JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
I meant Don's VP.........
can't be on Ron's board if you are playing for the other team
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District
- Thread starter castlecake2.0
- Start date
can't be on Ron's board if you are playing for the other team
JohnD
Well-Known Member
I disagree. That's the very reason. There's a suit brought by the CFTOD against Disney in state court. It doesn't take a rocket scientist to think it could go all the way to the State Supreme Court. Whether his wife would still have to recuse herself even after her husband resigned from the board is for others to debate. But his resigning now as his wife is appointed to the SC is definitely linked.
Last edited:
JohnD
Well-Known Member
Exactly .
Stripes
Premium Member
If the board/DeSantis thinks they will need her to rule in their favor they must not have a very strong case.
Disney also has a strong argument that the suit filed in state court is moot due to Senate Bill 1604 and the case should be dismissed.
JohnD
Well-Known Member
Showing me who is on the State Supreme Court right now is pointless. If his wife is being appointed there, and a case involving CFTOD and Disney could come before it, his resigning makes sense. Otherwise, her accepting the position and his staying on the board leads to all sorts of valid criticisms. Many would be cited right here in this forum, rightfully.
Stripes
Premium Member
The case could very well be dismissed as moot. Why not wait until the judge issues a ruling before deciding to resign?
I would argue that Michelle Sasso should still recuse herself from the case given it was her husband that voted to declare the contracts void even if he is no longer on the board.
JohnD
Well-Known Member
As I said, whether she should still recuse herself is debatable as you're debating here, but he is removing himself as a potential conflict of interest now.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Could it not be as simple as moving to Tallahassee and not caring to bother with the ongoing logistics of staying on the Board?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
The case would still center around actions to which her husband was a party. Him resigning only removes conflict regarding future actions and future litigation.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Wouldn’t she just recuse herself? I don’t think there would be any criticism if she recused herself, unless they think they somehow need that vote to swing the court, but that seems pretty unlikely.
This seems very likely. That’s not a close commute.
I wonder if the redignation has something to do with the closed meeting with tge lawyers. I thought the closed session lasted longer thsn usual. I also thing he knows they will lose the case and the Board can be shown to have not acted in the interest of the property owners they can be legally liable for their decissions and have to pay that liability personally.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
The Board is not personally liable.
Only if they are operating within their legal feduciary responsibiliy. I contend that they are not and if DVC owners and other business owners got together we can legally sue the Board members personally and I hope a lawyer will try l. I am glad though that one member did resign as I asked on May 1. I only wish the rest of them did too.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Under what law do they carry personal liability? It’s not within the District’s charter. They are not acting in a personal capacity.
The whole board resigning doesn’t change anything. It’s meaningless. Filling the vacancies is done by the governor.
The Board members are not personally liable. They are/were acting in their capacity as supervisors of the OCTOD Board.
Your concept of fiduciary responsibility is erroneous in this instance. The members of the Board are in essence agents of the government and have the legal authority, both by statute and charter, to supervise the operations of the District as deemed necessary.
Only IF it can be determined in a court of law that a member of the Board substantially and personally benefited from an action of the Board could a member be personally held liable. But in actuality what would happen is the Board would be sued and the member removed from the Board.
JohnD
Well-Known Member
Sigh. Now everyone wants to argue for the sake of arguing. His wife is being appointed to the state Supreme Court. He was being sued in his capacity as supervisor of CFTOD. He is removing himself as a potential conflict of interest. It's as simple as that. Put another way, the husband of a state Supreme Court Justice was being sued by Disney.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
No, it is not as simple as that because it does not remove the conflict.
I would think that's the primary motivation. It's a 4 hour drive from WDW to Tallahassee.
And as members of the Legislature who live in South Florida know, few options available to fly into the airport. And no direct flights - have a layover in either Miami, Ft. Lauderdale or Atlanta. A flight time of 3-5 hours that a direct flight would be 45 minutes.
Maybe he realized that the board’s actually job is white boring and couldn’t be bothered anymore? 1 down… 4 to go?