Business
Disney faces losing control of its kingdom with Florida bill
By Mike Schneider in Orlando
ORLANDO, Fla. (AP) — Disney’s government in Florida has been the envy of any private business, with its unprecedented powers in deciding what to build and how to build it at the Walt Disney World Resort, issuing bonds and holding the ability to build its own nuclear plant if it wanted.
Those days are numbered as a new bill released this week puts the entertainment giant’s district firmly in the control of Florida’s governor and legislative leaders in what some see as punishment for Disney’s opposition to the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” lawchampioned by Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis and the Republican-controlled Legislature.
“Disney won’t like it because they’re not in control,” said Richard Foglesong, professor emeritus at Rollins College, who wrote a definitive account of Disney’s Reedy Creek Improvement Districtin his book, “Married to the Mouse: Walt Disney World and Orlando.”
With that loss of control comes an uncertainty about how Disney’s revamped government and Walt Disney World, which it governs, will work together — whether the left hand always will be in sync with the right hand as it has been with the company overseeing both entities.
The uniqueness of Disney’ government, where building inspectors examine black box structures holding thrill rides instead of office buildings, also complicates matters. The district essentially runs a midsize city. On any given day, as many as 350,000 people are on Disney World’s 27,000 acres (11,000 hectares) as theme park visitors, overnight hotel guests or employees. The 55-year-old district has to manage the traffic, dispose of the waste and control the plentiful mosquitoes.
“What kind of control is preferable? Control by a private business or corporation, or control by appointed officials, appointed by governor of the state?” Foglesong said. “Will they have the expertise to be able to make the new district work as efficiently as the old district works?”
The bill prohibits anybody who has worked or had a contract with a theme park or entertainment complex in the past three years, or their relatives, from serving on the revamped district’s board of supervisors, a prohibition that some experts say eliminates people with expertise in the field.
The bill’s sponsor, Florida Rep. Fred Hawkins, a Republican from St. Cloud, defended the exclusion Tuesday.
“This was a provision I requested,” Hawkins said. “We want to try to avoid any conflicts of interest of the new board members.”
Under the bill’s proposals, Florida’s governor appoints the five-member board of supervisors to the renamed Central Florida Tourism Oversight District instead of Disney. Limits would be placed on the district’s autonomy by making it subject to oversight and regulation by state agencies, and it would be unable to adopt any codes that conflict with state regulations. The district also would no longer have the ability, if it wanted, to own and operate an airport, stadium, convention center or nuclear power plant.
DeSantis started gunning for Disney’s private government last year when the entertainment giant publicly opposed what critics call the “Don’t Say Gay” law, which bars instruction on sexual orientation, gender identity and other lessons deemed not age-appropriate in kindergarten through third grade. Republican critics of the Disney district also argued it has given the company an unfair advantage over rivals in issuing bonds and financing expansion.
The Legislature passed a bill last year to dissolve the Disney government by June 2023.
Lawmakers are meeting this week for a special session to complete the state takeover of the district and approve other key conservative priorities of the governor on immigration and voter fraud. A Senate committee approved separate bills Tuesday to expand the governor’s migrant relocation program and allow the statewide prosecutor to bring election crime charges.
Florida Rep. Anna Eskamani, a Democrat from Orlando, calledthe Disney bill on Monday a “power grab” by DeSantis, a potential 2024 presidential candidate who has emerged as a fierce opponent of what he describes as “woke” policies on race, gender and public health. Such positions endear him to the GOP’s conservative base but threaten to alienate independents and moderate voters in both parties who are influential in presidential politics.
The changes proposed in the legislation were welcomed by at least one group of Reedy Creek employees — firefighters who have clashed in the past with district leaders. Tim Stromsnes, a spokesperson for Reedy Creek Professional Firefighters Local 2117, said all the current board cares about is “bonds and low-interest loans for building Disney infrastructure, and zero about treating its employees fairly.”
“We think they are going to be more receptive to first responders,” Stomsnes said Tuesday of the proposed new board. “They’re calling the governor a fascist for doing this … but he is actually fixing a fascist, Disney-owned government.”
To the relief of taxpayers in neighboring Orange and Osceola counties, the district won’t be dissolved, a prospect that had raised fears that the counties would have to absorb the district’s responsibilities and raise property taxes significantly. The Reedy Creek Improvement District has more than $1 billion in bond debt.
In a statement, Orange County said officials were monitoring the bill.
The new bill appears to address some key questions raised by last year’s legislation, primarily preserving the district’s ability to raise revenue and service outstanding debt, said Michael Rinaldi, head of local government ratings for Fitch Ratings.
Foglesong expects a legal challenge should the bill pass. Disney didn’t respond to an inquiry asking about any potential lawsuits.
“Disney works under a number of different models and jurisdictions around the world, and regardless of the outcome, we remain committed to providing the highest quality experience for the millions of guests who visit each year,” Jeff Vahle, president of Walt Disney World Resort, said in a statement.
Disney could make an argument that their rights as a private business are being undermined, Foglesong said.
“It will have political appeal, the arguments they make, in a Republican state for a potential presidential candidate,” Foglesong said. “It will be like, legally, ‘How can you do this to us?’ and politically, ‘How can you do this to a corporation that has done so much for the state of Florida?'”
___
Associated Press writer Anthony Izaguirre in Tallahassee, Florida contributed to this report.
___
Follow Mike Schneider on Twitter at @MikeSchneiderAP
Economy
Federal government should listen to Canadians and trim the bureaucracy
From the Fraser Institute
By Jake Fuss and Grady Munro
Under Prime Minister Trudeau the government has introduced sweeping national programs in the areas of dental care, daycare and pharmacare, increased cash transfers to some Canadians while also spending billions on corporate welfare.
