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

lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
UNCgolf said:
Ex post facto laws are an explicit violation of the US Constitution. They're probably not allowed in the Florida constitution either, but it wouldn't matter because the US Constitution specifically doesn't allow states to pass them either.

They're generally related to criminal conduct, though.
Click to expand...
I still don’t understand how Anaheim was able to retroactively change their luxury hotel tax incentive.
 
M

mmascari

Well-Known Member
mikejs78 said:
I don't see a way out for DeSantis at this point or even some face saving measure. His choices are to basically repeal the dissolution, or tank the Florida economy.
Click to expand...
In the next special session, reverse what was passed in the last special session so it's back to the prior condition.

Then go out an publicly claim a victory and say whatever they want. Just call it a "win" again and again and again and that they showed Disney.

It doesn't matter if those two things agree or not.
 
Disney Glimpses

Disney Glimpses

Well-Known Member
mmascari said:
In the next special session, reverse what was passed in the last special session so it's back to the prior condition.

Then go out an publicly claim a victory and say whatever they want. Just call it a "win" again and again and again and that they showed Disney.

It doesn't matter if those two things agree or not.
Click to expand...
I think they need to establish a new District with even the smallest changes to call it a win. If they revert, Disney will clearly have won.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
disneyglimpses said:
I think they need to establish a new District with even the smallest changes to call it a win. If they revert, Disney will clearly have won.
Click to expand...
I still think a new District could violate the state’s pledge since it is for the specific district. It doesn’t say the District and it’s successors.

While the rhetoric is largely detached from actuality, there was the small bit of awareness that pretense was necessary. Other districts were effected to give cover for the open retaliation. Any fix related to Reedy Creek is now a special deal for Disney. It’s the exact opposite of the claims.
 
C

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
Lilofan said:
I hope it doesn’t jinx the Disney Springs free parking garage. Chapek hasn’t started charging guests to park there yet ….
Click to expand...

Well, some comforting information is that since the bonds are Ad Valorem tax bonds rather than Revenue bonds, they can't change the source of repayment to parking revenues. It doesn't mean they can't charge a parking fee (or won't in the future), just that the bonds won't be the reason.
 
Willmark

Willmark

Well-Known Member
Generally speaking, politicians don’t like to actually do something, far better to promise something or “fight” something (whatever something is) and claim the following:

1. “I tried, but the other side stopped me!”
2. “We came to a mutually beneficial solution.”
3. Insert reason here.





Lastly (as I think it’s been mentioned a random thought): Disney just can’t up and move to Georgia for instance. I wonder how much that factors that Disney just can’t relocate into this spectacle.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
mikejs78 said:
I really don't see how they're going to do this. Fitch basically said that the only viable solution is to reconstitute the district, maybe with a different administrative structure, but with all the powers and rights that it had before.

Now, DeSantis could try to put in a district that has administration from the counties or from the state as opposed to the Disney elected administrators, but that would run afoul of the homestead guarantee in the Florida Constitution.

I don't see a way out for DeSantis at this point or even some face saving measure. His choices are to basically repeal the dissolution, or tank the Florida economy.
Click to expand...

My guess is their simple strategy is to define a new district, in the same spot, make the law say it rolls all obligations, but has new scope and somehow redefine the admin so disney doesn’t get to own all the admin positions.

How you get there is kinda messy… there are a lot of requirements and ifs and buts in the law and state constitution now around how these get created. But I’d bet money that’s their plan. RCID II - under new management
 
M

mmascari

Well-Known Member
mikejs78 said:
Establish a new district without the ability to run a nuclear power plant. Call it a victory.
Click to expand...

lazyboy97o said:
I still think a new District could violate the state’s pledge since it is for the specific district. It doesn’t say the District and it’s successors.

While the rhetoric is largely detached from actuality, there was the small bit of awareness that pretense was necessary. Other districts were effected to give cover for the open retaliation. Any fix related to Reedy Creek is now a special deal for Disney. It’s the exact opposite of the claims.
Click to expand...

They could undo the currently passed that dissolves. Introduce new legislation that modifies all special districts that were previously granted rights to nuclear power plants with some new constraint. Existing district still exists, solves the bond problem and all the collateral damage. How many could there be? Plus, it's not like any were probably using that right.

Publicly decree from on high at every media outlet possible that they "put Disney in it's place" by modifying the district's rights.

Just gloss over what those modifications are, it's all go forward and eliminates all the bond issues. It's not like the media is big on nuance reporting.

The point being, the best case scenario for FL is to just undo what was passed. The best case political scenario is to keep saying whatever they want and not care about any reality.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
GimpYancIent said:
One thing is for sure the Florida economy is too diverse for this RCID issue to cause it to tank. Exaggerations are not helpful.
Click to expand...
You don’t understand what bond ratings mean do you?

They are talking about hurting the bond ratings of all municipal bonds in fl because of the prescient it sets about the future stability of something in fl.

It would hurt the borrowing ability of everyone… and that hinders things getting done
 
mikejs78

mikejs78

Premium Member
flynnibus said:
My guess is their simple strategy is to define a new district, in the same spot, make the law say it rolls all obligations, but has new scope and somehow redefine the admin so disney doesn’t get to own all the admin positions.

How you get there is kinda messy… there are a lot of requirements and ifs and buts in the law and state constitution now around how these get created. But I’d bet money that’s their plan. RCID II - under new management
Click to expand...

The thing is I don't think they can do this. The home rule provision of the constitution would require a vote of any residents of said new district. Disney would just be able to vote it down. The reason it works for other entities in the state is because usually there aren't any residents, or there are any municipalities involved as we have in the case of LBV and Bay Lake.

There's also the question on whether a newly constituted district would satisfy the provisions of the contract - given that the contract specifically references the entity of Reedy Creek. They can't modify any of the powers of Reedy Creek and still maintain the bond contract, which is basically what Fitch said today.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom