Florida Legislators Want To Remove The Reedy Creek Improvement District

[englanddg]

I will buy you a drink if the Gov, Lt Gov, or either the head of the Florida House and Senate can name the other five districts.

DeSantis is a JAG and a smart legal cookie. I suspect he could.

Your point is well taken, though.

 

[GimpYancIent]

Question for someone who knows. What’s the situation with the fact that Florida law states that special districts created by the legislature can only be dissolved with a majority vote of the district's landowners. Wouldn’t the next step be this vote? Which is essentially Disney themselves? A few articles mention this but most leave this part out. It seems pretty important to me and if true this is really all for nothing in the end?

An in depth thought about that. The census lists residents in RCID but are they "landowners"? Are the properties in which these people reside actually owned by say a company / corporation? How would that impact such a vote?

 

[Bender123]

Consequences from the government because of your political stance is against the law and a violation of the first amendment. The government punishing and silencing people, corporations, or organizations that speak out against that same government should be a scary thought to all.

The advantage being taken away was also a benefit that was special to just that company. The only reason they have RCID and the Twitter carve out is because they paid off a lot of politicians to get them.

 

[lazyboy97o]

One argument in defense of the legislative action, which I believe they will use, is that the bill doesn’t target Disney specifically in that it impacts 5 other improvement districts. Further, the older IDs conflict (apparently) with the amended Florida constitution. The bill is written in such a way.

Dunno if a judge would buy that though. I’m sure we will find out.

Legislators stated their intent to punish Disney in session. This isn’t just gossip about their true motivations, they said it out loud on video multiple times.

If the districts really violated the state constitution there would be no need for the expense of a special session or legislation. The governor could just sue the district(s).

 

[Figgy1]

So when is Reedy Creek going to make their move?

Publicly when legal gives them the green light. Privately I'm sure they're all over it

 

[CampbellzSoup]

And u have every right to have that opinion. But the state doesn't have the right to punish disney for it. They blatantly said this was the reasoning and that isn't allowed.

The state has granted you special permissions and privileges. You are now using your power and voice to place your thumb on the scale of the residents of Florida. Freedom of speech does not also mean freedom of consequence. If you don’t want to act as a neutral party, then you should be subjected to the same rules that every other business abides by.

 

[lazyboy97o]

ing political is fine and legal, but that doesnt exist in a vacuum and actions have consequences. "Talk $#!t get hit" is a phrase for a reason.

No. Free speech means no government consequences for speech, especially political speech.

 

[peter11435]

not true. this is about keeping these companies out of the political arena. They have no business being there and should just stick to what they do best...entertainment!

Wrong. Companies are legally allowed to make political statements. It may not be wise from a business standpoint but that’s not justification for government retaliation. The government should not be silencing or keeping any one out of the political arena. Among many other things the first amendment is intended to prevent the government from silencing dissent.

 

[EPCOT-O.G.]

People don’t realize how scary this is or what the future implications are. And I’m not referring to its impact on Disney.

It is terrible. Just as it was for Chick-Fil-A, small bakeries, and religious groups that occasionally want to use public facilities. Maybe those up in arms now should have been allies to those groups then?

 

[lazyboy97o]

The state has granted you special permissions and privileges. You are now using your power and voice to place your thumb on the scale of the residents of Florida. Freedom of speech does not also mean freedom of consequence. If you don’t want to act as a neutral party, then you should be subjected to the same rules that every other business abides by.

Freedom of speech does mean freedom of government consequence. Please give an example of how any of Disney’s statements regarding legislation or their content creation misused the powers of the District.

 

[lordsigma]

All companies should stay out of the political arena or risk losing half the population. Disney should just stick to entertainment!

I don't disagree - but one can agree with that but also say Florida's retaliation is an unacceptable and disturbing over reaction and abuse.

