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

[mikejs78]

You might want to read the audit then because they did flout laws as they see fit. RCID routinely made investments that only benefited disney. For instance those parking garages for Disney spring? Paid for by bonds issues by the district. Those didn't benefit any other tax papers. Now they can't pull crap like that.

The parking garages benefit the tenants at Disney Springs. It was the tenants that advocated for a Disney Springs expansion and they benefit as much as Disney from the increased traffic.

Not sure if it's actually "obstructionist" to have a normal permitting process take over from a rubber stamping process which was the point of RCID to Disney. Not to mention the hypocrisy of disney complaining about permitting delays when RCID would delay the permits of any other entity in the district if they dared to use non disney approved vendors.

They did have a normal permitting process. Reedy Creek was known for its rigorous process before the new law came in, and they did deny or delay permits when there were issues.

Its literally in the audit:
"Disney exercised undue influence over the RCID’s operations in many ways, including by influencing the RCID’s permit decisions. Other non-Disney District taxpayers were aware that if they chose vendors not approved by Disney for their construction and development projects, theycould expect the RCID to delay issuing them required permits for one quarter. This improperly coerced non-Disney District taxpayers into preferring Disney-approved vendors"
So you're saying all the other taxpayers in the district were lying?

The audit is political propaganda. As far as the vendors, yes that is true but is a result of land covenants Disney made with other landowners, not anything to do with the district.

Some of us suspect the audit contains lies, distortions and misrepresentations.

Suspect?

Disney controlled who the board members were. The RCID lawyers were the Disney Lawyers (at least part of the time). You really think Disney permits were denied or went through the full process?

Yes, they were, and yes, they did.

There are certain things they can't distort. They cant distort RCID using municipal bonds to build the parking garages at Disney Spring or that such bonds are to be used for the benefit of the district. If in the case of what other taxpayers said, the auditors would be held for libel if they misrepresented what the taxpayers said.

Those bonds do what the district was founded for - to promote infrastructure for tourism. That is exactly what the parking garages were for. It came mostly out of Disney's pockets (through their taxes) and benefited all of the tenants of Disney springs.

So anyone can build on Disney Springs without Disney approval?

Of course not. Disney owns 99% of the land. That's not changing with the new district.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

The other thing is the dismissal is without prejudice. The judge said Disney can refile if they are actually harmed and have actual injury. Disney has been asked what actual damages, other then loss of control of the governmental board, they have, and they have come up with absolutely nothing.

Disney's entire argument is that this board was put into place to harm Disney for exercising its first amendment rights, but they cannot come up with an ACTUAL, concrete harm, other then loss of control of a governmental body. But at this point, nothing has been done, so Disney is now having to argue that in 10 or 20 years or so, we might get harmed. The judge is saying come back then, but they really can't, because at this point, it seems by the time Disney is "harmed", DeSantis will be long gone so it clearly wasn't done to directly punish Disney and cause direct economic harm, but rather to just take some control away that nobody else in the state has.

Even today, Disney is still free to create new special districts under current Florida Statute, just as Universal has done, its only the old ones without regulation that have been eliminated.

1. Losing the ability to have a say in who sets your tax levy and determines the District budget IS a harm in and of itself. It is going from taxation with representation to taxation without representation.

2.RCID was never "without regulation." Regardless of how the Board was determined, the District still had to follow the laws of the state. It wasn't some uncontrolled, Wild West situation.

 

[jinx8402]

Disney controlled who the board members were. The RCID lawyers were the Disney Lawyers (at least part of the time). You really think Disney permits were denied or went through the full process?

You don't think the fishing expedition of the audit wouldn't have brought that to light? I'm sure they would have loved to nail that one to Disney/RCID.

 

[mmascari]

For the Governor, Disney argued the Gov’s power to appoint the board members and his ability to assert control over them is what links him to their injury. The Judge did not agree.

