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

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member

If the supreme court uphelds discrimination against family members is still retaliation under federal civil rights you can count on no such direct action requirement for a more fundamental constitutional right.

They simply have to demonstrate the action against rcid was to influence disney - which is something the state has already stated.

The three litmus test I provided do not require an action be explicitly enacted on the individual. That is the case law on retaliation for freedom of speech. You can keep disagreeing- it doesn’t make you right.

If you speak out against the gov and they imprisoned your significant other to punish you, you don’t think that is something you’d consider forbidden by the 1a? You think the courts would be like ‘… well, they didn’t imprison you…’?? And such a simple out would stand?

That’s why the second test does not include any requirement that the action was taken directly against you.
Title VII is employment law; there has to be some sort of employer/employee relationship. It's not even Constitutional; it's statutory. It has nothing to do with 1st Amendment law.
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member
DeSantis and his office vows that taxes aren't going to increase for any OC/OC resident. Reading between the lines here, to me that says they intend to negotiate a new district with the company with less favorable tax terms. They can't force that debt onto TWDC without giving them the district back and TWDC won't take the district back without terms that are favorable to them.
If what you say is accurate, why would TWDC take the district back at all? There's literally no "favorable" terms that would be worth a billion dollars (which is the outstanding bond debt).
 

flynnibus

Premium Member
Jumping back in to provide some info from the OC Tax Collector about “creating a new tax”, which is what many have suggested happen. It won’t.


Another interesting point is the cities vs the counties in the dissolution. The cities as they are were not defined prior to rcid… but in bills passed immediately after.

I’m wondering still if there are arguments for the dissolution of rcid to goto the cities instead of the underlying counties.

That would be interesting because it solves many of the discrepancies. It strips disney of it’s special status… the debts stay ‘in the family’… and there is less isolation.

Honestly I haven’t researched it - but you’d think this would be a good compromise .
 

AdventureHasAName

Well-Known Member

Disney Glimpses

Well-Known Member

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
I was under the impression that RCID had land leases with TWDC and owned no real property.
rc.PNG

Just one of many
 

englanddg

One Little Spark...
Another interesting point is the cities vs the counties in the dissolution. The cities as they are were not defined prior to rcid… but in bills passed immediately after.

I’m wondering still if there are arguments for the dissolution of rcid to goto the cities instead of the underlying counties.

That would be interesting because it solves many of the discrepancies. It strips disney of it’s special status… the debts stay ‘in the family’… and there is less isolation.

Honestly I haven’t researched it - but you’d think this would be a good compromise .
Rick Fogleson appears to think so. His bona fides are in the article.

Untitled.png


 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom