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

[monothingie]

Not all of them, no, but many of them have. And the bill sponsor and governor who signed it into law have been more than clear about the rational.

Which ones?
How many?
I'm not nitpicking, but without that information proving intent becomes exponentially more difficult.

And no, the wording of the bill does not mention Disney. But it doesn’t have to. They don’t get to violate your first amendment rights just because they take others down with you.

Which would be a challenge for a court to decide. Which falls back to the initial point.

 

[King Racoon 77]

 

[flynnibus]

Courts don’t really like it when people don’t bring up all arguments up front. It might not be their primary argument, but it would be a bit foolish to not include an argument up front and seriously risk giving it up as an argument.

No - because rcid suing over how the new law was implemented or written (arguing against its application etc) does not include disney.

Disney filing against the law would be completely separate- and no need to open that can of worms until rcid’s angles have been defeated.

 

[mikejs78]

You lost me when were talking about the senate. The current balance is 28/12. The super majority is there already.

My mistake. I did math wrong.

Let's set everybody straight. Yes, an amendment requires 60% (3/5) of both houses of the Florida Legislature to put before the voters. Then the amendment is put on the next general election ballot to be voted on.

The commentary on amending the constitution was meant to suggest that in a general term, the state can effectively do what it likes so long as it follows through the legislative process. No one is suggesting that this is even in play for this issue. Regardless, while extremely unlikely, amending the state constitution is a legislative option that is could be on the table give the current political makeup of the Florida legislature.

The legislature can't amend the FL constitution, only propose amendments. It needs to get approved by a supermajority (60%) of the voters. DeSantis, as much of a landslide victory as he had, just failed to reach 60%.

 

[JohnD]

My mistake. I did math wrong.




The legislature can't amend the FL constitution, only propose amendments. It needs to get approved by a supermajority (60%) of the voters. DeSantis, as much of a landslide victory as he had, just failed to reach 60%.

I think I said that. 60% from the Legislature then put before the voters.

 

[JohnD]

The person who wrote and sponsored the bill publicly stated his intent. And he did so on the floor when presenting the bill. It’s not hard to prove intent.

I think we can agree that while the bill sunsets special districts created before the 1968 Florida Constitution, that isn't the real intent. It was aimed at the RCID and other special districts got caught up in the wash due to how the bill was written.

 

[mikejs78]

I think I said that. 60% from the Legislature then put before the voters.

Yeah that part of my reply was more directed at @monothingie. But the threshold for the voters to pass it is 60%, not a simple majority.

 

[LAKid53]

I keep thinking it ends on 6/30/23, which is the end of Florida's fiscal year. It doesn't. It ends 6/1/23. Therefore, FIFW:

If there's no replacement for RCID on June 2, 2023, then everything reverts to the two counties WDW spans to provide the services RCID used to.

Either way, if there's nothing to replace it prior to 6/1/2023, it ceases to exist. Who then will provide emergency services, such as fire and ambulance? Thank god I'm 5 minutes from Orlando Health.

 

[LAKid53]

Unless of course the legislature takes action. Which is what this bill appears to do.

Ultimately the State has the power to implement any type of change they see fit so long as it adheres to the Florida Constitution. And if that got in the way, the legislature could amend the Florida Constitution.

The Florida Legislature can't unilaterally amend the state constitution. Any amendment requires a minimum of 60% of the voters approving.

 

[LAKid53]

The state can take it away….but there does not appear to be a legal path forward to require TWDC to pay for the services that are now provided by the special district. The real rub here is Disney was paying more than their fair share in taxes in exchange for a level of control over the quality of services provided. If you take away the control you also take away the payments. The debate is not whether the state can legally dissolve a special district.

The only way to do that is to create a special district. So if nothing happens, then TWDC will pay the same rate in property taxes I pay.

 

[LAKid53]

Which debate? Whether they can dissolve the district? That‘s already done. So far no lawsuit or legal challenge.

If you mean making Disney pay for the services without a special district that’s not going to be possible without an amendment to the state constitution. The legislature and Governor have no authority to assess additional taxes on an individual taxpayer. Without the special district the cost of the services falls to the local taxpayers in Orange and Osceola counties which would result in a massive tax increase on residents. Just saying that won’t happen is not a plan. So far we’ve seen no actual plan which could accomplish that goal.

Bingo. Thank you.

And as a property owner in Orange County, I am concerned that my property taxes will go up. However, as I'm registered to vote in another Florida County, I will have no say.

 

[lazyboy97o]

No - because rcid suing over how the new law was implemented or written (arguing against its application etc) does not include disney.

Disney filing against the law would be completely separate- and no need to open that can of worms until rcid’s angles have been defeated.

