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

mikejs78

Premium Member
Yea, I know but that doesn't mean that the scope of RCID, should it return, needs to be as extensive as it was before. It probably will not be done that way anyway, just a thought about what might lay ahead, if Disney wins and old puddin fingers is still in office.

The clauses in the bond contracts state that the district will have certain powers, and those powers were guaranteed by the FL legislature. That's one of the reasons why the original plan for dissolving the district didn't work and they had to basically keep the district as is (with minor modifications) but replace the board with a governor-appointed board.

So basically the district has to exist, and it has to have relatively the same authority, until all the bonds have been paid off which is at least 20 years away if I recall.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Yea, I know but that doesn't mean that the scope of RCID, should it return, needs to be as extensive as it was before. It probably will not be done that way anyway, just a thought about what might lay ahead, if Disney wins and old puddin fingers is still in office.
If Disney prevails in court then yes, things do just go back as they were because the original enabling legislation would be the legislation back in effect. The state legislature would have to pass new legislation to again modify the district but again still in a way that conforms with the bond requirements.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
I did a tiny bit of digging. The latest expiration date/date of maturity for the last remaining bonds is 2038. So the District is going to be around for at least 15 more years.

And there's the scary reminder that we are closer to 2040 than 2000.
That’s why you pull a Robert Moses and issue new bonds that get tied up with existing bonds and so on and so forth.
 

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
The clauses in the bond contracts state that the district will have certain powers, and those powers were guaranteed by the FL legislature. That's one of the reasons why the original plan for dissolving the district didn't work and they had to basically keep the district as is (with minor modifications) but replace the board with a governor-appointed board.

So basically the district has to exist, and it has to have relatively the same authority, until all the bonds have been paid off which is at least 20 years away if I recall.

If Disney prevails in court then yes, things do just go back as they were because the original enabling legislation would be the legislation back in effect. The state legislature would have to pass new legislation to again modify the district but again still in a way that conforms with the bond requirements.
OK, I guess then it will be all or nothing, at least, for the next 15 years. It will likely be longer then that because they will surely float some new bonds between now and then won't they?
 

flyakite

Well-Known Member
Here are highlights from the Orlando Sentinel article that is behind a pay wall:

………….

Glen Gilzean, a close DeSantis ally, landed a $400,000-a-year job leading the district, which provides government services to Disney World. His candidacy was helped by Michael Sasso, a DeSantis-appointed board member who also was the best man in Gilzean’s wedding over the summer.

As administrator, Gilzean selected Paula Hoisington, chairwoman of the Central Florida Urban League’s board, to serve as his chief of staff at the tourism oversight district. Public records show she started at an annual salary of $195,000 and was recently promoted to deputy district administrator, getting a $55,000-a-year raise.

Ronald Haag, a legislative aide to former state GOP Rep. Fred Hawkins, was brought in to serve as Gilzean’s executive assistant.

Hawkins, R-St. Cloud, sponsored the legislation overhauling Disney’s special district. He’s since left the Legislature, landing a job to lead South Florida State College despite having no experience in higher education.

The district also hired Brandy Brown, who worked as director of strategic initiatives in DeSantis’ office. Public records show, though, that she only worked briefly as the tourism oversight district’s director of external affairs before leaving. The district did not respond to questions about her departure.

“CFTOD [Central Florida Tourism Oversight District] appointing those they believe are qualified for certain positions isn’t cronyism,” Jeremy Redfern, a DeSantis spokesman, said in an email. “Cronyism is a local government that served as a Corporate Kingdom for over 50 years. The ‘criticism’ from the cronies indicates that the District is doing the right thing.”

Most recently, the district backpedaled on a $242,500 no-bid contract awarded to a DeSantis’ appointee to help upgrade the 911 network. That work went to Freddie Figgers, who served alongside Gilzean on the Florida Commission on Ethics.

The district also agreed to pay conservative George Mason University law professor Donald J. Kochan $110,000 to help produce a report and make recommendations to the Florida Legislature.

The district’s purchasing rules include competitive bidding exceptions for consultants and experts hired to prepare reports for the legislature.

The DeSantis-aligned board hired Washington-based Cooper & Kirk, agreeing to pay its lawyers $795 an hour. One of the partners in that law firm is Adam Laxalt, a longtime friend of DeSantis who was hired to lead the Never Back Down super PAC supporting the governor’s presidential campaign.

Lawson Huck Gonzalez, which was founded by three legal heavyweights earlier this year, bills $495 an hour. The firm’s founders include Alan Lawson, a retired Florida Supreme Court justice; Paul Huck Jr., once called the “godfather of the Federalist Society in Miami”; and Jason Gonzalez, who’s advised DeSantis on judicial picks.

Two of the district’s board members — Chairman Martin Garcia and Charbel Barakat — listed Jason Gonzalez as a reference on their Senate confirmation documents.

…………….
 

Stripes

Premium Member
I will do my own research, but anybody know if these are reasonable permit fees/how they compare with the previous ones?
IMG_0934.jpeg

IMG_0935.jpeg


IMG_0936.jpeg

IMG_0937.jpeg
IMG_0938.jpeg
IMG_0939.jpeg
 

Stripes

Premium Member

JoeCamel

Well-Known Member
I will do my own research, but anybody know if these are reasonable permit fees/how they compare with the previous ones?
View attachment 754000
View attachment 754001

View attachment 754002
View attachment 754003View attachment 754004View attachment 754005

The building permit fees are substantially higher but not nearly double. All the other fees are pretty much double what they were before.
Not really out of line from my limited experience with permits but in the TDO world these fees are nothing more than a pimple on Dumbo's butt in any project they put forward, the real question is who is inspecting their progress?
 
Last edited:

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom