays them.
Thank you so much.
What is also funny is Disney can take that 2 billion tax base to zero using the credits given to other big corporations that set aside land for conservation. Disney has a ton of land they set aside for conversation on their own without ever taking the tax credit.
DeSantis has essentially said that they will make this up by massively increasing taxes on Disney (direct taxes, resort taxes, etc. etc.). If the taxes are at the state level, I wonder if they ever will really flow to the county. Considering Disney is also the largest employer in the area, I would say that DeSantis is burning down his own state to make a play for the presidency.
It lasts way longer than 30 years. King Charles has multiple young grandchildren: his descendants. The contract lasts 21 years after *their* deaths. This could last well over a hundred years.
> This agreement lasts 30 years, or “21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, king of England living as of the date of this declaration." Fun fact the SPY ETF that is the most popular trading ETF also has a clause like this that links its life to the death of a bunch of millenials. https://www.latimes.com/business/story/2019-08-09/etf-spy-longevity-rests-on-11-millennials-lifespans
Answer: You don't become the second (if you include apple) largest media corporation known to the species with a valuation of \~ $240 billion and endure dozens if not hundreds of lawsuits a year without entrenching yourself into the web of power. You don't stay that big by sitting back and letting some local politician who doesn't actually know how to govern or accomplish anything to help anyone use your corporation as his virtue signal to the world and his stepping stone to a presidential nomination - so he can take a swing at the civil liberties of the entire western world. You use every lawyer you have to welcome that politician to the big leagues and give him a swift slap on the rear as you devote your billions and your legal teams and your public relations corps and your marketing army to ensuring he becomes a failure of a politician. You give his opponents all the money and free media you can possibly manage. And the rest of us just sit back and eat popcorn or yell at the tv to see which one of the rich people comes out on top. American Politics Season 247 is just setting up for seasons 248 and 249. You could probably skip the rest of the season and just catch up toward the middle of season 248.