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

[peter11435]

The district was very interested in improving traffic around Downtown Disney. The BVD widening, bus only lanes, centralized bus depot, parking garages, and I4 ramp were all part of that initiative.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Certainly things could have changed in design, but to present it like DS wouldn't have happened at all.. and get no benefit from the redevelopment... is not real either.

So let's put it in real context... DS was going to happen. The future community benefits you tout were going to happen if DS was a success. Does Disney build one garage instead of three (like the original leaked plans showed). Is the community benefit radically lessened? Are people not coming to DS because of that?

It all boils down to 'was it necessary?' - I advocate no.

Again, scale matters. A budget was set. If the budget gets cut to account for the parking garages then something else has to go to pay for the garages. Right away, that impacts the County because reduced scale means less in assessable improvements.

You omit that the county and state didn't even get to make this decision or determination. They are get to accept the consequence. The District's revenues are based on property, not sales tax. So you wanna compare what nearly $100 in district capex looks like vs decreased property taxes on what 'downsizing' Disney might have done and the ROI on that? I can tell you without even doing the napkin math.. that's not a good ROI.

Why do you keep ignoring that this is exactly what the state and counties signed up for back in 1967? They knew that this was how the District would operate. And even after this alleged infraction, the counties still wanted to maintain the status quo with RCID. And the State revisited the issue in 2004 and determined that RCID should remain as-is. The FL Office of Program Policy and Government Accountability issued a report saying as much in December 2004.

The sales tax rate in Orange County is 0.5%. The County's "lost" one-time sales tax revenue (less than $1 million, which is less than 1% of their $166+ million sales tax collections in 2016) from the garages pales in comparison to what it gained in assessed real property values that are taxed much more than half a percent. A relatively small one-time payment vs. increased tax revenues in perpetuity. I wonder which is better.

By the way, the County's 2016 audit specifically cited the Disney Springs project as one of the projects having a positive impact on the County's financial condition. So why are you acting upset on their behalf when they were clearly pleased???

'joined'? been here since the start. What I interjected here is when people tried to deny Disney's role and benefit to having work completed as public works.

'why RCID was bad' is an interesting take. The statement made by the user was:
"
Examples of why it should be reformed:

1) The RCID does not allow the hundreds of thousands of individuals that live near it to participate in its management
2) The RCID and Disney became intertwined and it impacted good governance
3) Disney shifted CapEx from its balance sheet to the local government apparatus, thus obscuring true CapEx"

None of those statements are incorrect. Yet posters went onto claim they were, in particular #3.

The statements on their own are factual - The disagreement is over do they bother you... and if you are ok with that status quo.

Right there is the problem. When a practice is common and legal then it's not a justification for singling out 1 government entity for reform. If the issue is with governments absorbing costs for private enterprise like this then the issue isn't with RCID but rather with FL laws that allow it in the first place - and every single member of the legislature and the governor himself are guilty of similar behavior in approving public funding for private enterprise. At least now you're finally acknowledging that the point was made after denying that anyone said it for so long.

So now, the answer to any criticism of the district is 'you reap what generations before you sowed'?

Should we make the same claim everyone should accept CFTOD's decisions blindly because that's what the state created?

Again, the State reviewed it in 2004 and determined it was working as intended and there was nothing to cause them to try to change it.

And your 2nd question is such an obvious bad faith question that it's amazing you even asked it. We all know the difference between an elected government and an imposed government.

The county didn't agree to giving up property taxes when RCID was created, nor did it sign up to some notion of lack of government independence.

The County isn't giving up any property taxes. If you're this deep into this thread and still think that then you haven't paid attention to anything written. And the counties haven't lost any independence. They have no say in what a local government funds, be it RCID or the City of Orlando.

I have no problem with the belief that Disney would have solved their parking problem even without the help of the district. Same way they manage to find a way to pay for it everywhere else.

It was a completely unnecessary concession.

