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

[Creathir]

Last I checked the FL legislature and the Governor are still required to follow the law. They cannot just do what they want because they are duly elected. The things people are talking about are all issues with their plan being legal based on the state constitution and existing state law.

What law was violated?

 

[LAKid53]

This was an action by the legislature, not just the Governor.

This is attention due to Disney putting their foot in their mouth.

Citizens United granted TWDC the right to do so...without government retaliation.

 

[LAKid53]

What law was violated?

The Home Rule Powers Act of the Florida Constitution, for one.

 

[UNCgolf]

Currently, there is no such mechanism for them to do so. It would violate the Home Rule Powers Act in the Florida Constitution. You'd see both county and city governments pushing back against any attempt to do so.

Right, that's why I said it would just be a shift in the basis for litigation (moving from the bond issue to this) rather than anything that gives them a clear victory. It's almost like a shell game.

 

[LAKid53]

Right, that's why I said it would just be a shift in the basis for litigation (moving from the bond issue to this) rather than anything that gives them a clear victory. It's almost like a shell game.

It is. And unfortunately, voters in Florida will pay the costs of that she'll game.

 

[flynnibus]

What irritants?

Meaning constructs like modifying an existing district vs creating a new one
...or avenues of change that maybe could be done via statute instead of requiring landowners
...or even potentially differences in grandfathering vs new application of other laws, etc

I don't know all the twists and turns.. just speculating that they could be aiming for something more surgical instead of gut n replace..

I do think the 2022c passed law was just to thrown down the gauntlet and doesn't represent anything that they will ultimately do. It was more to force the topic.

 

[UNCgolf]

It is. And unfortunately, voters in Florida will pay the costs of that she'll game.

Yep. Even if, in the end, RCID remains exactly as it exists today, Florida's taxpayers will be paying to defend this in multiple lawsuits.

 

[JoeCamel]

This was an action by the legislature, not just the Governor.

This is attention due to Disney putting their foot in their mouth.

No it was passed as a method to raise money. All they have to do slow walk ot through November

 

[lazyboy97o]

What law was violated?

Contract Clause.
Reedy Creek Improvement District Act.

 

[UNCgolf]

It just seems like it would get tied up in court for years, with Disney ultimately winning on First Amendment grounds if it came to that.

There's also no guarantee that a new Governor/AG would even continue to defend the law in court. If DeSantis loses to a Democrat in November (which is very unlikely, but for the sake of argument), the new Attorney General could simply decline to defend the law which would almost certainly result in a win for Disney.

 

[flynnibus]

In what way would a company, not even based within the state of Florida, have the upper hand over the Florida legislature and government?

1 - being based in florida is meaningless to operating in florida or the applicability of florida law.. so why even bring that up?

2 - They have the upper hand because they, like the rest of Florida and US Citizens have constitutions that bound what the government can do... and
3 - Disney already has the thing in place to defend.

This was not some edict from a despot dictator, the duly elected legislature pass a law dissolving all special tax districts created before the adoption of the current Florida constitution.
The duly elected Governor signed it.

The duly elected folks are also constrained by the duly appointed judical branch and the constitution accepted by their voters. So while you like to highlight they are 'duly elected' and not a despot dictator, it doesn't mean they get to act like one.

Unless they specifically targeted Disney directly, there is little recourse Disney has from a lawsuit standpoint.

Yeah, he's not target Disney at all... just naming them every chance he gets because it's the first name that comes to mind?

This 'oh it's not targeting Disney' talking point is so weak I can't believe people are still naive enough to believe it.

 

[JoeCamel]

It just seems like it would get tied up in court for years, with Disney ultimately winning on First Amendment grounds if it came to that.

What a mess.

And that last line is all that matters to them. Get past the election and let it die in the courts. Just a bunch of not their money spent.

 

[LAKid53]

With support from both chambers of the legislature, DeSantis can alter statutes pretty much anyway he wants.

What DeSantis cannot alter is the Florida Constitution. IMO, we have to look for ways that violate the Florida Constitution. The Florida Supreme Court cannot ignore that.

My kneejerk reaction is that what DeSantis proposes (taking direct control over RCID) violates the Floridia Constitution.

However...

(a) POLITICAL SUBDIVISIONS. The state shall be divided by law into political subdivisions called counties. Counties may be created, abolished or changed by law, with provision for payment or apportionment of the public debt.​

OK, so the state can create, abolish, or change counties by simple majority law.

Counties have officers and commissioners elected by the residents/landowners (for RCID, this is effectively Disney):

(d) COUNTY OFFICERS. There shall be elected by the electors of each county, for terms of four years, a sheriff, a tax collector, a property appraiser, a supervisor of elections, and a clerk of the circuit court.​

(e) COMMISSIONERS. Except when otherwise provided by county charter, the governing body of each county shall be a board of county commissioners composed of five or seven members serving staggered terms of four years. After each decennial census the board of county commissioners shall divide the county into districts of contiguous territory as nearly equal in population as practicable. One commissioner residing in each district shall be elected as provided by law.​

But there's an exception:

(f) NON-CHARTER GOVERNMENT. Counties not operating under county charters shall have such power of self-government as is provided by general or special law. The board of county commissioners of a county not operating under a charter may enact, in a manner prescribed by general law, county ordinances not inconsistent with general or special law, but an ordinance in conflict with a municipal ordinance shall not be effective within the municipality to the extent of such conflict.​

Does this mean that DeSantis can turn RCID into its own non-charter county, and then enact in "general or special law" whatever provisions he wants?

Still, he runs into the issue of Lake Buena Vista and Bay Lake, which are incorporated cities. Maybe he gets around those with this:

(a) ESTABLISHMENT. Municipalities may be established or abolished and their charters amended pursuant to general or special law. When any municipality is abolished, provision shall be made for the protection of its creditors.​

The Floridia Constitution is complex. Presumably, someone is advising DeSantis that there are ways to accomplish what he (says) he wants to do.

It just seems like it would get tied up in court for years, with Disney ultimately winning on First Amendment grounds if it came to that.

What a mess.

There would be serious consequences if either DeSantis or the Florida Legislature decided to abolish a charted, incorporated city or county in the state. Without specific, justifiable reasons that aren't related to governance.

 

[lentesta]

The Home Rule Powers Act of the Florida Constitution, for one.

I've readd the HRPA. Which part is violated by what DeSantis said today about the state taking control of the RCID? I'm not doubting you - I just don't understand the HRPA all that well.

 

[lentesta]

I take that statement as a plan to leave RCID intact as-is, but change the governing structure so that it's controlled by the State of Florida. That could potentially allow them to sidestep the bond issue, since the district would remain.

I'd argue the bond issue still remains. It's quite a different situation between "the bond issuer controls the revenue source" and "the bond issuer does not control the revenue source".

 

[peter11435]

This is attention due to Disney putting their foot in their mouth.

You spelled “this is retaliation for Disney exercising their constitutionly protected rights” wrong.

 

[GhostHost1000]

Regardless of what happens, this could have all been prevented if Disney didn’t completely botch PR. They need a major change in management starting from the top and this is just another example (of many since chapek has taken over) as to why

 

[UNCgolf]

I'd argue the bond issue still remains. It's quite a different situation between "the bond issuer controls the revenue source" and "the bond issuer does not control the revenue source".

Oh sure, there's still a potential argument there -- that's why I only said it potentially sidesteps the issue.

It's just not as blatant as completely eliminating the issuing municipality.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Regardless of what happens, this could have all been prevented if Disney didn’t completely botch PR. They need a major change in management starting from the top and this is just another example (of many since chapek has taken over) as to why

No, just no. It doesn’t matter how bad Disney handles their public positions. Nothing, absolutely nothing, justifies a government seeking to suppress speech. All you are doing is excusing authoritarian practices.

 

[GhostHost1000]

No, just no. It doesn’t matter how bad Disney handles their public positions. Nothing, absolutely nothing, justifies a government seeking to suppress speech. All you are doing is excusing authoritarian practices.

whether it’s justified or not…this could have all been avoided if Disney wasn’t so dumb in how they handle things. More companies need to run their business instead of their mouths outside of their business objectives regardless of anyones beliefs. Just my opinion