For the appointment angle, the Judge said those appointments are in the past - so its not relevant because Disney is seeking injunctive relief in this case so they must show a imminent future injury (this is the one that doesn’t sit well with me…).
Adding “[Disney] has not alleged facts showing that any imminent future appointments will contribute to its harm”

Adding “Stopping hypothetical future appointments would not redress any alleged imminent harm” — Yet.. he acknowledged that the board’s power to control land issues without Disney say WAS the injury…

This one feels particularly questionable. Like, if the lawsuit had been filed in the time after the law passed and before the board was appointed, then the appointment would have been a possible imminent harm. But, somehow since it already happened it's not something that can be fixed.

The boards appointment by the governor was an injury to Disney, but since he's not about to do it again (with this law) there's nothing we can do to resolve that he did it.

It feels like a circular justification.

 

[mmascari]

The other thing is the dismissal is without prejudice. The judge said Disney can refile if they are actually harmed and have actual injury. Disney has been asked what actual damages, other then loss of control of the governmental board, they have, and they have come up with absolutely nothing.

The dismissal says Disney was harmed. It specifically says that loss of representation on the board is an a injury to Disney.

It dismissed despite the harm, not because there wasn't any harm.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

Wow, Disney got clobbered in the lawsuit. Who could have predicted this?

I do predict Disney's demise in the courts. They will get clobbered.

Disney was fighting an uphill battle with this case. One that revolved around limiting the state legislature's innate constitutional powers. There's a good chance this proceeds to the Supreme Court. But make no mistake, this is not looking good for Disney.

Disney should try to end all this litigation ASAP. Disney should just call it quits and come to the negotiating table. Admit they let their emotions get the better of them. This whole process has been characterized by too much emoting and not enough thinking. It seems like the longer this is going on the worse it's getting.

But they're doubling down.

On a separate but related note, the District presented reasonable arguments to void the development plans in their audit. I honestly didn't think the District would find anything in their audit. And in a way they didn't. There wasn't widespread intentional corruption as far as I could see. I never believed and still don't believe that Disney was intentionally corrupt. But what the District did find were enormous irregularities and just basic incompetence. And unintentionally it became corruption. Disney needs to avoid further fallout and end this before it gets out of hand.

Iger could have stopped this. But he's too stubborn.

 

[mikejs78]

Disney was fighting an uphill battle with this case. One that revolved around limiting the state legislature's innate constitutional powers.

There are many limits on state legislator's constitutional powers. In fact, there are many examples, cited by Disney and agreed with by the judge, where state legislative motives are looked at - for example, in cases involving race discrimination. The judge just applied Hubbard (which is a very different case) and determined that free speech is not a reason to question legislative intent. It's not a foregone conclusion that the appeals court will agree wtih him.

Disney should try to end all this litigation ASAP. Disney should just call it quits and come to the negotiating table. Admit they let their emotions get the better of them. This whole process has been characterized by too much emoting and not enough thinking. It seems like the longer this is going on the worse it's getting.

No, they shouldn't. There are numerous other issues at stake in this and the state case - including the abridgment of contracts. And they tried to sit at the negotiating table - DeSantis refused to even talk to them. He has no interest in negotiating.

On a separate but related note, the District presented reasonable arguments to void the development plans in their audit.

There is no reasonable argument to dissolve a contract whole cloth.

what the District did find were enormous irregularities and just basic incompetence

Not backed up by evidence, and with a political spin. Many of the things they pointed to were basd on "conversations" which aren't credited. It's a one-sided argument without context and without the opportunity for cross-examination. It's highly suspect and incocnsistencies in the report have already been poitned out.

 

[Brian]

Iger could have stopped this. But he's too stubborn.

If the reporting is to be believed, Iger had reached out to DeSantis to talk about the situation, but DeSantis declined.

 

[wdwmagic]

Iger could have stopped this. But he's too stubborn.

Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor​

Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor

Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor

www.wdwmagic.com

 

[Drdcm]

I know nothing about this, but my BIL is an attorney in a state AG office first amendment and human rights division. He told me it would be very very difficult for Disney to win this case for the exact reasons the judge dismissed it.

He just said that first amendment law isn’t as straightforward as most people think because the current precedents are convoluted and contradictory. Unfortunately my knowledge is limited so can’t really provide any other explanation. Just figured I’d pipe up because he knows more about this stuff than most people.

