Does this mean that you are also Psychic?

Sorry I could not meet you today, but I was carrying one of those boxes with signatures signed by over 20% of Anaheim Registered Voters and you left before Todd was innterviewed and mentioned that we hope that the initiative will in fact be placed on the June Ballot along with the referendum to overturn the April 24, 2007 vote of the council. I believe that this is the first time in the last 30 years that such a referendum has been needed to overturn the vote of the Anaheim City Council.

At last the people of this community will have our voices heard, rather than the skewed viewpoints of three representatives, who fail to understand just how many people hate the idea of messing with the Resort. Matt, you looked especially comfy in the sandals. Makes me wish I was wearing some, hauling those heavy boxes in heels was a bit problematic, but worth it. Of course, City Council could have saved us all this hassle, we know the people of Anaheim will vote to preserve the Resort, no matter when the items are on the ballot. I'm glad Matt could make it to the party to share in our celebration. Have a great day.

Does this mean that you are also Psychic?

Nope, just hoping for some consistency from Disney/SOAR.

You mean Lori Galloway's motion to put the referendum on the Feb. ballot didn't receive a motion?

What a joke, the Hernandez/Galloway/Kring voting bloc screwed up big time on this one.

Too bad,
I thought we might start a psychic reality show. I'm glad that the referendum is going to be on the ballot and hopefully along with the initiative that we turned in today so that the voters will determine the future of our resort.

Too bad, I thought we might start a psychic reality show.

LOL

Go Disney

Go SunCal

Go citizens of Anaheim

Go Angels

SOAR is a Rock Star!

And who was that speaking for SunCal last night? Was that this Jubald guy?

The brain:

New handle?

Don't call other people names when you won't even use your own.

You gave me that name...remember?

Who was the guy speaking for SunCal? Was he part of your team?

Just..Asking??

The point is no name calling, Just...Asking. You know as much.

If we’re done with the name calling, let’s get back to the facts. Now, the SOAR folk are just volunteers, so it is hard keeping up with the full time misinformation campaign that Matt keeps coming up with. (See, some of us donate our time to this issue because we actually believe in what we’re doing, as opposed to being paid for it) In the interest of trying to earn a living, I frequently have to let your non-truths go, but you keep coming back to this one, so let’s look at the Westcot thing. Matt, you make it sound like Disney promised Westcot in exchange for a lot of City funded improvements, as if Mickey pulled a bait and switch. But Westcot was set out as a proposal or a possibility, and holding them to it a decade later is not only petty, it is as asinine as all of us coming back later and saying that SunCal promised to build a hotel/condo combo, since that seems to be what was floated as a compromise. It is all part of negotiating, and nothing is a promised deal until it is inked. You know that. In addition, the City staff that worked that deal, Lisa Stipkovitch, Dave Morgan, Joel Ficke, and Tom Wood, are still around. If Disney had broken promises to the people of Anaheim, you bet your sweet bippy that Galloway, Hernandez and Kring would be interrogating their staff, digging this stuff up to bludgeon Disney with right now. But just for fun, I will pull the public record info on the Westcot deal, as well as the Resort District formation. So Matt, I suggest you get your facts right, because you already have egg on your face with every other argument you have tossed out, and this bit of BS is about to be exposed as well.

You also make it sound like Disney got the City to pay for improvements that only Disney benefits from, but the City gained a benefit with improved rates for using Disney’s stellar credit rating rather than the City’s then-in-the-toilet credit rating. And the City floated all kinds of municipal infrastructure in that package, including the Convention Center expansion. Get it right Matt, your credibility is tanking because you keep throwing out these red herrings. The very fact that you have to go back 14 years to find something to gripe about is in itself telling of how far you are reaching to fling mud. Keep it current, let’s talk about the facts. And now, I am going back to work.

(See, some of us donate our time to this issue because we actually believe in what we’re doing, as opposed to being paid for it)

You're a paragon of virtue, Cynthia.

So what does your statement say about all the paid folks herding you all around at the signature turn-in? Or are they working pro-bono? Or are Disney/SOAR's messages automatically suspect because they are being propagated by a paid campaign team.

