Disneyland Reopening Speculation Superthread

[DLgal]

So far everything I have seen/read it is still only PART of phase 3 that is allowed to open next Friday. I have seen nothing about movie theaters, casinos and other entertainment venues that are/were part of Stage 3 being allowed. Nail salons were explicitly not included and they were also stage 3.

My take on the way Stage 3 has been going is that there will be blocks of stage 3 openings until we are actually fully in Stage 3.

Yes, that is correct. However, Orange County has filed and been approved for Attestation, which means it can move more quickly through the phases, which is why in person dining and malls opened up a week ago here but it is not yet allowed everywhere in the state.

So, once the state releases guidance for reopening theme parks (which they have not yet) the County Health Officer can decide to reopen them if the conditions support it. We don't know when the state will release that specific guidance, but they said to expect it "in the coming weeks."

Interestingly, Great Wolf Lodge has set a reopening date of June 13. They have been taking reservations for this date for a long time. I wonder if they will actually reopen on that date. Water park guidance has not yet been released either. I've been getting blasted with emails from them and they always use the language "We anticipate welcoming back guests on June 13." Maybe more guidance will be coming from the state this week?

Either way, we all know Disneyland won't be opening in June. However, I really do wonder what they are waiting for on reopening Downtown Disney. I wonder if the protests delayed their reopening plans. We went to pick up takeout last night from a restaurant in a large shopping center with several restaurants and the parking lot was PACKED FULL. All the restaurants were super busy. People are ready to go out.

 

[TikiTikiFan]

However, I really do wonder what they are waiting for on reopening Downtown Disney. I wonder if the protests delayed their reopening plans.

I think this is a big possibility. Can you imagine what press it would get if protesters gathered at Downtown Disney? If I was involved in the decision making, I’d be hesitant to open until the protests died down. Of course, would they even let you in through security if you were coming just to protest? No idea how that works.

Another interesting tidbit, a friend of mine is a freelance writer in CA and she said that many of the newspapers have paused a lot of articles having to do with theme park reopening to focus on the protests instead. The idea is that it’s be insensitive to the current climate to prioritize that over the movements happening right now. All rumor so who knows how true that is.

 

[midnight star]

A couple casinos already opened in San Diego County. This is one: https://www.sycuan.com/about-us/covid-19-updates/
I can't remember which other one, but it opened on the same day, May 20th. The news reported that both reached capacity by 11am and had long lines of people waiting to get in.

If I am not mistaken, the casinos that opened in May in San Diego County are on Native American land, so they are sovereign and don't have to follow state orders. They still are using precautions such as masks, social distancing, lower capacity, etc. but that is how they were able to open so early.

 

[TikiTikiFan]

I am hoping for a July opening- can start finalizing plans once we have an opening date. I thrive on planning so this is all making me bonkers!

I randomly picked October to reschedule but maybe I’d move it up to September or even August if they opened July. Especially with the fate of the Halloween parties unknown. I’d also love some Avengers Campus news too but who knows what will happen there.

 

[DLgal]

If I am not mistaken, the casinos that opened in May in San Diego County are on Native American land, so they are sovereign and don't have to follow state orders. They still are using precautions such as masks, social distancing, lower capacity, etc. but that is how they were able to open so early.

Aren't all casinos in the state on sovereign land parcels? Isn't that how they are legally allowed to operate?

 

[midnight star]

Aren't all casinos in the state on sovereign land parcels? Isn't that how they are legally allowed to operate?

They could be..Idk what the casino/gambling laws are here in California.

 

[mentos]

They could be..Idk what the casino/gambling laws are here in California.

Aren't all casinos in the state on sovereign land parcels? Isn't that how they are legally allowed to operate?

Yes and no —in 1988, a federal law was passed that required tribes to have compacts with states in order to operate gambling facilities. That compact was passed in California in 1998 (Proposition 5).

Prior to 1988, the only guidance on tribal gambling came from court cases which asserted that only the US Congress can regulate tribal activity on tribal land. That friction with states was addressed in the 1988 law.

ETA: Casinos reopening is a complicated question of whether tribes are subject to a state order, here’s an extensive discussion here if anyone wants to go deep into the weeds!

 

[DLgal]

Yes and no —in 1988, a federal law was passed that required tribes to have compacts with states in order to operate gambling facilities. That compact was passed in California in 1998 (Proposition 5).

Prior to 1988, the only guidance on tribal gambling came from court cases which asserted that only the US Congress can regulate tribal activity on tribal land. That friction with states was addressed in the 1988 law.

ETA: Casinos reopening is a complicated question of whether tribes are subject to a state order, here’s an extensive discussion here if anyone wants to go deep into the weeds!

