News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District

[AdventureHasAName]

If anyone thought this development would be the topic during the 50th Anniversary, what could possibly be the topic of the 60th??

Probably "Do we think they'll try and start and finish that Splash Mountain re-theme before the anniversary celebration starts?"

Or maybe ... "I wonder if Tron will be finished."

Or ... "I really hate that DeSantis AA in the Hall of Presidents. I don't think it's tasteful that the FDR AA is now giving him the finger."

 

[peter11435]

That's a huge part of my point. Technically, they (Disney) never got to approve their own permits so they can't march into court and say we've been injured because we don't get to approve our own permits anymore. All that has changed is the entity that approves the permits.


This is a stronger argument (taxes), but why and how are the taxes going up? You have Democrat elected officials proclaiming that the state legislature's action just gave Disney a major tax forgiveness. You have the guy who wrote the bill and the Governor saying that's wrong and that ultimately (the key word) the company's taxes will go up. But that's not enough to prove standing ("ultimately something bad is going to happen"). Disney would have to show in court how this dissolution (not something that happens a year from now in a different bill) caused their taxes to go up. I don't think they can because I don't think it does.

Again you are obsessed with permits. There are literally hundreds if not thousands of other details to this arrangement.

If you can’t see how even just threatening higher taxes if you don’t say what we want you to say is abridging free speech then I really can’t help you.

 

[Polkadotdress]

They have to show actual or imminent injury and I don't think they can. "We don't get to approve our own permits anymore" isn't an injury. And even if it was, I'm not sure Disney wants to even try and make that argument in court.

There are miles of green space preserved by Disney as natural habitat as part of the RCID. That’s some of the most valuable real estate in the country, and the dissolution of RCID could set off detrimental environmental impacts as the land could be sold/developed or claimed via “eminent domain”.

That’s harmful.

 

[drizgirl]

There are 1844 other special districts in FL, including neighborhoods like the Villages. It not just available to a few corporations.

Freedom of speech only means the government can’t curtail it. It doesn’t apply to private businesses.

Disney pays MORE in taxes due to having Reedy Creek. They’d actually pay less if it was dissolved. FL collected $780 million in state and local taxes from Disney last year.

Then Bob should send Ron a thank you note.

 

[AdventureHasAName]

There are miles of green space preserved by Disney as natural habitat as part of the RCID. That’s some of the most valuable real estate in the country, and the dissolution of RCID could set off detrimental environmental impacts as the land could be sold/developed or claimed via “eminent domain”.

That’s harmful.

But not to Disney.

 

[thomas998]

Thats what most articles do, tout the unknown. They are basing the predictions on what they know now as i said in my post. There are unknowns, but IMO I don’t think they can manage the amount of problems they will see in one year. It takes Disney 3 years to construct a kiosk anymore and people are expecting this to be figured out by june of next year? No chance.

Except it isn't Disney that is going to dictate the solution in this case. It will be the state of Florida and the counties that are impacted. Disney will likely have no control at all on how the Reedy Creek debt is dealt with. I suspect though that at the end of the day Disney will regret the can of worms they opened.

 

[drizgirl]

There are miles of green space preserved by Disney as natural habitat as part of the RCID. That’s some of the most valuable real estate in the country, and the dissolution of RCID could set off detrimental environmental impacts as the land could be sold/developed or claimed via “eminent domain”.

That’s harmful.

You must not have much faith in the governing ability of Orange and Osceola counties.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Except it isn't Disney that is going to dictate the solution in this case. It will be the state of Florida and the counties that are impacted. Disney will likely have no control at all on how the Reedy Creek debt is dealt with. I suspect though that at the end of the day Disney will regret the can of worms they opened.

Of course they wont dictate the solution, unless you think winning a lawsuit is actually the solution, then maybe it can be taken that way.
In what way did Disney “open a can of worms” as you put it. By voicing their opinion on something? Or am i not understanding what you mean? I hope its the latter because they are entitled to voice any opinion they want. Or should they have just shut up like another poster was saying earlier?

 

[GoofGoof]

Yes because free market capitalists believe in granting special privileges to only a few corporations and not everyone! Right!

In pure free market capitalism there are no taxes so it wouldn’t be an issue. That’s not what we are talking about here though.

So you oppose the government being pro-business in any way? For many, many years the governments in various places have been offering tax breaks to certain companies to bring jobs into an area. Look at the Amazon goat rodeo around their second HQ. You know the government does this to help grow the local economy and keep people employed. So now the narrative is No corporations should get these breaks? Again the gipper is rolling over in his grave. That is certainly the prerogative of the government to do and has been the stance in many liberal, blue areas, but remember that the economy is cyclical and while it’s hot right now it’s not going to always be that way. Companies have choices where to be located and where to expand jobs. It’s in the best interest of the people of FL to have a healthy relationship with their largest employer. Other companies are watching too. This makes FL less appealing for businesses and that’s not a great look for the state.