Be careful how you wield that particular sword, Cynthia. It cuts both ways.

So.....back to the issues. Are you absolutely certain of the charges you are leveling at Disney over the Resort formation and Westcot? I will probably log out for a few days to get caught up on work and pull the research. Back up those facts, Matt. I do not want to spend from now to June flinging mud, but I would absolutely LOVE to engage you in a good, honest debate on the merits of the Resort issue. No names, no nastiness, no posting personal stuff about each other. Just the facts. You game?

Cynthia:

Do you think the Resort was formed in a vacuum? I remember Disney trying to get the offramp. The editor of our magazine was working at the Anaheim Marriott and remembers the travelling WestCOT model. I know people who remember the community meetings.

What are you going to do -- come back and tell me Anaheim did all that to get California Adventure?

As the the personal stuff -- that hasn't been coming from me, Cynthia. That's been rolling down a one-way street from your side.

So if I find that Disney promised Westcot, in exchange for a bunch of City financed improvements, I apologize and, what, wash your car? But if I find otherwise, then what? How much are you willing to put on that chopping block, Matt? Your job?

If you guys have gotten a set of facts correct, I have not seen it yet. You said the Resort did not generate 50% of the City's funding. CBRE says otherwise. You said this was about affordable housing. But SunCal's project becomes a net loss of affordable units. You said it was about property rights. But zoning has never been a taking under the law. You keep lobbing these mis-information bombs out there, and facts do not support anything that SunCal has said so far. Lucille Kring said 80% of what SOAR was saying was false. But when pressed she has not come up with a single example.

So put your reputation where your mouth is. Or blog is. Post stuff that is actually quantifiable. Posting a news item and then following it with an unsubstantiated opinion is silly. Why waste time disproving a negative? Talk real numbers to me.

What exactly do you think Disney promised in exchanged for what specific benefits? And what has been reneged on? I think that is pretty straight forward.

And I have never said anything personal about you. My only personal reference was to the address attached to a website, and that was because I was IMPRESSED that someone your age was doing well enough at what he did to own that square footage in OC's market. That is hard to do, and you should be proud of being that good at this. That was not "creepy." I was sincere that day. Any sarcasm you heard was in your own head.

So let's quit the mud flinging and talk facts. Tell me precisely what you believe was promised in exchange for specific and definable benefits, and show me what was not produced, in defense of your position that Disney has no stand to say "a deal is a deal".

You said the Resort did not generate 50% of the City's funding. CBRE says otherwise. You said this was about affordable housing.

No, it didn't. That number in the CBRE was 45% or 45%, I believe.

The city budget guys comes of with figures, you guys dismiss them. Disney's consultant comes up with a study, and you act as if it came from the Burning Bush.

Somehow, if SunCal had hired a reputable company to do a study and the numbers didn't match Disney/SOAR's expectations, the study would be dismissed because SunCal paid for it. Disney pays for it, and it is beyond reproach.

It's just like your side repeated claim that 21,000 voters asked to have the zoning repealed. That is an outright lie. Disney/SOAR can in no way substantiate that claim, yet your side continues to repeat it.

Again.
What exactly do you think Disney promised in exchange for what specific benefits? And what has been reneged on? You strated this conversation with the Westcot thing, so let's hear it.

Sorry. "Started" not "strated". Lysdexia claims another victim.

Cythnia,

I see where you're going. It's a parsing strategy, and unless there is a document saying "Disney will build WestCOT if Anaheim does X,Y,Z" you are going to deny Disney broke any promise. I don't recall if it got to that level of specificity, but I and other do remember it was the underlying draw -- along with Disney playing the "give us what we want or will build the 2nd park in Long Beach card" that they leveraged the resort district deal.

Keep in mind your side has maintained all along that "a deal is a deal" and "Disney kept is part of the deal" so you begin by conceding a deal was made.