But, essentially, gambling is illegal in CA and the only casinos allowed are the ones operated on tribal lands, since they are exempt from state laws on that.

 

[mentos]

But, essentially, gambling is illegal in CA and the only casinos allowed are the ones operated on tribal lands, since they are exempt from state laws on that.

they’re not exempt, they’re subject to the 1998 compact I referenced above per the 1988 federal law, but there’s a procedural question as to whether a public health order applies. This hasn’t been legally tested since the casinos closed and did not challenge in court.

 

[DLgal]

they’re not exempt, they’re subject to the 1998 compact I referenced above per the 1988 federal law, but there’s a procedural question as to whether a public health order applies. This hasn’t been legally tested since the casinos closed and did not challenge in court.

What I meant was that they are essentially "exempt" (in layman's terms) from the "Gambling is illegal in CA" rule. I understand that they have their own agreement (compact) with the state.

They can also permit smoking inside the casinos, whereas this is also illegal in CA in general. Only 3 out of 69 casinos in the state have decided to ban smoking.

 

[disneychrista]

Only 3 out of 69 casinos in the state have decided to ban smoking.

Our local casino tried to "ban" smoking and they saw a substantial decline so they reversed course and began to allow smoking again.

 

[hiroMYhero]

Valley View casino also opened last month. I haven’t checked Las Vegas updates other than to cancel our November reservations when this thread was focused on LV.

Casinos are still considered lower risk than amusement/theme parks:

https://www.mlive.com/public-intere...-36-activities-by-coronavirus-risk-level.html

 

[disneychrista]

Casinos are still considered lower risk than amusement/theme parks:

Makes sense to me. It is a lot easier to distance at a casino vs a theme park.

 

[mentos]

They can also permit smoking inside the casinos, whereas this is also illegal in CA in general. Only 3 out of 69 casinos in the state have decided to ban smoking.

Our local casino tried to "ban" smoking and they saw a substantial decline so they reversed course and began to allow smoking again.

on a side note, their allowing of smoking is the biggest reason I don’t step inside...probably best for my wallet!

Same reason why I avoided walking on the northeast side of the Matterhorn prior to the smoking ban

ETA: fun fact, on-park tobacco sales continued until 1999

 

[hiroMYhero]

WDW has added new reopening info as of this afternoon. DL may open with the same guidelines:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1269385720927531009

 

[midnight star]

WDW has added new reopening info as of this afternoon. DL may open with the same guidelines:

https://twitter.com/x/status/1269385720927531009

Interesting about the hotel reservations. I guess that squashes the rumor that people who are staying onsite get priority access...

 

[TikiTikiFan]

Interesting about the hotel reservations. I guess that squashes the rumor that people who are staying onsite get priority access...

I really hope that won’t be the case for Disneyland. The price you pay is so high when you can easily book across the street for less. If they have to take away EMH they’ll need some incentive to match that.. We’re staying onsite for the first time in October and I might switch to an off property hotel if they don’t guarantee access... Harder to justify it then.

Maybe resort guests will get first chance at reservations?

 

[midnight star]

I really hope that won’t be the case for Disneyland. The price you pay is so high when you can easily book across the street for less. If they have to take away EMH they’ll need some incentive to match that.. We’re staying onsite for the first time in October and I might switch to an off property hotel if they don’t guarantee access... Harder to justify it then.

Maybe resort guests will get first chance at reservations?

Yeah I realize this isn’t guaranteed to happen for DL but it’s interesting. It probably has something to do with capacity.

 

[mentos]

I have some thoughts:

1) The numbers of on-site rooms vs capacity controlled DL/DCA support priority access.

2) DLR’s closest analog (Shanghai DL) has priority access for hotel guests.

3) This isn’t a new idea. Guests staying on-site are not guaranteed access during max capacity periods of time (Christmas/New Year) either.

4) Just because Disney makes that disclaimer in policy does not mean they are allowed to peruse a more generous procedure.

Example: by rule, Disney owed nothing to AP holders as those passes never guarantee park access in its TOS. Instead, they chose to offer suspended payments, pushed forward expiration dates, etc... even though the “no guarantee” rule is on its books.​

​

And I’m being picky, but a hotel reservation doesn’t mean a checked-in guest. SDL’s procedures are to go to the front desk and buy tickets from there.

 

[TikiTikiFan]

Just because Disney makes that disclaimer in policy does not mean they are allowed to peruse a more generous procedure.

Good point, this could just be a way to cover their bases.

Plus don’t the majority of WDW guests stay onsite? I’m not as familiar with their demographics but that’s what I always assumed.