 

[GimpYancIent]

One fact that is never learned by too many people that publicly speak is "Words are like bullets. Once they are out, you can't control the damage they do."

 

[peter11435]

But not to Disney.

How would it not be harmful for Disney for the county to be able to take and sell Disney’s land?

 

[AdventureHasAName]

How would it not be harmful for Disney for the county to be able to take and sell Disney’s land?

I'm not aware of any provision of the RCID dissolution bill that takes or sells Disney's land.

 

[Club34]

If anyone thought this development would be the topic during the 50th Anniversary, what could possibly be the topic of the 60th??

How we feel about the Saudi based or China based conglomerate that is going to take over the WDW Resorts and see Disney go the licensing route. If this situation goes bad, Disney may simply tap out and just skim the gravy moving forward which will make park reservations/no DME seem like a dream compared to what will be coming.

 

[AdventureHasAName]

How we feel about the Saudi based or China based conglomerate that is going to take over the WDW Resorts and see Disney go the licensing route. If this situation goes bad, Disney may simply tap out and just skim the gravy moving forward which will make park reservations/no DME seem like a dream compared to what will be coming.

From a customer experience point of view, I can't imagine there is any foreign investor that could or would run the parks division worse than Disney currently runs it.

 

[flynnibus]

I disagree. I think it matters a lot. But if you have some caselaw that says otherwise, I'm happy to hear about it.

Supreme Court Holds That Employees' Close Family Members are Protected From Retaliation Under Title VII

On January 24, 2011, in Thompson v. North American Stainless, L.P., __ U.S. __ (2011), the United States Supreme Court held that the anti-retaliation

www.csemploymentblog.com

If the supreme court uphelds discrimination against family members is still retaliation under federal civil rights you can count on no such direct action requirement for a more fundamental constitutional right.

They simply have to demonstrate the action against rcid was to influence disney - which is something the state has already stated.

The three litmus test I provided do not require an action be explicitly enacted on the individual. That is the case law on retaliation for freedom of speech. You can keep disagreeing- it doesn’t make you right.

If you speak out against the gov and they imprisoned your significant other to punish you, you don’t think that is something you’d consider forbidden by the 1a? You think the courts would be like ‘… well, they didn’t imprison you…’?? And such a simple out would stand?

That’s why the second test does not include any requirement that the action was taken directly against you.

 

[englanddg]

Which bill? The one that started all this had one yes vote from democrats in the house and none in the senate. I believe zero or a very small number of democrats voted in the special session for RCID to be removed.

No Democrat voted Aye in the House or Senate Special Session.

1 Republican State Senator voted Nay.

Details here. Vote History is about 1/3 of the way down.

SB 4-C (2022) - Independent Special Districts | Florida House of Representatives

www.myfloridahouse.gov

 

[Disney Glimpses]

DeSantis and his office vows that taxes aren't going to increase for any OC/OC resident. Reading between the lines here, to me that says they intend to negotiate a new district with the company with less favorable tax terms. They can't force that debt onto TWDC without giving them the district back and TWDC won't take the district back without terms that are favorable to them.

 

[flynnibus]

I wonder whether TWDC has standing here. Does a special district created by a special act of the legislature confer an inalienable right into perpetuity? Does TWDC, as a majority landowner in the RCID, have sufficient standing to argue a First or Fourteenth Amendment challenge?

Yes because it was their speech that is being chilled - not rcid’s

 

[peter11435]

I'm not aware of any provision of the RCID dissolution bill that takes or sells Disney's land.

I am referring to land that is currently held by the district

 

[AdventureHasAName]

Supreme Court Holds That Employees' Close Family Members are Protected From Retaliation Under Title VII

On January 24, 2011, in Thompson v. North American Stainless, L.P., __ U.S. __ (2011), the United States Supreme Court held that the anti-retaliation

www.csemploymentblog.com

If the supreme court uphelds discrimination against family members is still retaliation under federal civil rights you can count on no such direct action requirement for a more fundamental constitutional right.

They simply have to demonstrate the action against rcid was to influence disney - which is something the state has already stated.

The three litmus test I provided do not require an action be explicitly enacted on the individual. That is the case law on retaliation for freedom of speech. You can keep disagreeing- it doesn’t make you right.

If you speak out against the gov and they imprisoned your significant other to punish you, you don’t think that is something you’d consider forbidden by the 1a? You think the courts would be like ‘… well, they didn’t imprison you…’?? And such a simple out would stand?

That’s why the second test does not include any requirement that the action was taken directly against you.

Title VII is employment law; there has to be some sort of employer/employee relationship. It's not even Constitutional; it's statutory. It has nothing to do with 1st Amendment law.