Your belief ignores everything we've seen from Iger's Disney. Budget cuts are commonplace and projects get canceled (think Mary Poppins attraction at EPCOT or the planned-and-canceled theater on Main Street to name just 2). If you think they didn't have a budget set for Disney Springs that wouldn't have been impacted by the added expenses associated with the garages then you haven't been paying attention.

 

[Goofyernmost]

I am to old to waste more of my life reading about this crap. So I'll say just a couple of things and leave the topic.

It seems to me that those creating the idea that RCID was not operating for the good of the State of Florida, the counties surrounding and Disney itself seem to lose track of what was there previous to Disney and what RCID was created to do. The other thing is that RCID has very little property to tax other than Disney. Any expenditure be it for the benefit of Disney or it's property is pretty much 99% paid by Disney. It is primarily it's only source of income and formed to take care of the infrastructure of the Disney property and the rest of Disney is an entertainment company that uses the expense of RCID to avoid asking the surrounding area to having to foot the bill.

Yes, RCID was what was used to literally drain the swamp and make it into something to build on. Without it WDW would not exist and instead of concentrating on building the massive entertainment/vacation destination that it built would still be spending it's time figuring how many cubits are in a yard. So RCID does it's thing and builds the infrastructure that would support what WDW needed and now oversees all that property mostly owned by TWDC and charges TWDC for every nut and bolt that is used to keep that infrastructure the best in Florida. It continues to be a cash cow for the outskirts but also the entire freaking state of Florida. And then people come in here and use the word taxpayer expense like it is the population of Florida that is paying that tax instead of one company is beyond ridicules and bordering on ignorant.

Almost every nickel that is spent by LSMFT or whatever the hell the acronym is now, comes directly from Disney. It is Disney paying off those bonds because the operation formally known as RCID doesn't have a pot to pee in or a window to throw it out of that isn't generated by TWDC. (WDW division) It was indeed established to help make an enormously impossible build in a swamp that draws people from all over the world to go to what is to me the foreign country called Florida just to spend money and ride a monorail. Orlando or Florida was mostly nothing until WDW showed up and did the things that the locals couldn't afford to do for themselves and now is something creating havoc over some asinine personal agenda of one group of rich people wanting to control everything and everyone. It makes me nauseous and unless this wrong is corrected and RCID is brought back into existence, I will never return to the state nor will I spend a nickel there. I've pretty much given up on it now and surprisingly, I no longer care.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Why do you keep ignoring that this is exactly what the state and counties signed up for back in 1967?

It’s what the state and counties continue to sign up for to this day. Anyone with sizable land holdings can seek a special district that can be used to finance transportation projects. It’s an expected use. Yes, most places aren’t building garages but they’re still missing out on the sales taxes for the infrastructure that in many places would be the responsibility of the developer to build. It’s also possible that a garage can be built later well after the initial decision is made. Universal is free to decide at some future date, even decades from now, to have their district build a garage.

 

[flynnibus]

Again, scale matters. A budget was set. If the budget gets cut to account for the parking garages then something else has to go to pay for the garages. Right away, that impacts the County because reduced scale means less in assessable improvements.

Oh my.. maybe we would have lost the amazing elevated railway... or some fountains... I'm sure Disney would have figured out how to keep funding the portion that actually generates revenue... retail footprint.

Why do you keep ignoring that this is exactly what the state and counties signed up for back in 1967? They knew that this was how the District would operate. And even after this alleged infraction, the counties still wanted to maintain the status quo with RCID. And the State revisited the issue in 2004 and determined that RCID should remain as-is. The FL Office of Program Policy and Government Accountability issued a report saying as much in December 2004.

Do not overstate what those things meant. They were assessments of the district's purpose and function - not universal rubber stamps of approval for every policy decision they made... and certainly not for decisions they had not yet made.

The sales tax rate in Orange County is 0.5%. The County's "lost" one-time sales tax revenue (less than $1 million, which is less than 1% of their $166+ million sales tax collections in 2016) from the garages pales in comparison to what it gained in assessed real property values that are taxed much more than half a percent. A relatively small one-time payment vs. increased tax revenues in perpetuity. I wonder which is better.

