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

[MisterPenguin]

Everything I've heard on the news is about a regular session bill. I'm leaving Epcot now. Continue discussion...

I was going by what was said in this thread and it turns out to be the case...

The special session will reportedly begin Monday -

"The Florida Legislature will convene a special session Monday to consider a state takeover of Disney World’s Reedy Creek Improvement District."

"The bill hasn’t been filed as of Friday, but DeSantis has said he wants the state to take over control of the district and ensure that taxpayers are protected from paying the district’s debts.

The Reedy Creek reorganization will be filed as a local bill in the House and presented in Senate committees by Sen. Travis Hutson, R-Palm Coast."

Disney Reedy Creek special session is set for Monday

TALLAHASSEE — The Florida Legislature will convene a special session Monday to consider a state takeover of Disney World’s Reedy Creek Improvement District, migrant relocation, election…

www.orlandosentinel.com

 

[GoofGoof]

I don’t agree with the first part.

The Florida constitution clearly states that powers can be transferred by the electors or by law.

The Florida legislature, with concurrence from the governor, have the power to transfer the powers of a special district.

I agree with the second part.

This is very scary and shows one of the pitfalls of granting the government too much power.

Isn’t that a circular reference though? The constitution says control can be transferred by an act of law, but that act of law still has to be constitutional. They cannot just pass a law that says we want to attack Disney so we are taking away their special district. The by law reference still requires an actual law which would apply to all local governments not just RCID.

 

[MisterPenguin]

"The Florida Legislature will convene a special session Monday to consider a state takeover of Disney World’s Reedy Creek Improvement District."

"The bill hasn’t been filed as of Friday, but DeSantis has said he wants the state to take over control of the district and ensure that taxpayers are protected from paying the district’s debts.

The Reedy Creek reorganization will be filed as a local bill in the House and presented in Senate committees by Sen. Travis Hutson, R-Palm Coast."

 

[lazyboy97o]

The current Republican governor appears to be taking advantage of loopholes that have existed in the state constitution since 1968

How did the state legislature not find these loopholes when they did an in depth research study of the District?

 

[MR.Dis]

The truth is that it is Never good for one party to have complete control. Always better to have 2 parties that have to find common ground to get things done for betterment of the people they govern. I am originally from Chicago (Cook County) and the shannigans going on the the Reedy District is small potatoes to what goes on in Illinois. Heck, a few years ago the governor tried to auction off a vacant US Senate seat to the highest bidder, got caught on tape and ended spending 10 years in prison for that stunt. Illinois does not scrub their voting roles, there are documented cases of people who have been dead 50 years who have never missed voting in an election cycle. So please if I do not seem to think the transfer of power of Reedy Creek District is as big a deal as many on this forum.

 

[mikejs78]

The Florida constitution clearly states that powers can be transferred by the electors or by law.

That's not what that clause means. It doesn't mean that the legislature can pass a law in lieu of a referendum, but rather that they can pass a law that creates an alternative means instead of a referendum. And right now no such law exists.


Otherwise why would the first part of that clause say that the legislature can transfer with approval of the electors? It seems circular.

 

[drnilescrane]

I was reading the Orlando Sentinel article, and suddenly thought of a possible long game scenario.

They've managed through lobbying (and pointing out the reality of the situation) to water the whole thing down to the Governor appointing the board and potentially having to take over some debt (probably the parking garages).

WDW is going to be around a long time. Desantis isn't. They've been a very effective influence in the legislature for over 50 years.

Just give him the win now, keep their heads down, and turn the money taps back on. 3 years from now, new Governor, this all gets fixed. Everybody moves on.

 

[Basil of Baker Street]

I was reading the Orlando Sentinel article, and suddenly thought of a possible long game scenario.

They've managed through lobbying (and pointing out the reality of the situation) to water the whole thing down to the Governor appointing the board and potentially having to take over some debt (probably the parking garages).

WDW is going to be around a long time. Desantis isn't. They've been a very effective influence in the legislature for over 50 years.

Just give him the win now, keep their heads down, and turn the money taps back on. 3 years from now, new Governor, this all gets fixed. Everybody moves on.