 

[RickP330]

Bottom line, Chapek fouled this up. He should resign.
RP

 

[CampbellzSoup]

Freedom of speech does mean freedom of government consequence. Please give an example of how any of Disney’s statements regarding legislation or their content creation misused the powers of the District.

I’m not going to give you any examples you have special privileges and powers granted to by being a neutral entity. If you are now using your special rights, privileges, and power to now place your thumb on the scale of government you should now have no leg up on any competition. You don’t get to have special powers and also act against the hand that feeds you.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

www.cnbc.com
Florida taxpayers could face a $1 billion Disney debt bomb if its special ...

www.nytimes.com
Disney to Lose Special Florida Tax Status Amid 'Don't Say Gay' Clash

https://www.reuters.com › world
Factbox: What is the special tax designation Disney might lose?

I don't think you understand what you linked. RCID is a special taxing district, which means they levy additonal property taxes. It doesn't mean that the property owners within it are exempt from any state or local taxes. The only tax benefit derived from it is actually for the owners of any RCID debt because it can designate its bonds as being exempt from federal income taxes - so long as RCID follow certain rules for issuing the debt and follow those rules for the life of the debt. That typically results in lower interest rates being offered since the banks and brokers buying the debt don't have to worry about income taxes offsetting their interest earnings, but it provides literally zero tax benefit to Disney.

 

[the_rich]

The state has granted you special permissions and privileges. You are now using your power and voice to place your thumb on the scale of the residents of Florida. Freedom of speech does not also mean freedom of consequence. If you don’t want to act as a neutral party, then you should be subjected to the same rules that every other business abides by.

They are abiding by those rules. Consequences from customers is fine. Don't spend your money there, boycott, etc. They don't have to act as a neutral party. They are afforded protection under the first amendment. The gov made it clear they were doing this as punishment and that is indeed a violation of the constitution.

 

[englanddg]

Legislators stated their intent to punish Disney in session. This isn’t just gossip about their true motivations, they said it out loud on video multiple times.

If the districts really violated the state constitution there would be no need for the expense of a special session or legislation. The governor could just sue the district(s).

The stated intent will be brought up, I'm quite sure, but really isn't a strong legal argument. The question before the court is what the law actually DOES, not what a politician told a camera or posted on twitter. But, it will be a while before this filters through the courts. I'm sure Disney will pull some shotgun tactic lawfare as well.

I'm stating an argument I foresee they will make in defense.

1) It doesn't specifically target Disney, it targets all districts created before the 1968 ratification of the FL Constitution
2) It doesn't prevent districts, rather it clears up state constitutional conflicts which existed after the 1968 ratification. The districts can be reformed later, after review under the current state constitutional framework.

Please don't mistake this for support. But, you are free to dismiss, as you have.

 

[CampbellzSoup]

Also if you go outside of twitter and read the comments elsewhere it doesn’t seem too positive for Disney.

I’m sure they’ll be fine but I hate hate hate politics mixed in to things.

 

[yensidtlaw1969]

I’m not going to give you any examples you have special privileges and powers granted to by being a neutral entity. If you are now using your special rights, privileges, and power to now place your thumb on the scale of government you should now have no leg up on any competition. You don’t get to have special powers and also act against the hand that feeds you.

You seem to fundamentally misunderstand. The Government isn't allowed to take anything away that they were previously fine with you having just because you disagreed with them. That is, functionally, Free Speech in this country.

Disney has always been political, as has every major corporation in this country. Just because the greater portion of the public had no awareness of this does not discount its truth. They've always had stances, and many that many of us wouldn't agree with. We just didn't all see it so clearly. That does not make them a neutral entity. And it doesn't suddenly give the government the right to be withholding where it wasn't before.

 

[TikibirdLand]

Lol yeah that’s what happens. Only one side get censored.

View attachment 634684

Been there, been censored. And, comments like this will likely be as well.

 

[castlecake2.0]

My brain explodes every time someone says “free speech doesn’t mean free from consequence”.