The project for the first two garages was estimated at about 85 million initially, and went over budget by about 5 million if I recall. At the time it was estimated by RCID they were saving $1.4 million in sales tax. That doesn't include the 3rd garage that was added.

One-time per perpetuity? Know what's also in perpetuity? Their lost property tax collection on the improvements.

By the way, the County's 2016 audit specifically cited the Disney Springs project as one of the projects having a positive impact on the County's financial condition. So why are you acting upset on their behalf when they were clearly pleased???

Because one thing the tax man loves is... more taxes. You're not going to get them complaining about their lost revenue because it's decision they can't influence.

Right there is the problem. When a practice is common and legal then it's not a justification for singling out 1 government entity for reform.

I point you to my district attorney example before. Policy choices are subject to critique even if legal and can lead to change.

You don't think the president telling the AG what not to pursue didn't invite scrutiny even though it's legal?

If the issue is with governments absorbing costs for private enterprise like this then the issue isn't with RCID but rather with FL laws that allow it in the first place

Wait - you're going to throw the baby out with the bath water? Why is it individual bad designs must be tolerated equally with good decisions? Why must they be evaluated as if all were all or nothing? You've never decided one choice was a bad one, even though it was in their power to make that choice?

The County isn't giving up any property taxes. If you're this deep into this thread and still think that then you haven't paid attention to anything written.

Yes they are - by having the structures district owned, no one pay property taxes on them. If Disney owned the garages, they would be improvements subject to property tax. Property taxes owed to both the district and the county. You again can't seem to track these essential details.

- and every single member of the legislature and the governor himself are guilty of similar behavior in approving public funding for private enterprise. At least now you're finally acknowledging that the point was made after denying that anyone said it for so long.

Ok, this is my last message to you ever because I'm sick of your inability to follow without distorting things into things that were never said.

 

[mmascari]

The reason why it's important is because the entire tangent started because people took offense to the comment that someone suggested that Disney is 'shifted' CapEx to the District. And what you describe is exactly that... Disney has a need, and instead of paying for it, they get to "convince" the district it’s in everyone's best interest if the district pays for it instead.

You lost the context here. Someone suggested that shift was improper and a reason to reform RCID specifically. With that context, the answer is different. It would need to be a shift that is improper, not just one that is part of normal governance.

It's exactly the very thing people called 'outright lies' and @mmascari has issue with as well. It doesn't matter if its "valid" or "not unique" -- It was never claimed otherwise.

Again, dropping that context matters. A shift isn’t the primary subject here. That it was an improper thing and hence a reason to reform specifically RCID. which also means it would need to be unique. That it is a valid thing, benefit irrelevant, means it’s not a reason to reform specifically RCID. It may be a reason to reform all districts, a different topic.

I did not say it wasn’t a benefit to Disney. I said it wasn’t invalid and a reason to reform RCID, and I asked for other examples of CapEx shifting that might not be valid. Something that would be a reason to reform RCID, not just districts in general. No addition examples were cited.

RCID building the garages was a concession to Disney. A concession that Disney greatly benefits from. An idea that likely came from Disney - not RCID's assessment of underserved needs in the area. So when someone uses it as an example of how Disney benefits from the district by having the district supply capital improvements -- it's true.

But the question was, is that a reason that RCID should be reformed specifically instead of all districts? Was that reason unique to RCID and why RCID needs reform and not all districts or was that same thing available to all districts?

You can also disagree with the decision that the government made this concession to Disney and disagree that it was some necessity by the district.

I agree with this part. Good or bad policy is a matter of opinion. However, bad valid policy isn’t a reason to reform only RCID.

Yes, because it simply means adding garages IS NOT THE ONLY SOLUTION to a problem.

Not the only, but they were a valid solution. Valid within the defined scope of RCID. Valid in other districts to do the same thing if they desired. Hence, not a reason to target specifically RCID for reform.