FWIW, my BIL is very liberal.

 

[Chi84]

Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor​

Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor

Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor

www.wdwmagic.com

It wouldn’t have stopped because it wasn’t about RCID.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

There are many limits on state legislator's constitutional powers. In fact, there are many examples, cited by Disney and agreed with by the judge, where state legislative motives are looked at - for example, in cases involving race discrimination. The judge just applied Hubbard (which is a very different case) and determined that free speech is not a reason to question legislative intent. It's not a foregone conclusion that the appeals court will agree wtih him.



No, they shouldn't. There are numerous other issues at stake in this and the state case - including the abridgment of contracts. And they tried to sit at the negotiating table - DeSantis refused to even talk to them. He has no interest in negotiating.



There is no reasonable argument to dissolve a contract whole cloth.



Not backed up by evidence, and with a political spin. Many of the things they pointed to were basd on "conversations" which aren't credited. It's a one-sided argument without context and without the opportunity for cross-examination. It's highly suspect and incocnsistencies in the report have already been poitned out.

Iger needs to get his backside on his private jet and fly to Tallahassee with his legal team and beg to stop this. If DeSantis still refused to work after Iger physically coming to bring an olive branch, I'd feel differently. But last I heard Iger sent the DeSantis camp a message using one of his underlings about potentially having a meet. Nothing happened. He needs to camp out at the statehouse until he's seen. Would it be humiliating? Yeah. But he needs to end this for the good of the Walt Disney Company. This should be one of his top priorities.

He needs to play ball and take the humiliation. He famously suffered a grueling and humiliating ordeal with the Chinese Government (reported by @WDW1974). His patience with that ordeal saw the successful launch of Shanghai Disney. We need that Iger back. What happened to Iger the diplomat who could handle difficult relationships with people like Steve Jobs and President Xi? Now Iger can't even handle the Florida governor. This is pathetic.

Or maybe the Disney board should get a CEO who knows how to fix this. Floridians are not evil. They have tremendous amount of goodwill towards Disney. They will forgive and forget if given the chance. But that process can only stop by putting this process behind them. Moreover, shareholders deserve to have solid and level governance. Playing fast and loose with one of the company's most prized assets is insane.

 

[Disstevefan1]

There are many limits on state legislator's constitutional powers. In fact, there are many examples, cited by Disney and agreed with by the judge, where state legislative motives are looked at - for example, in cases involving race discrimination. The judge just applied Hubbard (which is a very different case) and determined that free speech is not a reason to question legislative intent. It's not a foregone conclusion that the appeals court will agree wtih him.



No, they shouldn't. There are numerous other issues at stake in this and the state case - including the abridgment of contracts. And they tried to sit at the negotiating table - DeSantis refused to even talk to them. He has no interest in negotiating.



There is no reasonable argument to dissolve a contract whole cloth.



Not backed up by evidence, and with a political spin. Many of the things they pointed to were basd on "conversations" which aren't credited. It's a one-sided argument without context and without the opportunity for cross-examination. It's highly suspect and incocnsistencies in the report have already been poitned out.

For over 50 years and including the folks running the state now, KNEW that RCID was not run by the book and was controlled by TWDC.

All previous leadership for the past over 50 years, LET IT BE, because they all knew, although irregular, and that the state could legally pull the plug on RCID at any time, knew it was the best for the state to let it be.

You know who did this to (try) to help himself politically, knowing he could legally do it all along. Obviously if he was smart, he would have let it be like all the past administrations.

In my opinion, TWDC should have SHUT UP and quietly used their POWER behind the scenes to get the law they disagreed with changed. I know they have the power. They didn’t, they took the, “talk is cheap” route.

 

[Drdcm]

For over 50 years and including the folks running the state now, KNEW that RCID was not run by the book and was controlled by TWDC.

All previous leadership for the past over 50 years, LET IT BE, because they all knew, although irregular, and that the state could legally pull the plug on RCID at any time, knew it was the best for the state to let it be.

You know who did this to (try) to help himself politically, knowing he could legally do it all along. Obviously if he was smart, he would have let it be like all the past administrations.

In my opinion, TWDC should have SHUT UP and quietly used their POWER behind the scenes to get the law they disagreed with changed. I know they have the power. They didn’t, they took the, “talk is cheap” route.

What’s crazy about this whole thing is that I doubt Disney would have said anything at all if they didn’t get caught donating to supporters of the bill. They were put on the defensive and called out publicly by their own employees. It was a lose lose no matter which way they went.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Iger needs to get his backside on his private jet and fly to Tallahassee with his legal team and beg to stop this. If DeSantis still refused to work after Iger physically coming to bring an olive branch, I'd feel differently. But last I heard Iger sent the DeSantis camp a message using one of his underlings about potentially having a meet. Nothing happened. He needs to camp out at the statehouse until he's seen. Would it be humiliating? Yeah. But he needs to end this for the good of the Walt Disney Company. This should be one of his top priorities.

He needs to play ball and take the humiliation. He famously suffered a grueling and humiliating ordeal with the Chinese Government (reported by @WDW1974). His patience with that ordeal saw the successful launch of Shanghai Disney. We need that Iger back. What happened to Iger the diplomat who could handle difficult relationships with people like Steve Jobs and President Xi? Now Iger can't even handle the Florida governor. This is pathetic.

Or maybe the Disney board should get a CEO who knows how to fix this. Floridians are not evil. They have tremendous amount of goodwill towards Disney. They will forgive and forget if given the chance. But that process can only stop by putting this process behind them. Moreover, shareholders deserve to have solid and level governance. Playing fast and loose with one of the company's most prized assets is insane.

it’s amazing how nobody actually states what Disney can offer. Just something.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

it’s amazing how nobody actually states what Disney can offer. Just something.

They could start by dropping their DOA lawsuits that are wasting the State and Disney's time and resources. Then they could collaborate on a longterm development plan for Walt Disney World.

They might also want to express their gratitude for Florida and Floridians publicly for having been generous over nearly 60 years in allowing them to operate in their home state with little interference.

 

[Disstevefan1]

What’s crazy about this whole thing is that I doubt Disney would have said anything at all if they didn’t get caught donating to supporters of the bill. They were put on the defensive and called out publicly by their own employees. It was a lose lose no matter which way they went.

I know I am Monday morning quarterbacking this, but I wonder if Disney made NO PUBLIC response, while working behind the scenes would have worked better?

 

[mmascari]

They could start by dropping their DOA lawsuits that are wasting the State and Disney's time and resources. Then they could collaborate on a longterm development plan for Walt Disney World.

They might also want to express their gratitude for Florida and Floridians publicly for having been generous over nearly 60 years in allowing them to operate in their home state with little interference.

This sounds like requesting that the state of FL take over running Walt Disney World. That's an interesting take, to say.

 

[Chi84]

I know nothing about this, but my BIL is an attorney in a state AG office first amendment and human rights division. He told me it would be very very difficult for Disney to win this case for the exact reasons the judge dismissed it.

He just said that first amendment law isn’t as straightforward as most people think because the current precedents are convoluted and contradictory. Unfortunately my knowledge is limited so can’t really provide any other explanation. Just figured I’d pipe up because he knows more about this stuff than most people.

FWIW, my BIL is very liberal.

In my opinion, people think the laws protect their constitutional rights/civil liberties to a much greater extent than they actually do. This is why there’s disappointment on both sides of the political spectrum.

But a district court ruling in favor of DeSantis on first amendment grounds was recently reversed by the 11th circuit so we’ll have to see.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

What’s crazy about this whole thing is that I doubt Disney would have said anything at all if they didn’t get caught donating to supporters of the bill. They were put on the defensive and called out publicly by their own employees. It was a lose lose no matter which way they went.

As much as I’ve soured on Iger I still have no doubt he could have navigated this and avoided the whole mess, for all his faults he’s a very good PR guy and I think he could have gotten a strong enough message across to appease the employees while also being diplomatic enough not to draw the ire of an entire state.

Chapek bumbling through it was the worst possible scenario, he managed to alienate both the employees and the state