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

tissandtully

tissandtully

Well-Known Member
Brian said:
I don't mean to be rude, but there's no requirement that anyone has to watch this meeting. You can't watch a group of partisans conduct a public meeting then be shocked and disappointed when they act like partisans.

Ultimately, this has zero impact on any of our lives. Disney will continue to exist in Florida no matter what these clowns do, and whether you watch or not, they will proceed with their plans. As at least one member has proven through their public comments at the meetings, the board does not care about what the public thinks.

In other words, spare yourself the frustration, especially when it comes to things that have no bearing on your life or the life of your family. I think everyone has sufficient information at this point to make an informed decision as to the only thing one can actually do to help rectify this situation - vote.
Click to expand...
I actually FF through the clowns, I can't watch the weirdos cause it's so cringey and there's a feeling of helplessness because you can't respond and point out factual errors, so you're right about that part and I agree with you, do some self-care and don't watch this if it makes you mad, I do that all the time with a lot of things, especially hard to do it with my profession though.
 
Figgy1

Figgy1

Premium Member
seascape said:
Even if what Garcia says is correct and the RCID was a bad law, his solution is wrong. Do away with the district and put WDW under the jurisdiction of the 2 counties. Having a local government run by the direction of Desantis us not democratic and is subject to all the same problems Garcia says was wrong with the RCID.
Click to expand...
I hope you're going to be able to make a meeting and tell them that in person.
 
W

WoundedDreamer

Well-Known Member
Figgy1 said:
Serious question: How much in sales tax does DS generate per year? IMHO one can't say the garages generate 0 in tax income with a straight face
Click to expand...
IMO The parking garages were kind of odious. It was basically a way for the WDC to pay for an improvement to its property using tax dollars. It kept a major asset and the accompanying depreciation off the books. Admittedly, this is not a unique phenomena in the world of local government. Disneyland famously had Anaheim build its Mickey and Friends parking garage, which Disney then leased for a small token sum. But just because it isn't criminal or unusual, doesn't make it necessarily right or desirable. It's reasonable for a local government to say Disney should pay for its own parking garage using its own capital.
 
wdwmagic

wdwmagic

Administrator
Moderator
Premium Member
Figgy1

Figgy1

Premium Member
WoundedDreamer said:
IMO The parking garages were kind of odious. It was basically a way for the WDC to pay for an improvement to its property using tax dollars. It kept a major asset and the accompanying depreciation off the books. Admittedly, this is not a unique phenomena in the world of local government. Disneyland famously had Anaheim build its Mickey and Friends parking garage, which Disney then leased for a small token sum. But just because it isn't criminal or unusual, doesn't make it necessarily right or desirable. It's reasonable for a local government to say Disney should pay for its own parking garage using its own capital.
Click to expand...
The difference in this case is Disney is paying for them not the public at large as they are paying about 90% of the taxes in the district in addition to paying 100% of their share of taxes to the counties
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Haven’t had a chance to listen yet, but Garcia claiming a problem with impact fees is yet another lie. Impact fees are a single, relatively small, fee paid at the time of development to support various services. They’re a [inefficient] way to get additional funds to expand services without increasing taxes. They don’t go into some collective regional pot but stay within the assessing jurisdiction.
 
W

WoundedDreamer

Well-Known Member
Figgy1 said:
The difference in this case is Disney is paying for them not the public at large as they are paying about 90% of the taxes in the district in addition to paying 100% of their share of taxes to the counties
Click to expand...
Sort of. You're right Disney will end up footing most of the bill through taxes. But by using the RCID to improve its property, it means that Disney technically spent no capital on the project. Any costs associated with the project are hidden in their tax bill. It's basically a really potent way to hide CapEx from investors and also take out debt through low-rate municipal bonds. This is not the intended function of government. Was it legal? Yes. Would I have done it if I were Disney? Of course. But should governments allow firms to hide CapEx and debt in their tax bill? No, absolutely not.

Again, I understand how reasonable people can have different views on this. If you're corporate development maximalist, then you might see this as no big deal. I'm just not a fan.
 
JKick95

JKick95

Active Member
castlecake2.0 said:
This is the question, as the district really has no suitable land for any of these. Also, it’s not really the district’s responsibility or mandate to be building any of these things.
Click to expand...
Listening to the board members talk it would appear that is exactly what their mandate is plus ensuring everything outside of the district is great.

I am also confused about their continued talk of competition. However, does Universal and Sea World not compete with Disney? Don’t I (the consumer) get to choose where I want to spend my money based on who offers me a better value?
 
Figgy1

Figgy1

Premium Member
JKick95 said:
Listening to the board members talk it would appear that is exactly what their mandate is plus ensuring everything outside of the district is great.

I am also confused about their continued talk of competition. However, does Universal and Sea World not compete with Disney? Don’t I (the consumer) get to choose where I want to spend my money based on who offers me a better value?
Click to expand...
You wouldn't have a choice if the powers that be had their way imho
Still curious why they need an eminent domain expert
 
castlecake2.0

castlecake2.0

Well-Known Member
Original Poster
JKick95 said:
Listening to the board members talk it would appear that is exactly what their mandate is plus ensuring everything outside of the district is great.

I am also confused about their continued talk of competition. However, does Universal and Sea World not compete with Disney? Don’t I (the consumer) get to choose where I want to spend my money based on who offers me a better value?
Click to expand...
It’s all very interesting to listen to, but at the end of the day, Disney owns most of the land, not the district.
 
B

Batman'sParents

Member
castlecake2.0 said:
This is the question, as the district really has no suitable land for any of these. Also, it’s not really the district’s responsibility or mandate to be building any of these things.
Click to expand...
The future land that they were talking about months ago for the housing could be a potential contender. The area between Flamingo Crossing hotels and ironically by the Disney affordable housing project.
 
W

WoundedDreamer

Well-Known Member
Figgy1 said:
You wouldn't have a choice if the powers that be had their way imho
Still curious why they need an eminent domain expert
Click to expand...
It's possible they could use eminent domain to take land from Disney in order to develop property (for the promised Disney prison for example). That would be an insane thing to do for a variety of reasons, but they might just try it. That would represent a major escalation. I'm hoping things thaw rather than continue to get worse.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom