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

[mkt]

I have no idea how this works but does SeaWorld and Universal pay for their own police presence?

Yes. They pay for off duty officers to patrol - it's easy overtime for them.

The ones at Disney are considered their own sector within OCSO and are regularly scheduled. Same as when municipalities don't have a police department and instead contract with a Sheriff's office for policing within their jurisdiction.

 

[mkt]

Who do you call to create a police report?

I've been in an accident on property.

OCSO doesn't handle it. FHP does (and Disney Security will attempt to as well)

 

[mkt]

It's just another example of getting rid of Disney's laundering of services through the District.

In terms of 'separating' things I don't think it's all that bad nor is it all that materially significant to how anything will actually operate.

I get the tax free money to build the parking garages, but how is paying for OCSO to patrol the district considered "laundering of services", given that Disney was far from the only beneficiary of this.

 

[mkt]

The District contracts with the counties for law enforcement because the cities having their own police departments would be incredibly unpopular.

And an insane liability that Disney does not want. At all.

They'd rather let every shoplifter get away with whatever is in their pocket than have to deal with the fallout of a Disney police officer killing an innocent civilian.

 

[lazyboy97o]

They're related though. The whole thing is a huge social contract that we all agree too, mostly.

Something being against the law only matters if someone actually enforces that law. If nobody enforces it, only the social contract of everyone following it volunteerily is left to enforce it. Depending on the thing they'll turn out differently with no enforcement or even with who steps in to enforce it.

With no district and no municipality funding and servicing the area, and the county not wanting to provide services for free since they are not budgeted and set up to provide them. What's enforced will become murky.

If someone were to go on a violent rampage in Disney Springs, I'm sure the county police force would respond. Funding or not, they're not going to just ignore that.

If someone is driving recklessly or causes a minor accident with no injuries, the stakes are signifigantly lower. The county could easily ignore that.

The effect of a "no turn on red" sign is almost exclusively based on the social contract, with some amount of enforcement encouraging that. Remove that enforcment by not funding it, and the social contrct will decline quickly, as a right on red is legal in many many instances. Likewise, the infraction isn't going to rise to the level that unfunded unplanned police force is going to go out of their way to deal with it.

And that’s just it, Disney isn’t going to want that so they are almost certain to go ahead and pick up the tab. There’s almost no chance they let things deteriorate that far. They don’t want stories about poor police response time or deputies being laid off because Disney isn’t paying.

Thats what makes this such a shrewd move. They figured out a way to stick it to Disney and really only Disney while they also get to crow about lowering taxes and being fiscally responsible.

 

[mmascari]

I've been in an accident on property.

The example wasn't on Disney Property. That was on purpose. Who reponds to two cars that collide in a Disney parking lot could be very different.

OCSO doesn't handle it. FHP does (and Disney Security will attempt to as well)

OCSO?
FHP?

(I'm slow here, lost on who each of those is.)

The root of the question was, is that reponse because of the district contract for services or because of existing reponsibility?
If it's because of the contract, and they elminate the contract, what's the outcome then?

 

[lazyboy97o]

OCSO?
FHP?

Orange County Sheriff’s Office.
Florida Highway Patrol.

 

[flynnibus]

There it is! The District contracts with the counties for law enforcement because the cities having their own police departments would be incredibly unpopular. Disney isn’t going to go without a police presence and that municipal police forces are essentially a non starter. Well played.

They're just getting out of the middle. They'll expect Disney to contract things itself.

Note we haven't seen the budget to see if they are getting out of contracting the counties all together (unlikely) - the quote from Garcia was about OVERTIME spending for police presence at Disney-exclusive properties.

Also have to love that they’re literally “defund[ing] the police” and even calling it waste.

Not what his statement was - nor (to my knowledge) have we seen the actual proposed budget. Am I wrong?

 

[Disstevefan1]

Yes. They pay for off duty officers to patrol - it's easy overtime for them.

The ones at Disney are considered their own sector within OCSO and are regularly scheduled. Same as when municipalities don't have a police department and instead contract with a Sheriff's office for policing within their jurisdiction.

Then it seems to me Disney can simply pay off duty officers going forward?

 

[mkt]

The example wasn't on Disney Property. That was on purpose. Who reponds to two cars that collide in a Disney parking lot could be very different.


OCSO?
FHP?

(I'm slow here, lost on who each of those is.)

The root of the question was, is that reponse because of the district contract for services or because of existing reponsibility?
If it's because of the contract, and they elminate the contract, what's the outcome then?

In Florida, if a traffic accident occurs in an unincorporated county jurisdiction in Florida, Highway Patrol will respond - but Sheriff's Office can and will assist if there are injuries or hazards to other road users (while FHP does the reporting)

On property, Disney Security started, but I called 911 and insisted on FHP, because I felt that my insurance company would prefer that. After speaking with the claims team, it turns out that I was right.

 

[flynnibus]

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?

No, that's not how private security works...

And police on District lands is initially seeded with the Cities.. which has been delegated out previously. Today's comments did not say the District would not be paying for police services.

 

[flynnibus]

The municipalities are obligated to provide the service.

The topic was presented as overtime pay for police coverage that was exclusive to Disney properties. That sure sounds like 'additional services' -- not simply the cities' policing obligation.

And in the context of that conversation being replied to... The district constiutients were paying for that service, but they are not OBLIGATED to get such additional services from the district. Security above and beyond the normal public safety requirements is not part of the cities' obligations.

 

[flynnibus]

s CFTOD talking about cancelling all police contracts or just some?

This is where the conversation is going off the rails - The comments did not infer nor include cancelling all policing contracting by the district.

 

[mkt]

Then it seems to me Disney can simply pay off duty officers going forward?

For sure, but I'm not sure if laws/policies will allow for a similar arrangement to what OCSO/CFTOD/RCID have right now, with a separate OCSO sector, OCSO offices, and holding facilities.

 

[mmascari]

They're just getting out of the middle. They'll expect Disney to contract things itself.

Note we haven't seen the budget to see if they are getting out of contracting the counties all together (unlikely) - the quote from Garcia was about OVERTIME spending for police presence at Disney-exclusive properties.

Is the some amount of official police activity going on at Disney properties that should really be security guard stuff? Presumably there is still official police activity that will need to go on. Disney should not be contracting for that directly.

Easy example. Disney decides that you're being a jerk and wishes to remove you for trespassing. Charging someone with tresspassing and removing them from the property is an official police activity. Asking you to nicely leave is a security guard function. But, if they're a huge jerk and will not volunteerily go, forcing their removal is an official police responsiblity. A directly Disney funded security guard (as it cannot be a private police force) that forceably removes you will be guilty of assulting you. An official government police force that hand cuffs and drags you away by force will not be guiltly of assult as you'll be resisting arrest.

And that’s just it, Disney isn’t going to want that so they are almost certain to go ahead and pick up the tab. There’s almost no chance they let things deteriorate that far. They don’t want stories about poor police response time or deputies being laid off because Disney isn’t paying.

I agree. I think the municipalities will quickly step in and contract for the services. It'll just be a change in funding from the district to them. Since both the district and the municipalities recieve almost all funding from Disney, it'll be a wash to Disney.

Thats what makes this such a shrewd move. They figured out a way to stick it to Disney and really only Disney while they also get to crow about lowering taxes and being fiscally responsible.

What surprises me more is that CFTOD looked like it had been trying to consolidate power and remove responsiblity from the municipalities. This shift would seem to give the municipalities more responsibilty, and one that would make it difficult to remove again later.

They can explain the reduction in tax rate by the reduction in sevices easily enough. We all know Disney is going to sue about the new property valuations to keep them lower. If Disney wins that, there will be no going back and raising the rate again since the reduction is tied to reducing services.

 

[flynnibus]

They're related though. The whole thing is a huge social contract that we all agree too, mostly.

if you want to move the conversation to "what will the policing levels be if..." - you can have that separate discussion. But that is more about the idea of proactive presence and procesecution. Your hypothetical was an automobile accident - something that is handled through dispatch, not typically proactive policing.

With no district and no municipality funding and servicing the area

Again - that wasn't what today's comments said. He talked about overtime spending in police coverage.

the county not wanting to provide services for free since they are not budgeted and set up to provide them. What's enforced will become murky.

Even if the district went as far as saying they are getting out of the contracting of police entirely (which wasn't what was covered today) - the responsibility would revert to the municipalities. And if they didn't carry through, eventually some of the residents would sue.

If someone were to go on a violent rampage in Disney Springs, I'm sure the county police force would respond. Funding or not, they're not going to just ignore that.

If someone is driving recklessly or causes a minor accident with no injuries, the stakes are signifigantly lower. The county could easily ignore that.

Not going to happen. The county isn't going to deny services to people and get all that flak over what is internal billing fights between municipalities. You'll hear lots of FUD, even complaints about quality of service, but they aren't going to deny services and just let people fend for themselves over budgets. There will be no thunderdome at WDW.

 

[lazyboy97o]

In Florida, if a traffic accident occurs in an unincorporated county jurisdiction in Florida, Highway Patrol will respond - but Sheriff's Office can and will assist if there are injuries or hazards to other road users (while FHP does the reporting)

On property, Disney Security started, but I called 911 and insisted on FHP, because I felt that my insurance company would prefer that. After speaking with the claims team, it turns out that I was right.

The county sheriff’s departments can also respond. They have overlapping jurisdiction. There are some places where FHP ends up handling most cases and others where the county does.

 

[flynnibus]

I get the tax free money to build the parking garages, but how is paying for OCSO to patrol the district considered "laundering of services", given that Disney was far from the only beneficiary of this.

paying for something via tax dollars means you can get a tax advantage for that spend because it's taxes owed. Paying a private security contract is just a regular business expense. Nevermind there probably is a cost advantage for the services contracted via inter-government vs to private entities.

 

[mmascari]

This is where the conversation is going off the rails - The comments did not infer nor include cancelling all policing contracting by the district.

I think I asked that earlier, I'm just reading what was reported here and it isn't clear what that $8M refers to.

Which gets to this question then:

Is the some amount of official police activity going on at Disney properties that should really be security guard stuff? Presumably there is still official police activity that will need to go on. Disney should not be contracting for that directly.

Is CFTOD suggesting that Disney has been using official police capacity for security guard resposbilibties to the tune of $8M a year?

There will always be official police capacity that is required on Disney property that cannot be done by Disney paid security staff.

paying for something via tax dollars means you can get a tax advantage for that spend because it's taxes owed. Paying a private security contract is just a regular business expense. Nevermind there probably is a cost advantage for the services contracted via inter-government vs to private entities.

Paying for actions via tax conveys the abiltiy for some actions to be accomplished while paying for private security restricts what actions can be done. A priviate security force cannot charge someone with a crime.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I agree. I think the municipalities will quickly step in and contract for the services. It'll just be a change in funding from the district to them. Since both the district and the municipalities recieve almost all funding from Disney, it'll be a wash to Disney.

What surprises me more is that CFTOD looked like it had been trying to consolidate power and remove responsiblity from the municipalities. This shift would seem to give the municipalities more responsibilty, and one that would make it difficult to remove again later.

There is almost no chance anything gets done through the municipalities. That’s a land mind.