I think that is the play as well. Lay low and move on. It really could be that simple.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I was reading the Orlando Sentinel article, and suddenly thought of a possible long game scenario.

They've managed through lobbying (and pointing out the reality of the situation) to water the whole thing down to the Governor appointing the board and potentially having to take over some debt (probably the parking garages).

WDW is going to be around a long time. Desantis isn't. They've been a very effective influence in the legislature for over 50 years.

Just give him the win now, keep their heads down, and turn the money taps back on. 3 years from now, new Governor, this all gets fixed. Everybody moves on.

The debt is already held by the District. There’s nothing for them to take over.

This issue is not just being driven by the governor. This was very much started by the legislature.

 

[lazyboy97o]

What makes a law in Florida constitutional? Presumably, it's constitutional if it's passed by both houses of legislation and signed by the governor.

So now you’re novel theory is that constitutions are meaningless?

 

[drnilescrane]

The debt is already held by the District. There’s nothing for them to take over.

This issue is not just being driven by the governor. This was very much started by the legislature.

I was responding to the $700m number being thrown around - assuming it was part of a deal - but more Googling suggests that's just the amount the district holds in unsecured/non bond encumbered debt.

I do stand by what I said though, Disney whipped the legislature into carving them out of the social media bill. They can change things once they resume their usual contributions.

 

[JMcMahonEsq]

What makes a law in Florida constitutional? Presumably, it's constitutional if it's passed by both houses of legislation and signed by the governor.

Wait, so then how did every law that a state of federal court rule to be unconstitutionally happen? Someone slipped it into the law books and didn't tell anyone?

A bill becomes a law when it is passed by the legislature and signed by the governor. The courts determine if said law is constitutional.

 

[culturenthrills]

That’s truly sad in the boring somewhat tasteless cuisine of Central Florida when Tiger eats some of his meals at Dennys

Do you even live here. If you did you would know Central Florida doesn’t have boring tasteless cuisine. We have some of the most diverse restaurants and eateries in the state.

 

[lazyboy97o]

People are justifiably upset at what Florida is doing to Disney. (Except apparently the FCID fire department, who are in favor of this.)

But the thing is, is the board of supervisors who will be appointed by the governor really going to try to screw Disney? Are they going to say "no" when Disney wants to build something? Are they going to say "no" when Disney wants the district to increase the millage to pay for another infrastructure project? The current RCID board of supervisors already have a reputation of requiring higher construction standards than local counties. Is the new board really going to make it even harder and more expensive for Disney to build?

It just doesn't make sense from the governor's perspective. He wants the political win and once the new board of supervisors take their seat, his win is complete. Pounding on Disney after the fact will just come off as petty and will drive away the voters he needs to win a general election.

That’s the whole purpose. It’s ongoing control. The board of supervisors can make things difficult when Disney engages in actions the state leaders do not like and those actions don’t have to just be related to public opposition to legislation. Anything can be a cause for punishment because that’s the point.

I'm simply asking you to find a section of the Florida constitution that the legislature has violated.

It's a lengthy document and I'm too lazy to read all of it.

I hope you can find something because that's sure to lead to an interesting and informative discussion.

Again, I feel Disney was wronged. But I'm also being realistic when I evaluate what legal grounds Disney has to fight this.

You have been given multiple references, and you just keep waving them away as able to be undone on a whim. You say you haven’t read it but are certain you’ve found constitutional loopholes that the Office of Program Policy Analysis and Government Accountability and hundreds of other lawyers have completely missed.

 

[Lilofan]

Do you even live here. If you did you would know Central Florida doesn’t have boring tasteless cuisine. We have some of the most diverse restaurants and eateries in the state.

Friends and family and I visit frequently. Doesn't compare to the more diverse better cuisine in Miami.

 

[lazyboy97o]

To be clear, these changes of the law are not being “undone on a whim.”

They require both houses of legislature to pass the approve the bill, and the governor to sign it into law. This is not a whim. This is the well-defined process to change state law.

What can Disney do to fight this when the state legislature is overwhelmingly Republican and hostile to “woke” Disney. When the governor is trying to score points with the Republican Party in his run for president?