'why RCID was bad' is an interesting take. The statement made by the user was:
"
Examples of why it should be reformed:

1) The RCID does not allow the hundreds of thousands of individuals that live near it to participate in its management
2) The RCID and Disney became intertwined and it impacted good governance
3) Disney shifted CapEx from its balance sheet to the local government apparatus, thus obscuring true CapEx"

None of those statements are incorrect. Yet posters went onto claim they were, in particular #3.

Also, none of them are reasons RCID should be reformed. 1 is a reason special districts or local government shouldn’t exist. 2 is a reason special districts shouldn’t exist. 3 is missing context to know what CapEx is being referenced. It may or may not be a reason to reform specifically RCID. The follow-up question (unanswered) was if there were examples besides the garages that were often mentioned in the past. Since, we’ve now shown that the garages are not a reason to reform specifically RCID.

The statements on their own are factual - The disagreement is over do they bother you... and if you are ok with that status quo.

They don’t exist on their own. They only exist in the context of answering the question why RCID specifically should be reformed.

All of the replies have been trying to get back to the topic of reasons that RCID specifically and not all districts should be reformed. You’re having a different conversation about why Disney benefited and why that was bad policy. Everyone else is talking about if it was a valid policy to have at all.

Special Districts provide a benefit to those in them generally. Hopefully they benefit the state too. Nobody is questioning that.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Oh my.. maybe we would have lost the amazing elevated railway... or some fountains... I'm sure Disney would have figured out how to keep funding the portion that actually generates revenue... retail footprint.


Do not overstate what those things meant. They were assessments of the district's purpose and function - not universal rubber stamps of approval for every policy decision they made... and certainly not for decisions they had not yet made.

See the great thing about a local government is that the statute that allowed it to exist in the first place spells out what ij can and cannot do, so in affirming the status quo, they affirmed the behavior of the District. Nothing about these garages is different from what was done before.

The project for the first two garages was estimated at about 85 million initially, and went over budget by about 5 million if I recall. At the time it was estimated by RCID they were saving $1.4 million in sales tax. That doesn't include the 3rd garage that was added.

The $1.4 million in sales tax includes the state's cut. Take 0.5% of $90 million. It's a lot less than $1.4 million. Nearly a million dollars less, in fact.

One-time per perpetuity? Know what's also in perpetuity? Their lost property tax collection on the improvements.

The garages would have such a small assessment compared to a parking lot and compared to the improvements made to the rest of the property. Again, you're upset about it when the people impacted are happy. Why should I take your argument over their happiness?

Because one thing the tax man loves is... more taxes. You're not going to get them complaining about their lost revenue because it's decision they can't influence.

The lost sales tax revenue was less about 0.6% of their sales tax revenues for 2016 - and considering the construction stretched across multiple years, you can see how inconsequential it was. Meanwhile, the finished project has had a sustained benefit for the County because they get to collect additional property taxes for the added improvements.

I point you to my district attorney example before. Policy choices are subject to critique even if legal and can lead to change.

You don't think the president telling the AG what not to pursue didn't invite scrutiny even though it's legal?

You're comparing apples and oranges.

Wait - you're going to throw the baby out with the bath water? Why is it individual bad designs must be tolerated equally with good decisions? Why must they be evaluated as if all were all or nothing? You've never decided one choice was a bad one, even though it was in their power to make that choice?

If the issue is that these types of funded projects happen then you can't just single out 1 entity over all of the others for reform. That doesn't solve the issue if you really think it's a problem. So if it's okay for Orlando to do something like that then it has to be okay for RCID. If you think only RCID needs reform because of this 1 issue then your issue isn't with the policy, it's an issue with Disney and you can't have a good faith discussion.

Yes they are - by having the structures district owned, no one pay property taxes on them. If Disney owned the garages, they would be improvements subject to property tax. Property taxes owed to both the district and the county. You again can't seem to track these essential details.

Again, this is miniscule compared to the benefit and the County has no more of a right to prevent it than they do in any other municipality.

Ok, this is my last message to you ever because I'm sick of your inability to follow without distorting things into things that were never said.

Toodles.

 

[Batman'sParents]

Perhaps someone can help me understand this. When they said Disney said no to a pedestrian bridge, connecting shades of green to the Polynesian, was a reason given?

If I had to guess, I don’t think funding is the problem with this project. My guess would be a technical lack of land to build it on without going into eminent domain, but I don’t know for sure which is why I am asking.

 

[castlecake2.0]

Perhaps someone can help me understand this. When they said Disney said no to a pedestrian bridge, connecting shades of green to the Polynesian, was a reason given?

If I had to guess, I don’t think funding is the problem with this project. My guess would be a technical lack of land to build it on without going into eminent domain, but I don’t know for sure which is why I am asking.

I don’t have any details I just assumed that Disney didn’t want to give people direct access to their deluxe resort

 

[castlecake2.0]

Interesting side note, this sign appeared in Celebration today but is using WDW styled signage instead of the Celebration

style

 

[peter11435]

Interesting side note, this sign appeared in Celebration today but is using WDW styled signage instead of the CelebrationView attachment 759008 style

Where is this specifically?

 

[castlecake2.0]

Where is this specifically?

Corner of World Drive and Celebration Celebration BLVD. I think technically the land it is on is owned by The Celebration Company aka Disney and/or part of the RCID, but is within the town. Good reminder to residents that the new board controls a lot of land surrounding the town and shouldn’t rely on Debbie to be the only one speaking up.

 

[JoeCamel]

Corner of World Drive and Celebration Celebration BLVD. I think technically the land it is on is owned by The Celebration Company aka Disney and/or part of the RCID, but is within the town. Good reminder to residents that the new board controls a lot of land surrounding the town and shouldn’t rely on Debbie to be the only one speaking up.

What is the sign on this one?

 

[castlecake2.0]

What is the sign on this one?

Reclaimed water warning

 

[UCF]

Disney accounts for 80-90% of the taxpayer funds in the district.

In typical municipalities, that is irrelevant to the election and representation of the people. If I own an apartment complex with 1000 units, I get 0 votes, and each tenant of mine gets 1 vote, even if I'm paying 90% of the revenue in a town.

If Disney took one vote, and gave every tenant on Disney's property a vote, that would be more fair, but Disney has no interest in doing that.

When the board says tax payers, they are primarily talking about and avoiding saying “Disney”.

While Disney pays the taxes to the district, ya'll keep arguing that they aren't the only beneficiary because they lease land to other people. When I stay in a Disney hotel, I am one of those people, so by that argument, I am the taxpayer, along with all of the business owners leasing land from Disney.

Its just not in any way fair to Disney to get to make every decision for the district.

Once again, those services are provided. These are Orange County’s impact fees:
Fire - Provided by the District
Law Enforcement - Provided by the cities
Parks & Recreation - Not Applicable
Schools - Not Applicable
Transportation- Provided by the District

I think you aren't understanding what impact fees are for. I am a developer. If I build a community or commercial establishment, I have to pay for all the roads for my residents or tenants to use out of my own funds. I have to pay taxes on all of that, I don't get help from the municipality. ON TOP OF THAT, I have to pay impact fees. So if I build a community, I might put $2 million into roads inside of the community. On top of that, I would have to pay, say, $1.5 million to the county to improve roads OUTSIDE my community, because its understood that the residents in my community will have an IMPACT on other roads as they travel around the area. Under the normal impact fee schedule for Disney's owned hotels and businesses on the property, Disney would have been required to pay SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS to improve roads OFF of Disney's property, because many people who stay on Disney's property will likely want to go other places, like, say, Universal. Disney avoided all that... Universal paid the impact fees on all their hotel rooms.

Sorry, I didn't qualify this one as "majority Disney, they're not the only land owner and tax payer within the district, just the overwhelming majority one". Probably need to add "all the other land owners have agreements with Disney that give Disney significant control over what those other land owners can do and that all of them became owners after the district already existed and knew how it worked when entering the agreement". It's a huge pain to type that out every time. I thought we all got to that point a hundred plus pages ago.

So can I, as a developer, tell people they must support me in all elections and future endeavors as a condition of buying homes from me? No, of course not, that is absurd. The people and businesses in the district, through a secret ballot, should be able to push for what they want without fear of repercussions from Disney. Clearly they can't, everyone knows that.

The Disney Springs complex itself was developed by Disney for Disney’s benefit, of course. However, the vast majority of employees at that destination do not work for Disney and the vast majority of the revenue doesn’t end up in Disney‘s pockets. And the garage is open to the public at no charge. The garages are clearly beneficial to the public and loads of businesses independent of Disney. The fact that Disney is the developer of the complex doesn’t change that.

When I build a shopping center, the employees who end up working at that shopping center don't work for me, and the whole thing are clearly beneficial to the public and loads of independents businesses, including all my tenants. Why do I have to pay taxes when I build my parking lots, and then not only that, but every year, have to pay property taxes on my facility? How is that fair?

If funding parking garages results in more accessibility, free parking, and results in higher attendance which benefits the local businesses who are tenants at Disney springs, which helps the Florida economy, and the economy of the resort district, it was a good use of tax payer dollars (majority of which come from Disney).

Florida's economy would have been helped more by the alternative, which would have been Disney built the same exact parking garages, paid sales tax and impact fees while building them, and then every year paid property taxes on them. That would have allowed all of the county's tax payers to benefit instead of just Disney.

Hopefully not charging us by the word.

Don't worry, they'd be charging Disney by the word, not you

The lost sales tax revenue was less about 0.6% of their sales tax revenues for 2016 - and considering the construction stretched across multiple years, you can see how inconsequential it was. Meanwhile, the finished project has had a sustained benefit for the County because they get to collect additional property taxes for the added improvements.

If its so inconsequential, why is Disney going through all this to evade such a small amount of taxes? Also, the problem is the county DOES NOT get to collect additional property taxes for the improved parking facilities, that is something they specifically avoided.

The same story applies to ALL of the services RCID provided... the energy plants provide power only Disney, but evade taxes that anyone else doing the same would have to, etc...

If you guys think parking lots, roads, and such should not be taxes, lets not tax it for ANYBODY in the state of Florida, but only exempting Disney is unfair.

 

[Stripes]

In typical municipalities, that is irrelevant to the election and representation of the people. If I own an apartment complex with 1000 units, I get 0 votes, and each tenant of mine gets 1 vote, even if I'm paying 90% of the revenue in a town.

If Disney took one vote, and gave every tenant on Disney's property a vote, that would be more fair, but Disney has no interest in doing that.

This isn’t a typical municipality. It’s a special district. The standard election method for thousands of special districts across Florida is one-acre/one vote. CFTOD is the only district with taxing powers in excess one one mill that deviates from that sensible governing structure.

I think you aren't understanding what impact fees are for. I am a developer. If I build a community or commercial establishment, I have to pay for all the roads for my residents or tenants to use out of my own funds. I have to pay taxes on all of that, I don't get help from the municipality. ON TOP OF THAT, I have to pay impact fees. So if I build a community, I might put $2 million into roads inside of the community. On top of that, I would have to pay, say, $1.5 million to the county to improve roads OUTSIDE my community, because its understood that the residents in my community will have an IMPACT on other roads as they travel around the area. Under the normal impact fee schedule for Disney's owned hotels and businesses on the property, Disney would have been required to pay SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS to improve roads OFF of Disney's property, because many people who stay on Disney's property will likely want to go other places, like, say, Universal. Disney avoided all that... Universal paid the impact fees on all their hotel rooms.

Replacing the property taxes that Disney paid to RCID with impact fees would be a terrible deal for Orange and Osceola counties given the burden that RCID carried for them. Disney pays HUNDREDS OF MILLIONS PER YEAR to CFTOD. Impact fees don’t come anywhere close to replacing that revenue. Would you rather have your property taxes doubled or pay impact fees? I thought so.

So can I, as a developer, tell people they must support me in all elections and future endeavors as a condition of buying homes from me? No, of course not, that is absurd. The people and businesses in the district, through a secret ballot, should be able to push for what they want without fear of repercussions from Disney. Clearly they can't, everyone knows that.

Disney merely rents the land to the employees. Votes are not always unanimous and are conducted via secret ballots. Furthermore, as tenants the residents have certain rights under Florida law.

When I build a shopping center, the employees who end up working at that shopping center don't work for me, and the whole thing are clearly beneficial to the public and loads of independents businesses, including all my tenants. Why do I have to pay taxes when I build my parking lots, and then not only that, but every year, have to pay property taxes on my facility? How is that fair?

Because you, a private entity, own the property your parking lot sits on. If you sell your land to your local government, you won‘t have to worry about property taxes just like tons of other property developers that sell their land to their local governments for one reason or another. Why should Disney pay property taxes on parking garages owned by CFTOD?

The district was specifically authorized to build parking garages by the Florida legislature in furtherance of its purpose to promote recreation in the district. And precedent for such a project had already existed at the time. Midtown Miami‘s parking garage was built by their special district before Reedy Creek built the DS garages. Said garage was also built for serving the guests of a particular commercial development.

If you guys think parking lots, roads, and such should not be taxes, let’s not tax it for ANYBODY in the state of Florida, but only exempting Disney is unfair.

If Disney could keep control over land use and replace the CFTOD tax bill with impact fees and property taxes on the Disney Springs parking garages, they would do it in a heartbeat. And again, Disney is hardly the only the developer in Florida not paying property taxes on public facilities that serve their property.

You’re complaining that Disney doesn’t pay certain taxes while ignoring the fact that they pay far more than their fair share relative to other entities in the Orlando area. For instance, the impact fees on the Grand Floridian Resort would be a one-time charge of about $3.1 million. Instead, Disney pays in excess of $4.2 million PER YEAR in EXTRA property taxes to CFTOD beyond what they pay to the state, schools, and county. Over 10 years, that’s $42 million in extra property taxes versus an impact fee of $3.1 million. Oh, and that doesn’t include taxes to Bay Lake either.

Impact fees sound great now, don’t they?

 

[mmascari]

I think you aren't understanding what impact fees are for. I am a developer. If I build a community or commercial establishment, I have to pay for all the roads for my residents or tenants to use out of my own funds. I have to pay taxes on all of that, I don't get help from the municipality. ON TOP OF THAT, I have to pay impact fees. So if I build a community, I might put $2 million into roads inside of the community. On top of that, I would have to pay, say, $1.5 million to the county to improve roads OUTSIDE my community, because its understood that the residents in my community will have an IMPACT on other roads as they travel around the area. Under the normal impact fee schedule for Disney's owned hotels and businesses on the property, Disney would have been required to pay SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS to improve roads OFF of Disney's property, because many people who stay on Disney's property will likely want to go other places, like, say, Universal. Disney avoided all that... Universal paid the impact fees on all their hotel rooms.



So can I, as a developer, tell people they must support me in all elections and future endeavors as a condition of buying homes from me? No, of course not, that is absurd. The people and businesses in the district, through a secret ballot, should be able to push for what they want without fear of repercussions from Disney. Clearly they can't, everyone knows that.

The next time you build a large development, you should. Look into creating a special district. It’s an option available to you. Then you can avoid the impact fees and instead pay your new district extra additional property taxes. You’ll get to maintain the infrastructure yourself and pay the extra district taxes forever as a bonus. Assuming you’re selling any of it, make sure it’s clear you will retain ownership of a majority of the land, so you keep your majority district control. Also, write into all the deeds that you get control over how the buyers make changes. See how those two things impact your sales, costs, and long term requirements. Depending on your business plan, this may be better or worse. It’s available to you as an option.

A special district, like RCID, is like a municipality in many ways, yet different in many ways. Analogies comparing them fail when they cross those differences.

