Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
What in the actual hell does that mean?
-
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
flynnibus
Premium Member
Eh?
This makes no sense. The county still has jurisdiction here as they always have had.
I’m not saying they were owed it, just saying they weren’t getting it for free.
TheMaxRebo
Well-Known Member
CFTOD chairman says that the district paid $8m a year for law enforcement at Walt Disney World among other 'naughty things'
CFTOD chairman says that the district paid $8m a year for law enforcement at Walt Disney World among other 'naughty things'
CFTOD chairman says that the district paid $8m a year for law enforcement at Walt Disney World among other 'naughty things'www.wdwmagic.com
I didn't see in there any indication of how much it should cost for all of the police coverage/protection of all of the area including all of Walt Disney World
Like, is $8m a crazy number? Too little? Too much?
I mean, it sounds like a lot but how many hundreds of millions of people are covered per year including all guests and Disney springs, etc?
flynnibus
Premium Member
Well Disney Springs is managed by Disney is it not? So the funneling of money through the district did benefit Disney as a developer and property manager.
Now, just like every other property manager, if they want additional police at their site, they will contract it with the relevant agencies.
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
I think(?) the complaint isn't so much about the number, but that the police were used exclusively at Walt Disney World and not other locations in the district?
flynnibus
Premium Member
This is just more 'decoupling' of the District's activities from Disney's interests. District gets to make noise about it (just like they made noise about creating 'missing' policies the district didn't have)... but it's not really all that foul or vengeful. It's tearing up the cozy relationship between the company and the district under the guise of 'fairness'.
What benefit did the District really have to be the conduit for those services?
What benefit did the District really have to be the conduit for those services?
Is that who reponsds today then?
Why doesn't the county simply repond to all police calls everywhere then? Couldn't they already do that?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
The counties do not just provide services within municipalities. They have to be contracted to provide those services.
Here’s an example from last year where a town’s police force quit. The city wasn’t able to just expect the county to show up and do their policing for them. They had to pay for the service.
Officer resignations leave this Florida town without a police force
All six members of the Melbourne Village police force resigned this week, leaving the town without an effective agency starting Friday, officials said.
www.clickorlando.com
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Yes, the counties respond today within the cities because they are contracted to provide that service. They don’t just provide those services within Orlando or Kissimmee or any other municipal entity responsible for policing.
In practice this doesn’t really mean they won’t show up because the different entities all tend to have various assistance agreements.
So who’s to pay for police on district lands then? Currently Disney security will respond to calls on district roadways, can they start charging the district for that?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
The municipalities are obligated to provide the service. It was one of their municipal responsibilities the District handled on their behalf.
What other locations? Services contracted for by the District covered the entire District.
Side note, the blessing of the board members every meeting feels inappropriate at a government meeting
TheMaxRebo
Well-Known Member
Ok, is there all that much for the Police to cover beyond Disney though?
The headline/article definitely reads like they are implying Disney did something "Naughty" in it charging $8m
If they repond because of the contract and the contract is cannceled, wouldn't that mean they'll no longer repond?
My understanding of mutual assistance agreements is that they need to actually be mutual. That someone with a police force isn't going to maintain a mutual assistance agreement with someone who doesn't have a police force. Since that's not mutual anymore, that's just providing a free service.
So, how much (if any) of the district is NOT within a municipality?
Is CFTOD talking about cancelling all police contracts or just some?
Is it correct that today, neither municipality has a police force or contract?
That the district handles providing police service for all the area within the district?
Assuming they're cancelling all police contracting for the area within the district, that sounds like the district abandoning that responsibility. Assuming they can make that decision unilaterally, the adjustment would be for another entity to pick up that responsibilty. Since we've said that the county will not provide policing within a municipality for free, there's only two options left. Each municipality could form it's own police force. Each municipality could contract for a police force. The second just shifts the payer from the district to the municipalities.
If the district is abanding responsibilty and pushing it back onto the municipalities, that just shifts it around within things that while technically matter, in the abstract they're all still Disney. Important from a legal and cash flow stand point, not so much in the grand scheme of things.
If they do it haphazardly with no real plan and just a hard cutoff, it'll create some lawless chaos as the municipalities scramble to sign their own contracts for service.
mightynine
Well-Known Member
Well, they are doing their god's work.
It is common and legal for board meetings throughout the US. Antidisestablishmentarianism does not go over freedom of speech is the reason. Oddly as it may seem to some.
Paritcularly because as a teacher I am not trusted to allow/endorse, or practice that free speech in a classroom, but board meetings typically begin with them.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Who responds is a different topic vs "Is that just a lawless intersection?" - The law of the city, county, state all still apply, and the state and county still have jurisdiction to enforce their laws.
Who "services" the area is a function of the delegation of responsibility and funding of it. When a municipality with policing responsibility is created (like a city), the city takes that responsibility, funds it, and services it with either its own resources or contracting it out.
Because the city is chartered to do it, the county doesn't intend to provide those services by default, because that first line of responsibility has been assigned to the city. This doesn't mean the county doesn't work there or doesn't have any jurisdiction, it just means the county isn't going to scope its work to cover an area someone else is already tasked to cover.
TLDR - all that is just about who feeds the budget that the police rely on.
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
Can they just “do“ this without Disney’s approval? How would something like this even work? I imagine this could be added to the suit and also highlights the need for an injunction.
flynnibus
Premium Member
To clarify - the county has authority to enforce the law and does - the county doesn't default to provide services for an area that has already been delegated to a municipality. The post was "is this a lawless intersection" -- No its not.
Will the county expect to be paid over time if a chartered city doesn't meet it's obligation and tries to free load on the county? Yes