The intent is to harm the District’s constituents. Why would that not be part of an argument package for the District alone? If anything it could help Disney with public perception because it maintains that bit of separation versus Disney themselves fighting to keeping their special treatment, especially if it was after the District tried and failed.

 

[GoofGoof]

The commentary on amending the constitution was meant to suggest that in a general term, the state can effectively do what it likes so long as it follows through the legislative process. No one is suggesting that this is even in play for this issue. Regardless, while extremely unlikely, amending the state constitution is a legislative option that is could be on the table give the current political makeup of the Florida legislature.

I don’t disagree that amending the state constitution is an option and possible. I wasn’t questioning if it could be done but if it should be done.

So my question is should any taxpayer in the state have to pay all their normal local taxes to the county and then pay additional local taxes to a special district where they have no control? That makes no sense to me. In an extreme example what if the Governor appoints his cousin to the board and he hires his son’s company to pave the roads for 10X the current rate and does a terrible job. Now there are potholes everywhere and the taxes double next year to pay the extra cost. A taxpayer should have representation on the board that decides how their tax dollars are spent. Even with representation it’s hard to avoid corruption but without it there is no check at all.

Again, if you take that concept into a vacuum and ignore the politics I don’t think any rational person would say that this seems like something we should do. Do you disagree with that?

 

[flynnibus]

Which ones?
How many?
I'm not nitpicking, but without that information proving intent becomes exponentially more difficult.

No, trying to justify how this dropped out of the blue in a special session with no clear end game or vetting would be the exponentially difficult position to argue that this was not related to the events of the time or the leaders of the GOP or even the sponsors of the bill.

The defendent in the suit would be the dtate of Florida- no one needs to convict every congress person- their actions as a whole will be judged. And given the partyline… again hard to argue it’s not aligned.

 

[LAKid53]

This would be the Florida Constitution. It has nothing to do with the US Constitution.

No one is talking about amending the US Constitution. We are specifically referencing the process to be amend the state constitution. Which can be done in 3 ways - Legislature proposed amendments, citizens' initiatives and recommendations from the Constitutional Revision Commission.

 

[flynnibus]

The intent is to harm the District’s constituents. Why would that not be part of an argument package for the District alone?

I don’t think rcid has any standing in an argument of defending an individual’s rights simply because they are their special district the individual lives in….

They would have to make such arguments in the action that involves the district.

Disney can file suit completely separately and that’s what you’d expect… and to get pulled into federal court.

Tldr - disney’s rights are separate from rcid… and will file their own case if needed.

 

[Stripes]

Getting back to the topic, what exactly would the amendment to the state constitution be for? Allowing the Governor to create a special district where he can appoint the board and that district can then assess taxes on landowners in the district (in addition to the local taxes already paid to the local counties) without any vote or representation in the district? That is what would be needed to replace RCID with a new special district where Disney pays all the taxes and has no control.

For the people in favor of this, does this sound like something we should support? If you put aside political bias and the culture war struggle in this particular case and look at this from a pure government setup prospective nobody should be happy to support an amendment that does this. Would you be happy to pay extra taxes but then have no say in how the funds are spent? Seems like a real bad idea.

That’s what it sounds like they’re trying to do. If that’s the case I have no idea how it’s legal.

When it comes to special district representation, earlier you mentioned there were a few special districts that were controlled by the state but that the state funded the district in one way or another. How was this arranged? Did the landowner have to agree to this arrangement? Do they have voluntary dissolution power?

What power does Florida have to determine how a special district is represented?

 

[LAKid53]

The commentary on amending the constitution was meant to suggest that in a general term, the state can effectively do what it likes so long as it follows through the legislative process. No one is suggesting that this is even in play for this issue. Regardless, while extremely unlikely, amending the state constitution is a legislative option that is could be on the table give the current political makeup of the Florida legislature.

Which has to be approved by the state supreme court to ensure the amendment meets the single subject and clear language requirement before getting put on the 2024 ballot. And then must be approved by 60% of the voters.

 

[LAKid53]

I think we can agree that while the bill sunsets special districts created before the 1968 Florida Constitution, that isn't the real intent. It was aimed at the RCID and other special districts got caught up in the wash due to how the bill was written.

Because Disney would potentially have a case for targeted legislative action if the Legislature didn't abolish all special districts created prior to the 1968 constitution.

 

[LAKid53]

The fact that it was stated by the bill sponsor while in session as part of the debate about the bill, implies that all those who voted for it were aware of the goal. Even if they didn't specifically say it themselves. So, while it's true, nobody will find individual quotes from every single person who voted for this bill, that's a very misleading technicality. It was clearly part of the official debate on the bill. Not just something said on FOX News.

The focus of the special session in which the bill was passed was modified to include the dissolution of RCID.