 

[lazyboy97o]

If Disney took one vote, and gave every tenant on Disney's property a vote, that would be more fair, but Disney has no interest in doing that.

They do in the cities that used to have more say.

I think you aren't understanding what impact fees are for. I am a developer. If I build a community or commercial establishment, I have to pay for all the roads for my residents or tenants to use out of my own funds. I have to pay taxes on all of that, I don't get help from the municipality. ON TOP OF THAT, I have to pay impact fees. So if I build a community, I might put $2 million into roads inside of the community. On top of that, I would have to pay, say, $1.5 million to the county to improve roads OUTSIDE my community, because its understood that the residents in my community will have an IMPACT on other roads as they travel around the area. Under the normal impact fee schedule for Disney's owned hotels and businesses on the property, Disney would have been required to pay SEVERAL HUNDRED MILLION DOLLARS to improve roads OFF of Disney's property, because many people who stay on Disney's property will likely want to go other places, like, say, Universal. Disney avoided all that... Universal paid the impact fees on all their hotel rooms.

Anyone with sufficient land holdings can petition for the establishment of a community development district which can then build infrastructure such as water management, water supply and roads. The district can even issue bonds to finance such works.

Universal paid impacts fees for their north campus to Orlando. Those fees went to the city of Orlando. They are used to fund services in the city of Orlando. They do not fund improvements or expanded coverage just down the road on International Drive in unincorporated Orange County. Similarly, if the District and the cities didn’t exist, the vast majority of impact fees would have been paid to Orange County and not Osceola County who also didn’t receive the increased property taxes. They don’t go into a true regional pot to be shared across the jurisdictions impacted by development.

I already did the rough math and pointed out that using current schedules, Disney probably would have paid about one billion in impact fees. That though makes the big assumption that fees have been consistent over the years and that they would have been assessed the entire time (being some of the first ever assessed). Even today, Osceola County doesn’t assess as many impact fees as Orange County. That seems like a lot, but it’s not when you consider that Disney paid significantly more in property taxes that did not have to go towards providing the listed services. Every year Disney helps pay for the Orange County Fire and a rescue service without utilizing the service. They help pay for the roads of Orange County without having road services provided.

If you guys think parking lots, roads, and such should not be taxes, lets not tax it for ANYBODY in the state of Florida, but only exempting Disney is unfair.

Disney is not the only one who is exempt.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Assuming you’re selling any of it, make sure it’s clear you will retain ownership of a majority of the land, so you keep your majority district control.

Community development districts created for residential development automatically behind switch to resident participation when they hit certain thresholds.

 

[mikejs78]

Florida's economy would have been helped more by the alternative, which would have been Disney built the same exact parking garages, paid sales tax and impact fees while building them, and then every year paid property taxes on them.

Except they may not have in that situation.

If its so inconsequential, why is Disney going through all this to evade such a small amount of taxes?

It's not about the taxes, it's about being able to manage and control the infrastructure on their timelines and to their standards. It's not about the savings, although the bonds do help in some situations, it's about being able to build public infrastructure to the standard they want.

If you guys think parking lots, roads, and such should not be taxes, lets not tax it for ANYBODY in the state of Florida, but only exempting Disney is unfair.

Many, many businesses in Florida don't - either because of negotiated deals, or special districts.

Every year Disney helps pay for the Orange County Fire and a rescue service without utilizing the service. They help pay for the roads of Orange County without having road services provided.

That's the thing most people forget about here - not only does Disney pay full property taxes to Orange and Osceola county, they don't use any county services that those taxes would normally provide by default. No road maintenance, police, fire, rescue, etc that their property taxes would normally entitle them to - those things are paid for by Reedy Creek.

@UCF - when you pay impact fees and pay for roads, etc. - do you get police service? Rescue? Fire fighter coverage? Road maintenance? Because Disney does not get these things from the counties. They pay *extra* taxes for Reedy Creek to provide those services to them.

And when they do use services from the counties, such as sheriff coverage, Reedy Creem contracts that out and pays the counties *extra*.