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

L

lordsigma

Active Member
Touchdown said:
Again, I’m not a lawyer but I’ve got to think it’s a legal question to determine if the legislature can simply say that a provision that states a dissolution must be put to a vote locally simply does not apply in this situation. While this is being put through the legal system, RCID will continue.
Click to expand...
I think at the end of the day there's a very good chance that after the dust settles and media attention moves on from this and they get their bragging rights for sticking it to Disney they'll quietly declaw the provision and most of the status quo will continue.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Adventure Has A Name said:
If they wanted to, the county could force them to apply for a permit every time they need to replace a lightbulb.
Click to expand...
Not without apply the same rules to everyone else. This effort is not being driven by local officials, who have no interest or benefit to gain by making life difficult for Disney. If anything, their current inclination is to make Disney happy because they will need cooperation for Disney if they want to ensure the financial burden does not fall on them.
 
D

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
Touchdown said:
Again, I’m not a lawyer but I’ve got to think it’s a legal question to determine if the legislature can simply say that a provision that states a dissolution must be put to a vote locally simply does not apply in this situation. While this is being put through the legal system, RCID will continue.
Click to expand...
I think that it might depend on when that provision was signed into law. If RCID was established prior to that provision then I don't believe it is an issue. If the provision existed before RCID was established, then I would assume there is an issue that would violate the ex post facto clauses of both the Florida and US Constitutions.
 
ABQ

ABQ

Well-Known Member
DisneyCane said:
Politicians are laughing all right. They are laughing at the people who keep reelecting them (both parties). The incumbent reelection rate is some insanely high percentage (80%+ IIRC) even though government bodies always have high disapproval ratings.

As far as #2, if this will not hurt Disney and could be of some benefit to Disney, why have they not previously dissolved RCID on their own. I don't know enough to know what it is but there must be some significant benefit to Disney for RCID to continue to exist.
Click to expand...
yeah, if #2 were correct, it's counter to this fiasco:
1650565531206.png
 
TrainsOfDisney

TrainsOfDisney

Well-Known Member
DisneyCane said:
As far as #2, if this will not hurt Disney and could be of some benefit to Disney, why have they not previously dissolved RCID on their own. I don't know enough to know what it is but there must be some significant benefit to Disney for RCID to continue to exist.
Click to expand...
I think it’s complex. There were enough pros to keep it and people like Chapek probably don’t care about the parks enough to dive into the financials of how to save money by disolving it.

If we had Disney leaders that cared about the future of the WDW property, they would be fighting to keep Reedy Creek.
 
J

jimbojones

Well-Known Member
lordsigma said:
I think at the end of the day there's a very good chance that after the dust settles and media attention moves on from this and they get their bragging rights for sticking it to Disney they'll quietly declaw the provision and most of the status quo will continue.
Click to expand...
exactly this. Disney should stay quite , let DeSantis have his moment to gain credibility for an eventual presidential or senate run, and wait for the repeal in a few months when the hubbub is over and the political spotlight has moved on to the next "outrage".
 
durangojim

durangojim

Well-Known Member
Ok, how will this affect any of us? As of right now I'm having a difficult time figuring that out.
And as much as I love you all on this site I find it pretty disheartening that this thread has just become another echo chamber for both sides with self professed experts giving their opinions as facts without really stating how this affects Disney's guests.
 
L

lordsigma

Active Member
ABQ said:
yeah, if #2 were correct, it's counter to this fiasco:
View attachment 634616
Click to expand...
Why would anyone be surprised by this graph? The attention they are getting and controversy isn't good for business because it can potentially polarize your customer base. This has nothing to do with RCID. No more RCID isn't going to sink WDW. Universal does just fine without a special district. (Though I suspect ultimately RCID will continue in some form because the counties are not going to want to be bothered fixing something that isn't really broken.)
 