Under the Trudeau government, the number of federal government employees has grown substantially, and new polling shows that many Canadians would prefer to see that number decline. This would be a step in the right direction, as the growing size of government imposes costs on Canadians with little to no evidence suggesting they’re better off because of it.
Specifically, from 2015 (the year Prime Minister Trudeau was first elected) to March 2024 (the latest month of available data), the number of federal employees grew from 257,034 to 367,772. In other words, in nine years the Trudeau government has increased the size of the federal bureaucracy by 43.1 per cent, nearly three times the rate of population growth (15.2 per cent) over that same period.
In response, many Canadians believe the government should begin cutting back. According a recent poll, when made aware of this increase, nearly half (47 per cent) of respondents said the federal government should start reducing the number of employees while only 7 per cent said the government should hire more.
The growth of the federal public service is part of the Trudeau government’s approach to governance, which has been to increase Ottawa’s involvement in the economy and day-to-day lives of Canadians. Under Prime Minister Trudeau the government has introduced sweeping national programs in the areas of dental care, daycare and pharmacare, increased cash transfers to some Canadians while also spending billions on corporate welfare.
In other words, the Trudeau government has vastly increased the size of government in Canada.
One way to understand the size of government is to measure government spending as a share of the overall economy (GDP), which shows the extent to which economic activity is directly or indirectly controlled by government activities. From 2014/15 to 2024/25, total federal spending (as a share of GDP) will increase from 14.1 per cent to a projected 17.9 per cent—meaning federal bureaucrats now control a larger share of economic activity than they did before the Trudeau government came to power.
Of course, Canadian taxpayers ultimately foot the bill for a larger federal government, and 86 per cent of middle-income Canadians now pay higher taxes than in 2015. Yet for all this increased spending and taxation, it’s unclear Canadians are better off.
In fact, inflation-adjusted GDP per person (a broad measure of living standards) has been in a historic decline since mid-2019, and as of the second quarter of 2024 it sat below the level it was at the end of 2014. And recent polling shows that 74 per cent of respondents feel the average Canadian family is overtaxed, while 44 per cent feel they receive “poor” or “very poor” value from government services.
Clearly, the federal government should break from the status quo and take a different approach focused on smaller and smarter government. A good first step would be to listen to Canadians and trim the number of bureaucrats.
Authors:
Subs
Alberta
Province will not allow liquor sales in Alberta grocery and convenience stores
MLA committee completes liquor model review
Minister for Service Alberta and Red Tape Reduction Dale Nally has accepted recommendations to maintain the current liquor retail model.
After a comprehensive review, the MLA Advisory Committee tasked with evaluating Alberta’s liquor retail model has recommended to the Minister of Service Alberta and Red Tape Reduction that the province should not move forward with allowing liquor sales in grocery and convenience stores. The review into the potential expansion of liquor sales into grocery and convenience stores was initiated to explore the feasibility and impact of such a change on Alberta’s retail liquor industry.
“The idea of expanding liquor sales to grocery and convenience stores has been mused about for years. I’m grateful for the significant work done by MLAs to look into the feasibility and wisdom of such an expansion and the recommendations they’ve put forward. I am pleased to accept those recommendations and ensure Alberta continues to uphold our current model, which is one of the most open in Canada.”
The committee’s recommendation comes after extensive consultations with industry representatives, business owners and experts. The decision to uphold the current model was made to protect Alberta’s private liquor industry, which has been a pillar of economic growth and job creation since privatization in the 1990s.
“Alberta’s private liquor model is a jewel in the crown and allows small businesses to thrive while providing a wide variety of products and services. I accept the MLA committee’s recommendation to keep a level playing field and ensure the continued success of these businesses.”
“Expanding liquor sales to grocery and convenience stores may seem convenient for consumers, but it would have a detrimental effect on the retail liquor store industry. Our review determined that such a move would significantly harm small businesses and could ultimately lead to widespread closures, job losses and diminished selection for consumers.”
The MLA committee’s findings underscore the strength and diversity of Alberta’s existing private liquor model, which offers Albertans one of the most varied selections of alcohol in the country, along with competitive pricing and tailored customer service.
After consulting with members of the liquor industry and analyzing the economic effects, the committee concluded that expanding liquor sales to grocery and convenience stores would significantly harm Alberta’s existing private liquor retail model. Allowing sales of this nature would likely lead to widespread closures of independent liquor stores, job losses and a decrease in product variety and customer service. As a result, the committee recommended maintaining the current model to preserve the strength and stability of Alberta’s unique private liquor industry.
Quick facts
- With more than 1,600 stores and 36,000 liquor products, Alberta has one of the most open liquor markets in Canada.
- There are no barriers to listing a product in Alberta, as licensed liquor agents can pick and choose any products to bring into the province.
-
Business2 days ago
Some dockworkers earn more than $400,000 a year
-
Crime2 days ago
EXCLUSIVE: GOP Rep Demands Answers From FBI Over ‘Misguided’ Crime Stats
-
Crime2 days ago
Bukele Defends El Salvador’s Gang Reforms
-
Alberta1 day ago
Province will not allow liquor sales in Alberta grocery and convenience stores
-
International2 days ago
Rescue group issues warning to Jews, Americans over potential terrorist threats
-
conflict2 days ago
Israel Reportedly Warned Iran It Would Strike Nuclear Sites If It Was Attacked, Officials Say
-
Brownstone Institute2 days ago
Study Confirms the Truth about Masks and Children
-
illegal immigration1 day ago
Cartels, UN, and NGOs Fuel U.S. Border Crisis – A Report from Colombia