4 ms·

Any new or existing municipality can take over those bonds. They do it all the time. And as a fallback the state could take those on and refinance them and pay

Any new or existing municipality can take over those bonds. They do it all the time. And as a fallback the state could take those on and refinance them and pay then off. It's really not difficult, but the author makes it seem to be. As for the millage rate, if Reedy Creek is higher than the state maximum, I'm curious for what valuation Disney appraises its own property, since the millage rate is only part of the story.

mikeryan 5y ago
Sure another municipality “could” take over the bonds. They just can’t afford them.
edmundsauto 5y ago
Except one of the bonds cannot be redeemed early, and based on the taxation rate authorized to Reedy Creek means the underlying terms of the bonds have been changed. The Florida state constitution apparently has strict limits on the state governments ability to interfere with contracts, and according to the article, that is also strongly held in previous Supreme Court cases. This article is written by an attorney based in Florida. I think it’s probably reasonable to defer to their expertise, in this case. after all, they are an attorney with experience in the state - are you?
- bdonlan 5y ago
  The state _could_ attempt to negotiate with bondholders to repurchase the bonds - probably at a significant premium, however. Of course, if one of the bondholders refuses to sell, there wouldn't be much they can do... (I wonder if Disney holds any of those bonds for this very reason?)
  - tantalor 5y ago
    > if one of the bondholders refuses to sell eminent domain has entered the chat
cldellow 5y ago
> I'm curious for what valuation Disney appraises its own property It doesn't seem that Disney is responsible for property appraisals. See, for example, this news story [1] about them suing Orange County to get their assessments lowered. [1]: https://floridapolitics.com/archives/440815-what-is-disney-world-actually-worth-tax-assessment-battle-heads-to-court/ https://floridapolitics.com/archives/440815-what-is-disney-w...
ryaniscool 5y ago
I saw a better article in my local newspaper[0]. According to that article, Disney already pays property taxes to both Orange and Osceola county for their properties inside the respective counties. Essentially, they are double taxed. This is not unusual because this is how it works if you live in an incorporated city in Florida. You pay taxes to both the city and the county. Disney just runs their own little city. The problem is that the legislator is basically unincorporating the city that Disney runs. This is a huge problem for the counties' taxpayers. They will have to absorb the budget of this now unincorporated city as well as the $1 billion debt. [0] https://www.floridatoday.com/story/money/business/2022/04/23/disney-desantis-florida-dissolves-reedy-creek-impact/7408784001/ https://www.floridatoday.com/story/money/business/2022/04/23...
toast0 5y ago
From what I read, if the district is dissolved, the counties would need to assume the bonds. But, currently, the district is taxing the property to pay for the bonds at a rate that's much higher than is allowed for the counties to levy. If the counties assume the bonds, they'd need to increase taxes across the board to pay for them. If it's really the policy of the Florida government to retaliate against Disney by relieving them of their debt service; how does that dissuade Disney? How do the citizens of the two counties feel? Is it appropriate for governments to retaliate against companies for opposition or support of a law?

mikeryan 5y ago

Sure another municipality “could” take over the bonds. They just can’t afford them.

edmundsauto 5y ago

Except one of the bonds cannot be redeemed early, and based on the taxation rate authorized to Reedy Creek means the underlying terms of the bonds have been changed. The Florida state constitution apparently has strict limits on the state governments ability to interfere with contracts, and according to the article, that is also strongly held in previous Supreme Court cases. This article is written by an attorney based in Florida. I think it’s probably reasonable to defer to their expertise, in this case. after all, they are an attorney with experience in the state - are you?

bdonlan 5y ago
The state _could_ attempt to negotiate with bondholders to repurchase the bonds - probably at a significant premium, however. Of course, if one of the bondholders refuses to sell, there wouldn't be much they can do... (I wonder if Disney holds any of those bonds for this very reason?)
- tantalor 5y ago
  > if one of the bondholders refuses to sell eminent domain has entered the chat

cldellow 5y ago

> I'm curious for what valuation Disney appraises its own property It doesn't seem that Disney is responsible for property appraisals. See, for example, this news story [1] about them suing Orange County to get their assessments lowered. [1]: https://floridapolitics.com/archives/440815-what-is-disney-world-actually-worth-tax-assessment-battle-heads-to-court/ https://floridapolitics.com/archives/440815-what-is-disney-w...

ryaniscool 5y ago

I saw a better article in my local newspaper[0]. According to that article, Disney already pays property taxes to both Orange and Osceola county for their properties inside the respective counties. Essentially, they are double taxed. This is not unusual because this is how it works if you live in an incorporated city in Florida. You pay taxes to both the city and the county. Disney just runs their own little city. The problem is that the legislator is basically unincorporating the city that Disney runs. This is a huge problem for the counties' taxpayers. They will have to absorb the budget of this now unincorporated city as well as the $1 billion debt. [0] https://www.floridatoday.com/story/money/business/2022/04/23/disney-desantis-florida-dissolves-reedy-creek-impact/7408784001/ https://www.floridatoday.com/story/money/business/2022/04/23...

toast0 5y ago

From what I read, if the district is dissolved, the counties would need to assume the bonds. But, currently, the district is taxing the property to pay for the bonds at a rate that's much higher than is allowed for the counties to levy. If the counties assume the bonds, they'd need to increase taxes across the board to pay for them. If it's really the policy of the Florida government to retaliate against Disney by relieving them of their debt service; how does that dissuade Disney? How do the citizens of the two counties feel? Is it appropriate for governments to retaliate against companies for opposition or support of a law?