flyakite
Well-Known Member
Here is the agenda posted on the website:
That’s some expensive legal firepower. Seems like they’re gearing up for a fight - one they’re picking or one they’re defending is anyone’s guess.Looks like they updated BOS Sheet again and there is definitely some interesting content in it. This is for the special session tomorrow.
The interesting stuff begins on page 61 of 97.
Looks like Reedy Creek/ CFTOD are going to retain Cooper &Kirk and Lawson for: "regarding certain constitutional and contract matters and potential legal challenges for matters involving the District that occurred under the prior board of supervisors and that may involve the Walt Disney Parks and Resorts U.S., Inc. and its affiliates and subsidiary and related entities."
They also will retain Nardella & Nardella to" represent the District on those matters specifically assigned by the District and accepted by the firm. " Also retaining Waugh Grant LLC to "represent the District and provide litigation and dispute resolution counsel for the District for any matters designated by the District."
In addition to all of this, by browsing around on RCID's site I saw there is a special meeting being held for the cities of Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista on April 6.
Link to updated BOS: https://www.rcid.org/document/3-29-23-bos-package/
That’s some expensive legal firepower. Seems like they’re gearing up for a fight - one they’re picking or one they’re defending is anyone’s guess.
What’s interesting to me is the general sense they’re reassessing what’s come before. Reevaluating decisions of the previous board. Not just prospective changes, but second guessing what’s already been done.Cooper & Kirk is a well-known firm and not a cheap one. Whatever the new Board wants to do, it must be broad in scope.
Given the scope of these firms being hired by the district, WDW's in-house and maybe outside counsel is probably going to be closely monitoring the actions of the District.
Unknown at this time. It's a case of could be nothing or could be something.What’s the meetings about Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista going to be for?
Could this be in case they potentially try to dissolve Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista? Also question for @lazyboy97o, if the district is able to dissolve these municipalities, what becomes the “host city” for WDW?Cooper & Kirk handles First Amendment cases (and a lot of constitutional cases in general) so yeah... maybe something actually is brewing here.
I can't think of any other reason (at least off the top of my head) a local Florida municipality would need to hire a DC constitutional law firm (that's not all they do, but it's one of their main focuses) with significant appellate and Supreme Court practice.
I'd guess they are either expecting Disney (or someone else with standing) to sue over what's already happened, or they have plans to do something new that they think could draw lawsuits. It's also possible they could be planning to file suit over something, but I have no earthly idea what.
Was curious to what would need to be done to dissolve the cities. Hoping the governor got his 15 minutes with this already and will move on.Unknown at this time. It's a case of could be nothing or could be something.
It could be nothing because they held special meetings in 2020 and 2021 without anything being too particular. The 2021 Special Meeting for Lake Buena Vista per the offical document: "CONSIDERATION TO ADOPT Resolution Number 178, to establish an Auditor Selection Committee pursuant to Section 218.391, Florida Statutes, which establishes required procedures for the selection of auditors to perform financial audits."
It could be something because one of the newly appointed board members of the CFTOD/RCID had talked about dissolving the cities ( but you need the approval of the Legislature for that) and " wants the district to oversee all of those cities’ law enforcement contracts or ensure the cities cannot supersede the district’s building codes or land-planning powers."
The cities had previously canceled their March 8 meetings.
Part of this is quoted from https://www.bizjournals.com/orlando...disney-reedy-creek-new-board-1st-meeting.html
But whatever happens, will be interesting.
The District itself cannot dissolve the municipalities. That has to come from the state legislature.Could this be in case they potentially try to dissolve Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista? Also question for @lazyboy97o, if the district is able to dissolve these municipalities, what becomes the “host city” for WDW?
It’s like a divorce, except one party is paying for attorneys on both sides.The District itself cannot dissolve the municipalities. That has to come from the state legislature.
Walt Disney World can exist within unincorporated Orange County just like SeaWorld Orlando and Universal Orlando Resort South Campus.
Reedy Creek Improvement District wasn’t mired in litigation. That they’re going on a hiring spree is definitely interesting. At a minimum, it shows Disney’s foolishness. They’re now paying for a bunch of expensive lawyers to do something and they have absolutely no say in these contracts.
It’s not even like that. If there are any shared assets there would be no reason to end that arrangement and if there was it doesn’t need to be litigated, especially as a matter of constitutional law.It’s like a divorce, except one party is paying for attorneys on both sides.
From a reporter at the meeting -
CONTROL@lazyboy97o since you have the most knowledge on the subject, why would the new board care about long term land use agreements other than to stick it to Disney? What is their play here?
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.