One protection that Disney has is to appeal to the judiciary, which means finding ways what the State of Florida is doing violates the state’s or U.S. Constitution.

I’ve already suggested that they are loopholes in the Florida constitution that allows them to replace RCID.

I would love it if someone could find something in the Florida constitution that Disney can use to fight those loopholes.

We’re right back to constitutions being meaningless. The whole point of the constitution is because the legislative process should not be all powerful, that it should have limits. We’re talking about a law and pending legislation both introduced by special session with almost no prior notice, one rushed through and another expected to be pushed through quickly. If that’s not a whim then you really are reaching for excuses.

You have been given multiple sections.

It seems incredibly extraordinary that someone who has not even read the entire constitution has discovered that the entire thing is actually self-negating. Decades of jurisprudence and precedent rendered meaningless because generations of Florida lawyers, scholars and judges didn’t realize that the legislature was actually empowered to do pretty much anything they desire because it is “provided by law.”

 

[mikejs78]

Disney has already approved the millage under the existing RCID.

Disney's loophole is to have a referendum before the transfer of power happens, and approve a reduction in the milage.

 

[mikejs78]

They require both houses of legislature to pass the approve the bill, and the governor to sign it into law. This is not a whim. This is the well-defined process to change state law

I've said it before and I'll say it again. As it stands right now, the legislature cannot transfer powers without the consent of the electors in the district, because no other process has been established by law to do so. In fact, FL law reiterates the constitutional requirement for a referendum.

 

[GoofGoof]

What makes a law in Florida constitutional? Presumably, it's constitutional if it's passed by both houses of legislation and signed by the governor.

There are over 1000 special districts in Florida. I suspect many required their own legislation. The Florida constitution references general laws and special laws, and includes the following definition:

(g) “Special law” means a special or local law.​

It's been a while since I last looked but as I recall, a charter typically is written when the legislature creates a special district. (I believe this was the case for the original RCID charter.) The special district's charter specifies how the board of supervisors are elected/appointed.

One special district's charter does not need to be the same as another special district's charter. Presumably, the Florida legislature is drafting a special law that is specific to the district that is replacing RCID.

As I mentioned before, I think the Florida constitution allows laws to be passed to create special districts, and to transfer the powers of one special district to another. I'm hoping someone else finds a section in the Florida constitution that limits this power. If not, then I think this aspect of what's happening is legal from the perspective of the Florida constitution.

I think Disney's better play is to seek redress on Freedom of Speech grounds. Legal precedent is complex but the core argument is simple. Disney said something the governor didn't like. The governor retaliated in an attempt to "chill" Disney's protected free speech rights. ("Chill" is a word frequently found in a lot of free speech Supreme Court rulings.) The governor violated Disney's free speech rights.

I am sure there are many examples of the FL legislature passing a law that is then struck down on grounds it’s unconstitutional. That’s the whole point of a constitution. I think we are too liberally interpreting a throw away sentence in a statute that says or by law to mean that any act of law will automatically be constitutional. The law they passed to dissolve RCID has not been challenged as unconstitutional but that’s different than arbitrarily overtaking the board of an existing district. I know this is a special district and unique but I don’t see how allowing this would then not allow the governor to take over any local municipality any time he wants as long as the legislature passes a bill. Surely that cannot be the intent of the constitution.

All I’m saying here is put any political bias aside and look at the action being attempted. The system of checks and balances exists to prevent this kind of overreach. Imagine if POTUS decided FL was being governed poorly so he replaced the elected legislature with a hand pick group. People on both sides of the aisle would not stand for it. Just because it’s a special district and Disney is the primary land owner shouldn’t make this any more palatable.

 

[GoofGoof]

I've said it before and I'll say it again. As it stands right now, the legislature cannot transfer powers without the consent of the electors in the district, because no other process has been established by law to do so. In fact, FL law reiterates the constitutional requirement for a referendum.

This is true. They will have to pass a new law granting the Governor the power to overthrow an elected board. I suppose they can try to carve it out to apply to just special districts but still leaves a huge opening for the 1,800 other districts to be tampered with.