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

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Yeah, hate to say it, but @ParentsOf4 nailed this. We are definitely seeing a major shift in the political landscape that goes far beyond DeSantis or any one politician. Shifts have happened throughout the short history of this country so not unprecedented, but still alarming to see this. As both parties move further and further to the extremes we have never had a need for a 3rd party more.

Well we’re getting into national/global political theory here…

But the amount of tumult going on right now is at furious pace by global standard as far as scope…something is gonna have to give

 

[mightynine]

What do we think is happening behind the scenes here. Disney and the District have barely made a peep about this. There has to be something in the works?

Right now, Disney doesn't need to say anything publicly. It's in DeSantis' and the legislature's court to present their plan, react then - maybe.

 

[danlb_2000]

What do we think is happening behind the scenes here. Disney and the District have barely made a peep about this. There has to be something in the works?

I would think Disney would be making plans on how to handle any likely outcome.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I would think Disney would be making plans on how to handle any likely outcome.

I think that’s already done:

“There’s no reason to change anything…look at what we’ve have paid for/contributed to the state for 70 years with no issues”

The state has no valid counter argument for that.

…Then they go out for shawarma

 

[GoofGoof]

What do we think is happening behind the scenes here. Disney and the District have barely made a peep about this. There has to be something in the works?

Nobody knows at this point. Word came out that there were discussions between the legislature and the district and the framework for a compromise plan was agreed on but that didn’t provide enough political pop for one guy so here we are. I am sure Disney has made plenty of contingency plans for a range of paths this could take but there’s nothing to do or say publicly at this point. The last thing Disney wants is a drawn out public dispute, but that is exactly what the Gov wants so Disney staying silent is burning him up. Most of the news media has largely forgotten about this issue already but if Iger takes a shot at the gov now it goes right back to the front page. Instead Disney has stayed silent and DeSantis just keeps repeating the same lines over and over in the hopes of getting some traction from it.

 

[mightynine]

…Then they go out for shawarma

I'll take chicken, if we're ordering takeout

 

[kong1802]

Nobody knows at this point. Word came out that there were discussions between the legislature and the district and the framework for a compromise plan was agreed on but that didn’t provide enough political pop for one guy so here we are. I am sure Disney has made plenty of contingency plans for a range of paths this could take but there’s nothing to do or say publicly at this point. The last thing Disney wants is a drawn out public dispute, but that is exactly what the Gov wants so Disney staying silent is burning him up. Most of the news media has largely forgotten about this issue already but if Iger takes a shot at the gov now it goes right back to the front page. Instead Disney has stayed silent and DeSantis just keeps repeating the same lines over and over in the hopes of getting some traction from it.

Yep.

It's why lil Ronnie is going the special session route. It's very pick me of him.

 

[rio]

I am not sure everyone is aware of what has been happening. The Governors office has disclosed what they plan to do. They are NOT going to dissolve the District, just change the governing body. As many have pointed out on this forum, dissolving the district opens this up to multiple challenges. By just changing the construction of the board, which is allowed by law, they avoid most of the legal issues. All debts would stay with the district. The board will be 5 member (same as now) appointed by the Governor (change from having current land owners appoint the board). Disney could challenge, but would lose (well 99% chance they would lose). There are whispers that Disney has been negotiating behind closed doors that 5 members would be appointed by gov but that one of the appointed members would be a current resident (i.e. Disney employee). The Gov would claim complete victory, but Disney would not try to challenge and would not disagree with Gov claim of victory.

So the governor can appoint political appointees if someone disagrees with him-and those appointees can decide issues regarding taxation, services, etc. How is that a win for any of the local landowners?

 

[MisterPenguin]

They are NOT going to dissolve the District, just change the governing body.

That sounds very plausible except for one thing: They already passed a law to dissolve the district.

So, don't tell me they won't do what they already did.

 

[Dranth]

I am not sure everyone is aware of what has been happening. The Governors office has disclosed what they plan to do. They are NOT going to dissolve the District, just change the governing body. As many have pointed out on this forum, dissolving the district opens this up to multiple challenges. By just changing the construction of the board, which is allowed by law, they avoid most of the legal issues. All debts would stay with the district. The board will be 5 member (same as now) appointed by the Governor (change from having current land owners appoint the board). Disney could challenge, but would lose (well 99% chance they would lose). There are whispers that Disney has been negotiating behind closed doors that 5 members would be appointed by gov but that one of the appointed members would be a current resident (i.e. Disney employee). The Gov would claim complete victory, but Disney would not try to challenge and would not disagree with Gov claim of victory.

They already passed the bill to remove the district. So, unless they are going to backtrack on that part of it and pass yet another bill to overturn the first one, the district is gone.

 

[flynnibus]

my favorite kind of new post...

 

[mmascari]

The board will be 5 member (same as now) appointed by the Governor (change from having current land owners appoint the board).

How does that work within the FL constitution? (Honest question here.)

If that is a viable solution for a district, is it also viable for a village/town/city?
How about for a county?

Can the governor decide he doesn't like the mayor of Miami and replace them?
How about the mayor of Orange County?

