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

DisAl

Well-Known Member
If Disney ejected themselves from RCID does that mean they are now under the purview of the local governments and their codes and permitting systems? If so they may have jumped out of the skillet and right into the fire.
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member
He does look pretty comfortable in the meetings..

1680206481277.png
 

Spokker

New Member
Going after a corporation because it simply didn't agree with them is also unacceptable. That is the sign of a wannabe dictator.
States provide and remove privileges, benefits and incentives from companies because they agree/disagree with them all the time. Government, after all, picks winners and losers, and Disney receiving a benefit is a de facto punishment against its competitors. This benefit/privilege may have been wise when the land was undeveloped, but today it's a lot harder to justify.

I previously tried to provide some examples of CA removing benefits and privileges from companies/people they disagree with, but I seemed to have run into a word filter and the post was filtered.

Regardless, Florida is perfectly within its right to elect representatives and leaders that will remove privileges from companies when the voters don't like what they are doing. It's no different from government creating a benefit for solar panel makers or punishing an oil company. They did not try to place Disney below any other company, only remove some privileges they no longer want to offer a company that goes against the values of their voters.
 

trainplane3

Well-Known Member
If Disney ejected themselves from RCID does that mean they are now under the purview of the local governments and their codes and permitting systems? If so they may have jumped out of the skillet and right into the fire.
My understanding is this locks Disney into land usage rights. They still need to follow the laws of RCID or whatever it's now but they are in complete control of their property and don't need to listen to RCID on what they're allowed to build. Permits and such will need to be filed of course plus usual inspections need to take place.

General summary that may not be correct.
 

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
I'd be shocked if they didn't have some outside counsel assistance. It's pretty rare for large corporations to handle anything like this entirely in-house (I wouldn't have a job if they did!).
Yea but does outside counsel get complimentary passes for them and family to the theme parks?😀
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member
States provide and remove privileges, benefits and incentives from companies because they agree/disagree with them all the time. Government, after all, picks winners and losers, and Disney receiving a benefit is a de facto punishment against its competitors. This benefit/privilege may have been wise when the land was undeveloped, but today it's a lot harder to justify.

I previously tried to provide some examples of CA removing benefits and privileges from companies/people they disagree with, but I seemed to have run into a word filter and the post was filtered.

Regardless, Florida is perfectly within its right to elect representatives and leaders that will remove privileges from companies when the voters don't like what they are doing. It's no different from government creating a benefit for solar panel makers or punishing an oil company. They did not try to place Disney below any other company, only remove some privileges they no longer want to offer a company that goes against the values of their voters.

That's funny, I don't recall seeing any of this on a ballot...
 

Chi84

Premium Member
States provide and remove privileges, benefits and incentives from companies because they agree/disagree with them all the time. Government, after all, picks winners and losers, and Disney receiving a benefit is a de facto punishment against its competitors. This benefit/privilege may have been wise when the land was undeveloped, but today it's a lot harder to justify.

I previously tried to provide some examples of CA removing benefits and privileges from companies/people they disagree with, but I seemed to have run into a word filter and the post was filtered.

Regardless, Florida is perfectly within its right to elect representatives and leaders that will remove privileges from companies when the voters don't like what they are doing. It's no different from government creating a benefit for solar panel makers or punishing an oil company. They did not try to place Disney below any other company, only remove some privileges they no longer want to offer a company that goes against the values of their voters.
Then maybe they should elect representatives who can actually do those things without trampling on a valid exercise of constitutional rights.

Edit: Or in light of today’s news maybe I should have stopped after “can actually do those things” 😂
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
States provide and remove privileges, benefits and incentives from companies because they agree/disagree with them all the time. Government, after all, picks winners and losers, and Disney receiving a benefit is a de facto punishment against its competitors. This benefit/privilege may have been wise when the land was undeveloped, but today it's a lot harder to justify.

I previously tried to provide some examples of CA removing benefits and privileges from companies/people they disagree with, but I seemed to have run into a word filter and the post was filtered.

Regardless, Florida is perfectly within its right to elect representatives and leaders that will remove privileges from companies when the voters don't like what they are doing. It's no different from government creating a benefit for solar panel makers or punishing an oil company. They did not try to place Disney below any other company, only remove some privileges they no longer want to offer a company that goes against the values of their voters.
What privileges were removed that goes against the values of the voters? Why were these privileges not taken from others?
 

GimpYancIent

Well-Known Member
That is not what happened.
Something fell into the fire and now there is a nasty flare up. A lot of legal smoke right now. As usual the legal resolution will not resemble any of the hoped for results expressed in this thread. I am curious to see how long this takes to resolve and what that resolution will look like. The attorneys are in no rush.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom