-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District
- Thread starter castlecake2.0
- Start date
matt9112
Well-Known Member
Your ignoring all the induced demand from people who never intend to actually live in the houses…… also ignoring the reality that all those successful areas still need lower paying service jobs yet those areas fight tooth and nail against any kind of affordable housing.
Last edited:
GoofGoof
Premium Member
I’m not ignoring any of that. It’s part of the reality we live in. That’s why the government at all levels has made affordable housing a priority in urban areas to some extent. Disney and Universal have been involved in projects to build affordable housing for at least some of their workforce. That housing is usually apartment style vs single family homes. It’s also possible for people with lower paying service jobs to live in a single family home that’s affordable if they are willing to commute. I know places like FL have no real mass transit and commuting is more of a Northeast thing, but where do you think all the Manhattan McDonalds workers live? They commute and usually take mass transit to work.
JohnD
Well-Known Member
As if the state cares. They got what they wanted one way or the other. Turns out it was the other.
The outcome depends highly on what they're partisan about though.
If it's a specific ideology or a team will be very important. This case in particular pits those two concepts against each other in many ways.
Which is an impact of the overall GOP platform eroding and moving away from many of its historic positions and more into just being about the team first.
Brian
Well-Known Member
His presidential run will be over long before this case is. That's not a knock against his chances as much as it is an assessment of the turtle's pace of the court system.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
It's crazy that outcomes are being theorized based not on the law, but what certain judges will do. Judges who are supposed to be impartial.
I imagine many judges would also consider the broader implications at stake. If they let Florida punish Disney for their speech, that opens up a whole can of worms.
I imagine many judges would also consider the broader implications at stake. If they let Florida punish Disney for their speech, that opens up a whole can of worms.
Wendy Pleakley
Well-Known Member
This is a mischaracterization of the choices available, because, as has been pointed out time and time again, the "special privileges" Disney has come with the cost of paying more in taxes.
A ruling against those "special privileges" would only make sense if it includes a provision that the district be dissolved completely. If Florida wants to have control, there's no reasonable scenario in which they have full control AND Disney still pays more in taxes. Any such ruling would be ludicrous.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Kinda like when we expected the Attorney General to uphold the current law - but because it was the exec branch they sat on their hands? Basically making the exec immune from the judicial system? Yes, it's a F'd up world we live in now.
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
Way to blow it Harry!
JohnD
Well-Known Member
I didn't say I was arguing for it. I am saying that is the state argument. I was providing different points of view, both of which could be characterized as "conservative". The Trump appointee is not so much a slam dunk for the state as everyone thinks it is. We'll just have to see.
mikejs78
Premium Member
As much as I don't like it, that is how the constitution set up the government. The AG works for the President, and the president is the chief law enforcer of the land. There is no provision in law for the AG to overrule the president, and laws that have been passed have not fared well in the courts.
The way the framers set it up, the remedy for lawbreaking from a President is impeachment, then prosecution once removed from office. But that hasn't worked out too well...
Andrew C
You know what's funny?
Seems like it has worked as intended.
Some deadlines set today for Disney vs DeSantis
Deadline to file motions to dismiss is 6/26/2023., Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 6/27/2023., Plaintiff's deadline to respond to any motions to dismiss is 7/26/2023., Defendants may reply no later than 8/9/2023. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 6/2/2023.
Deadline to file motions to dismiss is 6/26/2023., Rule 26 Meeting Report due by 6/27/2023., Plaintiff's deadline to respond to any motions to dismiss is 7/26/2023., Defendants may reply no later than 8/9/2023. Signed by JUDGE ALLEN C WINSOR on 6/2/2023.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Many judges would consider broader implications, just not the recent batch who were appointed as partisan hacks. With the filibuster in place both sides had to nominate respectable judges who were more moderate. If you put up an extreme candidate they got shot down because you couldn’t get to 60 votes. The system worked for decades. Both sides knew the game and knew that it would eventually be their turn. Then in 2013 one side decided the game was over and they wouldn’t vote for anyone no matter how qualified they were essentially forcing many long term open positions. The Dems decided to end the filibuster for Federal judges allowing a simple majority to get a judge through. Now either side can and has nominated and approved extreme judges who are politically biased and would have never gotten through under the old rules. So unless a case draws a federal judge who was appointed before 2013 it’s likely they are going to be biased and partisan.
It wasn’t really his call. Letting the seats remain vacant for years wasn‘t a viable answer either. The blame falls on those who refused to vote for judges nominated even if they were well qualified and not extreme.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
This case is pretty slam dunk in partisan circles. I don’t believe any conservative judge recently appointed with a high political bias is going to side with Disney here. I hope I’m wrong but I just don’t see it happening. This guy was highly political before being appointed (it’s why he was picked) and I’m sure continues to be. Remember we went from having to nominate moderates with respect for the law to trying to pack the courts with as many of “my guy” political hacks as possible.
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
Why do I have a feeling Disney is gonna lose this case now? I haven't been following that closely anymore cause it's all a bit maddening. But this latest development doesn't seem great for Disney.
Then they appeal.
Just like DeSantis would appeal a loss as well.
The reason I disagree with you is that Conservative Judges will not decide cases based on Disney being a so called woke company. This case is simple. DeSantis could have won if he just kept the first bill and abolished the RCID. However, that would have been a disaster politically for him. So he decided to punish Disney, void the DA and appoint a new board over the newly created CFTOD. Disney will win this case regardless of whi h Judge hears the case. I do not think a Conservative Judge is likely to let his or her political views decide the case and rule against Disney. I could see a liberal judge rule in favor of Disney for political reasons but Conservative Judges follow the US Constitution and rule of law and both are on Disney's side. Just look up O'Hare Truck Service v. City of Northlake, 518 U.S. 712 (1996).