GoofTroop80

GoofTroop80

Member
I'm not all that familiar with what is going on and I'm not reading 87 pages to try to cover everything. Is there a chance the reasoning behind this move is because of the affordable housing Disney plans to build on site? Does population/permanent resident levels have any affect on whether an area can or cannot be an improvement district? I understand Golden Oak is on site, along with members of the improvement district board, but is there a population threshold an area has to stay under to remain as an improvement district?
 
Tamandua

Tamandua

Well-Known Member
Everyone remember that they made this bill broad enough to apply to a number of special districts so that they can't be blamed for targeting Disney specifically. Also keep in mind that Disney has been benefitting from similar legislative carve outs forever that are broad enough to not target Disney specifically, but are created specifically for Disney. For example, you are allowed to keep firearms locked in your car in Florida, but not at Disney because they store "explosives" (fireworks). This exemption was created specifically for Disney but used the explosives carve out as a loophole. If Disney argues that they are being targeted, they will be vulnerable to losing other beneficial carve outs as well.
 
Disstevefan1

Disstevefan1

Well-Known Member
lordsigma said:
And on a further point - for the business reasons I stated - I agree Disney should have kept their mouth shut - but with what was going on with employee pressure it was somewhat darned if you do darned if you don't. They were in a pretty tricky spot. And they took a stand and there's nothing wrong with them having consequences in the public discourse or market for that. I don't think it's contradictory to simultaneously believe Disney made a dumb decision by opining but also being of the opinion that DeSantis and the state GOP are going way too far with this punitive bill that isn't really to the benefit of Florida taxpayers.
Click to expand...
In the end the only losers will be the Florida taxpayers. Mostly Orange and Osceola counties. Ironically the folks mostly financially affected will be these folks, most of them do not go to the parks because its too expensive AND NOW will be paying higher taxes to boot.
 
J

jimbojones

Well-Known Member
durangojim said:
Ok, how will this affect any of us? As of right now I'm having a difficult time figuring that out.
And as much as I love you all on this site I find it pretty disheartening that this thread has just become another echo chamber for both sides with self professed experts giving their opinions as facts without really stating how this affects Disney's guests.
Click to expand...
This actually was my original reason for jumping in to this thread, I am very curious how this might impact the WDW experience?
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
GoofTroop80 said:
I'm not all that familiar with what is going on and I'm not reading 87 pages to try to cover everything. Is there a chance the reasoning behind this move is because of the affordable housing Disney plans to build on site? Does population/permanent resident levels have any affect on whether an area can or cannot be an improvement district? I understand Golden Oak is on site, along with members of the improvement district board, but is there a population threshold an area has to stay under to remain as an improvement district?
Click to expand...
None. This is a really poor taste vendetta that unfortunately plays in this political climate.
 
D

DisneyCane

Well-Known Member
Vegas Disney Fan said:
That’s a pretty broad statement, I lean right and have major problems with this legislation, I bet if there was a poll done that many, if not most, people on the right would say this is absolutely wrong.

There’s a huge disconnect between voters and and the political parties, I disagree with most Rep legislation, the problem is I also disagree with most Dem legislation. The main reason I end up leaning conservative is because I think the less meddling done by either party the better off we are.

Unfortunately when you only have 2 choices, and they are both bad, you can disagree with most of what a party stands for and still end up voting for them as the lessor evil.
Click to expand...
I think it is well known which way I lean and I don't support this legislation either. It's basically the same thing as the cities that wouldn't allow Chik-fil-a due to political disagreements with the owners.

I am in the same boat as you. To me, the less legislation the better. One of the biggest problems to me is that every congress and every state legislative session they are always passing new laws or amending old laws. There isn't a requirement to always be "doing something" in a legislative body.
 
VelocityRaptor

VelocityRaptor

Active Member
Lifelong Republican here, and I just can’t wrap my head around this one. As a resident of Orange County I just don’t understand it. I know it’s all political theater, but of all my Republican friends and neighbors not a single one of us agree on this. Remember when politicians actually listened to their constituents? Yeah me neither :(
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom