-
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
We don't know - that wasn't part of the statements made, so we can't be making assertions one way or the other. The claim made was the work was divided and figgler was chosen because they could commit (along with the ability to do the work). We can't conclude what conversations they had with others (or not) based on their statement because it doesn't delineate either way.
For a perception issue - sure. For a 'what really happened' discussion - no that pretense isn't relevant in discovering what they did or didn't do. You can't grow new facts out of a statement based on your belief about the person.
flynnibus
Premium Member
It only proves they should have known each other - It doesn't prove any close association or motivation to conspire to do anything. This is akin to saying you would be willing to commit violations at your job for anyone who worked there... purely because you worked together for a brief amount of time. The fact they both worked together for just a month is not a strong connection to suggest motivation to do this. To point out they ride in another circle with far more close associations, with a proven history of helping each other, for far longer, is a far stronger link between the named parties.
And unless it were shown to be illegal, it's not really much more than mud slinging and not court worthy. "shady dealings" suck, but if they are legal, you can only file it under "politicans suck"
You can't conclude what they did or did not do from their simple statement on why they picked figgler. There simply isn't the words there to make the jumps you are making. With the conditions under which they are operating, they didn't have to do said search. You are drawing conclusions about their words based on what you think they should have done - vs what they actually said.
I'm all for saying it stinks and deserves scrutiny. What I'm not for is filling the fact gaps with things simply because they've demonstrated they are political minions.. and assuming we should be granted the power to make up our own because they are proven to be bad people.
Stick to what we actually know. We know their claimed reasoning, we know the district policy governing this type of deal, we know the trigger for the work is real, we know the district admin and the board are suckups, we also know the district employees are professionals and not drop-in minions.
We also know the board wouldn't have had to address the topic at all in the meeting that was canceled - it's not a open Q&A. Maybe someone would have commented, and they could have just said "thank you for your comments" and just ignored them. The board members or district admin can be confronted or contacted by reporters anywhere - not just the board meeting. Cancelling the meeting does nothing to shield the district from this matter.... and nothing was on the agenda to advance the deal in question either. So the board meeting is more "it looks fishy" then it actually has any meat to say it's related.
JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
The pool is very small
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
It was a matter of time…but Disney did in fact bring Universal’s new special district into this.
flynnibus
Premium Member
They board didn’t need to given the size and criteria. The District Admin has authority for contracts <500k per their policy.
Polkadotdress
Well-Known Member
In that article posted earlier re: the cancellation of the contract, did anyone notice the following:
"Figgers Communication was hired to assist with “consulting, negotiating and requesting approval from state and federal regulators on behalf of the district,” according to the contract. The scope of work also included designing an “efficient call flow plan” that will enhance the district’s 911 network and eliminate routing through Orange County.
A two-person consulting team was to be paid $485 an hour for an expected 500 hours of work with a total price tag of $242,500, according to the contract."
So, this contract does not even include the work to install the system or procure the hardware/software. It's literally $242K for consulting.
"Figgers Communication was hired to assist with “consulting, negotiating and requesting approval from state and federal regulators on behalf of the district,” according to the contract. The scope of work also included designing an “efficient call flow plan” that will enhance the district’s 911 network and eliminate routing through Orange County.
A two-person consulting team was to be paid $485 an hour for an expected 500 hours of work with a total price tag of $242,500, according to the contract."
So, this contract does not even include the work to install the system or procure the hardware/software. It's literally $242K for consulting.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
That's a beautiful gig. Its good to have connections with CFTOD
That's good work if you can get it.
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
So to prevent the optics of retaliation I guess the state has to take over Universal's district too?
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
Probably too late for that. I guess they can say though that the state didn’t grant the district.
I think uni wouldn’t be very happy with the state stepping in.
flynnibus
Premium Member
Welcome to IT - where you pay for brainpower and design... and can source the kit and install separately. This deal was always noted as a portion of the larger $1million dollar network upgrade they had budgeted.. (and why people assumed it was a million dollar deal earlier).
This is not that uncommon. I was trying to do a spitball of the deal the other night when the $242k number came out. Even aiming low at $300/hr I was like this is like a month of work tops.
There's no optics to prevent. The state's position all along has been that they took away a privilege because Disney stepped out of their lane and that they have every legal right to do so for any reason, retaliation or not.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Universal already deals with a special district they do not directly control. The North Campus of Universal Orlando Resort is within the I-4 Republic Drive CRA that is entirely controlled by the city. The new Shingle Creek Transportation & Utility Community Development District is not the same type of district as was Reedy Creek Improvement District or its current iteration as the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District nor does it have the same scope of powers. The state taking over the new CDD doesn’t change things like who controls the zoning, ownership of roads, utility services or building authority. The primary purpose of the district is to provide funding and support for SunRail which the local governments have not yet assumed and is still owned and operated by FDOT.
Yes they are both special districts, but their size, scope and purpose are just not the same and it is disingenuous to continue to keep trying to create a false equivalence.
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
That’s a fair point. Still though, they are both special districts that can be argued give Uni a special advantage. Your point about the scope and still stands though.
Surferboy567
Well-Known Member
No they do not, you cannot punish a company because of their views. That’s why we have the 1st Amendment.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
What advantage?
Batman'sParents
Active Member
Not really an advantage. If anything, the CDD that universal has is great for everyone involved. Orange County and Orlando get road improvements, multimodal transit center, odor control improvement, and maybe sun rail service to the airport?
If anything, there be more of these type of districts in Orange and Osceola counties. I don’t see why those governments couldn’t create specific CDD’s outside of the entrance to Disney on 535 or 192 to help improve the roads over there.