-
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
Considering their total admin budget was like 33k - clearly they didn't have their own fulltime staff before
Looks like they are adding someThanks for the update. I was able to find the new LBV notice but not Bay Lake. Are you able to point me to where you found this please?
Here's a link to the full CFTOD Board of Supervisors package for the upcoming meeting on September 13.
This e-mailed public comment from a Reedy Creek Fire Department retiree was also added as an addendum to the August 23 meeting minutes.
Subject: Annual Disney Park Passes being eliminated from Employee and Retiree Benefits
Good Morning Board Members,
I am only speaking for myself today but am aware of many others who I have served with and spent their careers serving the district for 25, 30 plus years. As required, those who obtained an Annual Pass had to meet the age requirement of 55 prior to retirement in order to keep it. There are many reasons why the staff and retirees of Reedy Creek want to keep there pass but mostly because they spent their Life and Career working for it. The employees and retirees were here serving the District 55 plus years, long before the turmoil between Governor DeSantis and Walt Disney World Co. and should not be unfairly used as pawns or collateral damage as a result of two parties that can’t compromise and meet each other half way on their differences.
Secondly, if there is an annual stipend of $1000 offered in lieu of Annual Passes to District employees in the proposed fiscal year 2024 budget or future budget years, then the retirees deserve the same or equal compensation, as we served, earned, and worked for the same annual pass benefit throughout our careers. I would prefer Board Members use empathy and not rush to eliminate this benefit enjoyed by so many but rather pause, compromise, and evaluate other options in maintaining it.
Sincerely,
Jim Fox
This e-mailed public comment from a Reedy Creek Fire Department retiree was also added as an addendum to the August 23 meeting minutes.
Subject: Annual Disney Park Passes being eliminated from Employee and Retiree Benefits
Good Morning Board Members,
I am only speaking for myself today but am aware of many others who I have served with and spent their careers serving the district for 25, 30 plus years. As required, those who obtained an Annual Pass had to meet the age requirement of 55 prior to retirement in order to keep it. There are many reasons why the staff and retirees of Reedy Creek want to keep there pass but mostly because they spent their Life and Career working for it. The employees and retirees were here serving the District 55 plus years, long before the turmoil between Governor DeSantis and Walt Disney World Co. and should not be unfairly used as pawns or collateral damage as a result of two parties that can’t compromise and meet each other half way on their differences.
Secondly, if there is an annual stipend of $1000 offered in lieu of Annual Passes to District employees in the proposed fiscal year 2024 budget or future budget years, then the retirees deserve the same or equal compensation, as we served, earned, and worked for the same annual pass benefit throughout our careers. I would prefer Board Members use empathy and not rush to eliminate this benefit enjoyed by so many but rather pause, compromise, and evaluate other options in maintaining it.
Sincerely,
Jim Fox
James Alucobond
Well-Known Member
Yikes… they attached his email and posted it on their website without redacting his address and contact info.
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
Yeah, to accuse them of using the pass as a political lever and the retirees as pawns isn't the best way to ask them to "Pause, compromise and consider". He was a firefighter but needed a course in effective writing.
I wonder what the board might do after this persuasive plea?
flyakite
Well-Known Member
It was listed in the Orlando Sentinel legal notices on the 6th.
pdude81
Well-Known Member
Benefits are more or less gone already. He wants this letter on the record in hopes that they will get them back from RCID in the future.
DeSantis' Oversight District Files Motion to Dismiss Disney's Countersuit: "Disney Has Unclean Hands"
DeSantis' Central Florida Tourism Oversight District has filed a Motion to Dismiss a countersuit filed by Disney
blogmickey.com
The two documents are embedded on Blog Mickey.
The CFTOD story is that: Disney has unclean hands. Disney maintained absolute control over RCID before the
District replaced RCID as its successor, and Disney is the cause of the Agreements’ invalidity.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
“Disney failed to notify Disney about Disney’s deal with Disney” is definitely something and it probably has a decent shot.DeSantis' Oversight District Files Motion to Dismiss Disney's Countersuit: "Disney Has Unclean Hands"
DeSantis' Central Florida Tourism Oversight District has filed a Motion to Dismiss a countersuit filed by Disney
The two documents are embedded on Blog Mickey.
The CFTOD story is that: Disney has unclean hands. Disney maintained absolute control over RCID before the
District replaced RCID as its successor, and Disney is the cause of the Agreements’ invalidity.
drnilescrane
Well-Known Member
Disney didn't want the CFTOD to get the press release out first. Nevermind me.
Last edited:
New press release from the CFTOD.
Lake Buena Vista, FL – The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, today, accepted Disney’s proposal to allow Disney to backtrack on key claims in their federal case. Last week, Disney asked the court to remove these key claims from their lawsuit. The judge denied their motion without prejudice because Disney’s lawyers did not follow legal procedure and forgot to ask the district’s permission to proceed.
After accepting Disney’s proposal, district spokesman Alexei Woltornist released the following statement:
We are pleased that Disney backtracked on these legal claims against the district in their federal case. Disney’s latest legal move puts them in line with the position of what the district has been advocating for months now: that these matters should be decided in state court. We hope this helps expedite justice for the people of Florida.
Here is Disney's filing via the CFTOD.
Lake Buena Vista, FL – The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, today, accepted Disney’s proposal to allow Disney to backtrack on key claims in their federal case. Last week, Disney asked the court to remove these key claims from their lawsuit. The judge denied their motion without prejudice because Disney’s lawyers did not follow legal procedure and forgot to ask the district’s permission to proceed.
After accepting Disney’s proposal, district spokesman Alexei Woltornist released the following statement:
We are pleased that Disney backtracked on these legal claims against the district in their federal case. Disney’s latest legal move puts them in line with the position of what the district has been advocating for months now: that these matters should be decided in state court. We hope this helps expedite justice for the people of Florida.
Here is Disney's filing via the CFTOD.
mikejs78
Premium Member
I wonder if the FL judge is sorry she didn't just dismiss the case. The way I see it -DeSantis' Oversight District Files Motion to Dismiss Disney's Countersuit: "Disney Has Unclean Hands"
DeSantis' Central Florida Tourism Oversight District has filed a Motion to Dismiss a countersuit filed by Disney
The two documents are embedded on Blog Mickey.
The CFTOD story is that: Disney has unclean hands. Disney maintained absolute control over RCID before the
District replaced RCID as its successor, and Disney is the cause of the Agreements’ invalidity.
- I don't think any judge would accept the argument of unclean hands on its face. That would have to be a finding of fact proven at trial.
- I still don't see how any judge grants CFTOD standing in this case regarding their claims. Disney's counter-claims on the other hand...
Batman'sParents
Member
Any chance the cities try to hire their own full-time staff?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
I understand the technical reason why they didn’t, but given the already stated desire to rule on the hypothetical, I don’t really understand why Disney didn’t more clearly argue that the Reedy Creek Improvement District followed its own unique rules and nobody with actual standing has come forward. I’m not sure the lack of standing will matter too much now.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Maybe but they’d be small. The cities don’t do much and a lot of what they did do they no longer control.
drnilescrane
Well-Known Member
If I had to be cynical, it's because Disney really doesn't care about the development agreements. They're trying to string this out while they litigate the real battle.
mikejs78
Premium Member
Disney's argument for each of CFTOD's claims is lack of standing (this was after the judge ruled against the motion to dismiss, which was argued on different grounds).
The difference of rules only matters if the district has standing, which Disney is arguing right now that it doesn't. What helps Disney's case is the enabling legislation that states that CFTOD and RCID are effectively the same entity, just with a new management structure.