Jubal, you're really getting pretty far out on the diving board here. What Cynthia is saying is that there was a "deal" - the establishment of the Resort District. Disney's creation of the Wescot thing was obviously not part of anythng or the City & Diz would have memorialized it in an agreement to do something - a DDA, in fact. Cities and developers do them all the time. Since there was none it's pretty cheesy to say Disney reneged on a deal.

And in any case, how is this issue germane to SunCal, who used political leverage to upset the "deal" by changing the zoning to insert 1500 units and dodging CEQA while they were at it?

It is my understanding that the “deal” was Disney used their better credit rating to guarantee the bonds, saving Anaheim bundles of money to put in public benefit infrastructure such as street widening, the Convention Center, etc. and the general clean up of the area was done in a public-private partnership. In addition, business and property owners in the area agreed to set a standard, from the design of the signage to the zoning and land use of parcels. By banding together, knowing that they could count on each other to improve and develop the Resort into the world-class destination it has become, they were all willing to pour money into their own improvements. We see it all the time in preservation, get an HPOZ into place and folks can invest in rehabbing that bungalow, but if the underlying zoning is still upzoned, nobody wants to restore on old house if an incompatible use may be going in next door. The reassurance of a set standard is essential for revitalization. Same holds for the Resort. All of those businesses, from Disney to the ticket agency across Harbor, staked their futures on the neighbors holding together as Resort uses.

So now you come along and claim that SunCal does not have to uphold that agreement, because you think Disney did not abide by some unwritten, unspecified action. You base your client’s demand for a zone change on an unprovable charge. How convenient is that? Do we next debate the existence of UFOs?

I will try to get the info on Resort formation. I have to believe that if a financial moron like myself knows enough to make sure my house comes with the porch swing and window treatments before agreeing to escrow terms, then someone as savvy as City staff would know to get conditions in writing. Let’s see what the deal was before we accuse Disney of breaking it.

In the meantime, have a great weekend.

RP:

I've been listening to these guys for months. That is what they say: Disney kept its part of the bargain, Disney has held up its end of the deal, and if there is any change in the Resort District zoning, then the city is reneging on its end of the deal.

I have yet to hear you accuse Disney/SOAR of being cheesy.

"I have yet to hear you accuse Disney/SOAR of being cheesy."

Are you offering me a job as a subcontractor? ;)

No, just a periodic turning of your jaundiced eye in Disney's direction. SunCal sought a zoning change. Disney's trying to achieve effective control of the resort district via a ballot-box zoning initiative. You've had a lot to say about the former, but scarcely anything about the latter.

Well, that's too bad. I could use another source of income!

What Zenger could use is a source of credibility.

Hey Ray, still enjoying your Lost Week-end?

no.

I still have my x-ray eyes, though.

Nice Vids Matt, I was waving at you in the second one. I'm going to sign off until 9/11 in case our council wants to give Suncal a Freebie. For noe, both you and I have better things to do.

Enjoy yourself, Jim!

"I still have my x-ray eyes, though."

I dunno, Ray. I hear your voice but I see Rosie Grier's lips moving.

If SunCal wants to have the registered voters of Anaheim vote in their favor, why not do some or all of the following, based on Ms. Galloway's list that was printed in the OC Register.

Increase the percentage of Affordable Housing for its project, from 15% to 30 to 50% of the project.

Take a portion of the over $60 million (based on the current about $2 million per acre for Commercial use compared to the $5 million or so for Residential use) that SunCal will make just in the increased land value due to the rezoning and give it to the city of Anaheim to help pay for the increased services that will be needed with the new residents, such as adding school classrooms and teachers. Say $20 to $30 million of that profit that the City Council tried to give SunCal just by the act of rezoning.

Submitting an actual plan for the property and an environmental report prior to the June election so the citizens can make an informed decision.

Working with the businesses in the Resort Area to make sure no other area is removed from the commercial/tourism uses, which brings in a lot of tax revenue that benefits the entire city.

Of course, IMHO, you won't see SunCal do any of this, as they are just interesting in the Tens of Millions of dollars they will make on the project, and are trying to avoid spending anything they don't have to, heck they haven't even bought the property in question yet.

Should be an interesting 8 months... Will SunCal just keep trying to paint Disney as evil and the bad guy, or will they try and communicate why their project will benefit the City of Anaheim and its residents?