Doing both of those would be consistent and "good" ways for the governor to gain control of those entities then.

 

[MR.Dis]

So the governor can appoint political appointees if someone disagrees with him-and those appointees can decide issues regarding taxation, services, etc. How is that a win for any of the local landowners?

I am not commenting if what is going on is right or wrong. The Governor has come off as very petty. But it should be noted that prior to Disney's very dumb interjecting into a political issue, that there was discussion from both parties that the Reedy Creek District needed to end. It was not fare to Disney's competitor's (Universal, Seaworld., Etc) that Disney was able to make their own rules. In my opinion, Chapek deserved to get fired for this alone, let alone his other missteps.

 

[MR.Dis]

How does that work within the FL constitution? (Honest question here.)

If that is a viable solution for a district, is it also viable for a village/town/city?
How about for a county?

Can the governor decide he doesn't like the mayor of Miami and replace them?
How about the mayor of Orange County?

Doing both of those would be consistent and "good" ways for the governor to gain control of those entities then.

The quick answer is that The Reedy Creek District was created by special act of the Florida Legistature and can be amended by the Florida Legislature. Quite different than a county or municipality.

 

[MR.Dis]

They already passed the bill to remove the district. So, unless they are going to backtrack on that part of it and pass yet another bill to overturn the first one, the district is gone.

The Devil is the Details. Correct, that there is going to be backtracking (of course that is not what the governor will say). As we all agree, they hurried the original bill and had not thought out. Once the dust started to settle, they saw there were some serious issues. That is why the Reedy District is not actually going to be dissolved and why there is a new special legislature to correct the mess they created.

 

[Dranth]

Anything is possible at this point. Will be interesting to see what they do.

 

[mmascari]

Quite different than a county or municipality.

What makes them different? Are they somehow created out of thin air as independent entities? Are they not also created within the laws of the state?

I mean, if we're going with the legislature can rewrite any law it wants. That just get's us back to the other municipality also exist within other laws, they should be no different.

This also doesn't answer the FL constitutionality question, a framework of laws the legislature cannot just rewrite easily (they can, through the defined amendment and approval process). Taxing people without any input from them was an important topic earlier. This plan seems to just gloss that over. Hence the question, how does a governor appointed taxing authority with no input from those taxed play with the FL constitution?

 

[GoofGoof]

I am not sure everyone is aware of what has been happening. The Governors office has disclosed what they plan to do. They are NOT going to dissolve the District, just change the governing body. As many have pointed out on this forum, dissolving the district opens this up to multiple challenges. By just changing the construction of the board, which is allowed by law, they avoid most of the legal issues. All debts would stay with the district. The board will be 5 member (same as now) appointed by the Governor (change from having current land owners appoint the board). Disney could challenge, but would lose (well 99% chance they would lose). There are whispers that Disney has been negotiating behind closed doors that 5 members would be appointed by gov but that one of the appointed members would be a current resident (i.e. Disney employee). The Gov would claim complete victory, but Disney would not try to challenge and would not disagree with Gov claim of victory.

It’s very likely that the bolded statement is actually not true at all. Pesky state constitution getting in the way. Just because a politician running for national office who has an agenda says something doesn’t make it true. If it were that easy they would have done this from day 1. Clearly it is not. What is actually happening is the gov will attempt to do something he knows is not legal and enjoy the free publicity when it goes to court and if he wins in court added bonus.

 

[GoofGoof]

What makes them different? Are they somehow created out of thin air as independent entities? Are they not also created within the laws of the state?

I mean, if we're going with the legislature can rewrite any law it wants. That just get's us back to the other municipality also exist within other laws, they should be no different.

This also doesn't answer the FL constitutionality question, a framework of laws the legislature cannot just rewrite easily (they can, through the defined amendment and approval process). Taxing people without any input from them was an important topic earlier. This plan seems to just gloss that over. Hence the question, how does a governor appointed taxing authority with no input from those taxed play with the FL constitution?

We went through pages and pages on whether this violates the constitution and the general conclusion was probably yes, but a judge is a person and has bias so despite being unconstitutional it may actually be allowed to go through.

 

[MR.Dis]

What makes them different? Are they somehow created out of thin air as independent entities? Are they not also created within the laws of the state?

I mean, if we're going with the legislature can rewrite any law it wants. That just get's us back to the other municipality also exist within other laws, they should be no different.

This also doesn't answer the FL constitutionality question, a framework of laws the legislature cannot just rewrite easily (they can, through the defined amendment and approval process). Taxing people without any input from them was an important topic earlier. This plan seems to just gloss that over. Hence the question, how does a governor appointed taxing authority with no input from those taxed play with the FL constitution?

The Reedy Creek District is a unique District but not the only one. There have been several created over the years. I am not sure if this is the last one that still exists. The board is and has been responsible party for taxing--and let us be clear that Disney is the Only land holder in the District. I am not even sure if any of the current board members actually reside in the District. If rumors are true, one of the board members will be a resident. Do not let your anger of the Governor distort what is legal in the State of Florida. I wise man once told me that something can be morally reprehensible and socially corrupt, but that does not make it illegal.