The City Council is holding the Tax Rebate Incentive hostage from Disney because of the change of address of the hotel. Its that simple.
The reason the current councils is doing this, is because the majority of them don't agree that Disney should be getting a rebate.
But, no matter anyones current opinion of the rebate, the previous council approved it. And, therefore, it should be honored.
If the city does not honor the agreement, then that sets a precedent that the city can/will void an agreement legally made; if the council suddenly decides it is not to their liking. That does not look good to new business or business that wants to expand within the city.
I don't see it as a the city voiding an agreement legally made, because they're not voiding anything, and correct me if I'm wrong, but as far as I've read, the city basically said that if they want to build their hotel with their tax break, they are free to do so at the location they initially applied for/agreed on. Additionally, the city is not allowing them to change the address. Again the point being Disney wants to change the existing deal which the city doesn't want to do, not the city voiding the current one.
My guess is they'll come to sort of middle ground and get the project done on time.
^That is correct. The original hotel plans are still valid with the rebate.
The issue with that is, the city didn't tell Disney that in october when they submitted new plans in a new location. They told them over 9 months later, after Disney had started the project. And, in my opinion, I believe the City did this to try and "Have their cake, and eat it too". Trying to get to a point where Disney would still go ahead with the project because of investments already made, even if the City revoked the rebate. It's the city playing dirty, and I have had enough of it.
Moving the hotel does require changes to the agreement, and the city is refusing to make them. There-by voiding the agreement.
COASTER FREAK 11 wrote:As a Tax payer, who lives in anaheim, this is the way I see it -
I didn't want to paste your big quote of text, so I included this part only, but I just wanted to say, great job with that post. That's EXACTLY how I see it. If they didn't like it, they should have told them when Disney gave them the heads up the location was being moved 8 months ago. Not after people lose their jobs and renters have left DD and Disney has been thinking for the last 8 months this is a "go" until mere DAYS before their meet up with the council.
And for a second, let's ignore technicalities, and just be practical here: moving the hotel 1000 feet away on the same property is by NO MEANS a reasonable justification for any of this City Council crap, and is absurdly petty. It's going to be advantageous for the city no matter where it is.
What seems to be happening, is they're hoping by pulling a fast one at the last minute, that Disney will just say screw it, and still move forward with the location change, thus annulling the tax breaks. Very shady sleazy way to go about business if you ask me.
Also, I just want to add: I was an Orange County resident for 30 years before I moved a couple years ago (because I was fed up with California) and live about 10 minutes from Disneyland so I was always driving by the park on the 5, or driving around the park to different locations in Anaheim. And I don't know if this was all Disney but back when CA Adventure opened, Disney pretty much did a complete face-lift of the entire surrounding area of the resort. I'm talking redoing streets, a carpool lane bridge off the 5 freeway, lightpoles, medians with huge nice trees, even BUS stops were improved. The ENTIRE AREA was redone and it was done SO well, and it still looks good today. I'm definitely not in the "let Disney do whatever they want" boat, but for craps sake, anytime they do anything, it's nothing but good for the entire community. Even if you're just on Harbor going South, all the hotels and restaurants just have a "community" and resort feel to them, and it's extraordinary.
There would be nothing like that if Disney wasn't there, so I am of the opinion the city should be a little more lenient with a company that has practically put Anaheim on the map and has driven the surrounding economy for the past 40+ years.
I have no doubt the hotel will still be built. Disney is leaving hundreds of millions of dollars a year in revenue on the table by not building a desperately needed new hotel on their property.
It is entirely possible that no one understood the legal ramifications of moving the address until recently. A new deal will be reached where the city gets a little more back (hopefully that deal doesn't screw the CM's: if the ballot measure passes in November raising Anaheim Resort District minimum wage to $18/hr by 2022, I have no doubt Disney will try to exempt themselves from it) and everyone can say they won.
So, in a very surprising turn, Disney went to the city, and asked to be released from ALL current tax agreements. This will allow them to avoid the $18 min wage on the November Ballot, if it were to pass.
Id guess someone did the math and found that any savings from these tax credits would be less than having to pay people $18 minimum wage.
Not surprising at all if you read my post right above yours. But city got more than even I would have guessed.
City had been Disney's bitch for years...finally found a way to fight back and actually won. My guess is Disney will still end up paying the $18/hr as part of the next union negotiations in 3 years, but by not taking the tax incentives they are clearly trying to work around the perpetual inflation or 2% annual minimum wage increase that comes with the law after the $18/hr minimum is hit.
These pages are in no way affiliated with nor endorsed by SeaWorld Parks & Entertainment, Cedar Fair, Legoland, Merlin Entertainment, Blackstone, Tussaud's Group, Six Flags, Universal Theme Parks, the Walt Disney Company or any other theme park company.
photos and videos on this website were taken with the permission of the park by
a professional ride photographer.
For yours and others safety, please do not attempt to take photos or videos at
parks without proper permission.
You need a sense of humor to view our site,
if you don't have a sense of humor, or are easily offended, please turn back
Most of the content on this forum is suitable for all ages. HOWEVER! There may be some content that would be considered rated "PG-13." Theme Park Review is NOT recommended for ages under 13 years of age.