David,

How about a scenario where SunCal realizes they are about to be thoroughly trounced in the June election, and rather than throw good money after bad, they just go home to Irvine rather than continue to paint Disney as the "evilest place on earth"?

Hey, a girl can hope. Jim is right, we all have better things to do. Have a great weekend.
CW

Interesting news regarding what Disney is planning to do in an Disney Park update by Al Lutz over at MiceAge.com (Full disclosure, I do provide content for the website).

http://www.miceage.com/allutz/al082807a.htm

>>Of course, when bulldozers move in to the rest of Paradise Pier in a few months it will be difficult to pretend they aren't doing something big. But right now TDA is keeping all of their cards very close to their vest as they continue to lay out a winning strategy against the housing developer and a few city council members pitted against them.

One plan being considered however is to come out with guns blazing and lay all of the big budget plans for Anaheim out on the table to impress the voters, just to prove Disney is very serious about investing heavily in the Anaheim Resort District.

So it looks like Disney will be investing a LOT in the fight to keep the resort area zoned for commercial/tourist uses. At what point does SunCal decide to stop spending money on the fight and just count the amount already spent as a business expense and find another project. Might be sooner than later, CW.

And I hoped everyone had a good weekend.

David,
Thanks for the update. The article with pictures is great. I think Al is showing that the Disney management of today is not the Disney management of Yesterday and that they really want to upgrade DCA into a park that people will want to go to rather than as an overflow facility for Disneyland. Along with the possibility that they will be managing the two hotels in GardenWalk, this clearly shows Disney's commitment to Anaheim.

I was talking to a few of Anaheim's finest today and their concern is that GardenWalk could become another Block of Orange unless Disney, the City and GardenWalk can fund some officers to patrol that venue to keep the gang bangers from taking it over.

Keep up the good work!

Hi Jim, thanks for the comments about the pictures (many I took, let me plug my NON-commercial website darkbeer.smugmug.com). I am lucky I found a hobby I like and get to meet and know a lot of folks such as Al Lutz, David Koenig, etc..

I am very fortunate to get into the inner working at Disney and know a lot of the "future" before it is announced and/or leaked to the public. Heck, I knew about the AGW Disney talks for weeks, but of course, couldn't talk about it, though now, with the LA Times mentioning Al's update (and confirming the info from another source (not me ;) it is public knowledge, and let me also state, not a final deal, Disney is talking with AGW and has come close to a deal, but to the best of my knowledge has not yet signed a contract with the AGW owners.

As to the "gang" issues, I think that Anaheim has done a great job with Downtown Disney (and especially the House of Blues concert venue) in keeping the "peace". I know that the city and Disney made a deal and much of Downtown Disney's public walkways are "public" streets instead of private sidewalks, which allows for better police access in the shopping area.

They way I understand it, the Anaheim Garden Walk (official spelling, why do the newspapers get it wrong and eliminate the space?) will have to rely mainly on private security, but hopefully will keep up a good standard, similar to the Convention Center area.

But the point is, Disney is taking the zoning issues seriously and is planning a major campaign both in the terms of words (aka campaigning expenses) and in actions (such as announcing its plans to spend BILLIONS of dollars in the Anaheim Resort Area) to let folks know why it is important that the city of Anaheim remains solid on the deal it made when the Resort Area was formed.

And to get back to the main subject, which is NOT Disney, but SunCal and its proposed project, hopefully they will realize that they found a project that they can't bully and throw their weight around in getting a project approved just to make a massive profit and taking advantage of the city and its citizens. I think the sooner they realize this, the better, as if they go toe-to-toe in a war of words, the city loses, some council members will more than likely lose (as in not getting re-elected) and that BOTH companies will get smeared more than they deserve.

This is just my PERSONAL OPINION, but I see no way that the SunCal project will be approved and don't understand why they want to go forward. Yes, tens of millions of profit in rezoning a location is very nice, but with the current situation and the very highly likelihood of them loosing, why spend the time, effort, political favors and money to go forward?