So, after reading the last few pages, not one instance of the CFTOD getting in the way on how Disney conducts its business. So it has zero effect. We have almost 1200 pages of comments with all this hand wringing about this horrible CFTOD, and in reality it has zero effect. People still go to the parks and spend money. Disney is still doing ongoing projects. ZERO effect. About time people realize there is a lot of hand wringing over what is actually a non issue. Yet we still have law suites with both State and Federal Courts waying in with what will end up costing millions of dollars in legal fees. The only winners here are the attorneys.
-
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
Didn't CFTOD change the tax rate? I seem to remember that, but maybe they just proposed a change.
Even if they didn't. CFTOD certainly changed priorities on what to spend money on and is clearly spending large quantities of money on things those governed by CFTOD would rather not spend money on. With no recourse or accountability to those who pay the tax money being spent.
Maybe you don't consider that spending an impact. But when my tax money is spent and I get no input, I think that's an impact.
Most of the issues that would impact Disney are medium to long-term, such as land usage. Daily operations are not the concern.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
It was already explained to you that the development agreements over which the District is suing interfere with the most powerful and discretionary tool available to the board.
Last edited by a moderator:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
They could be near term if the board is able to change the zoning regulations to require more development review.
What a waste of money
remember, this is Disney and other businesses in the district paying for all this nonsense with ZERO say with how funds are being usedThat is just it, not your tax dollars unless you are one of the 500 or so that live in the District. Disney business has NOT been effected at all. Even the most zealous defenders of Disney controling the RCID have to admit this.
Last edited by a moderator:
mikejs78
Well-Known Member
Please point to an example in Florida of high turnover of firefighters/emergency responders as the result of a change in administration.
They significantly reduced the amount of money to be spent on road upkeep, for one...
Any idea what the rebrand costs?What a waste of money
Chances that it came out of the Firefighter budget or some other district budget?
If paid from the Firefighter budget, how does the cost compare to hours of staff pay? Any value guesses on the rebrand vs using that money for staff hours?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
For the third time, Disney was able to delay the most power tool for impacts which the District is spending significant sums to try to remove.
flynnibus
Premium Member
No no no. Don't you know it's Thursday, and I haven't been impacted all week. Obviously the most adamant defenders must acknowledge that this means there is no impact at all!
I guess this is why people follow the blinky lights and can't even fathom thinking about what's behind it.
I didn't say it was my tax dollars. Much like it doesn't impact me either way, I didn't have RCID representation before either.
You asked if there was an impact. Those people that pay taxes to the district were most certainly impacted by the change in spending by the district with no recourse, input, or accountability at all.
Disney being impacted and Disney consumer impact in the district are not the same thing. Even if they still sell all the exact same amount of stuff to visitors, that doesn't mean Disney isn't impacted.
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
They did float that idea though.
JohnD
Well-Known Member
Okay, fine. They changed it's name. But why change the logo? It was a perfectly good firefighter-prominent logo. Now it's the same orange tree as the district logo.
The monorail inspection law was written vaguely enough as to potentially apply to every theme park ride on a rail.
Brian
Well-Known Member
It's nothing spectacular, but it's really not that much of a departure from the RCFD logo. Instead of being jumbled and juxtaposed on top of each other in the middle, there are icons on the periphery.
If anything is worthy of criticism, it's the name. District Fire Department sounds like something Dwight Schrute would come up with if he were in charge of picking the name.
If anything is worthy of criticism, it's the name. District Fire Department sounds like something Dwight Schrute would come up with if he were in charge of picking the name.
Last edited by a moderator:
One could argue that the Florida reopening was somewhat reckless, and the situation at Disneyland was far more measured. While not ideal for Disney, it was maybe a better option. But that is a different conversation and not for this thread.
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
I think most people are averse to any type of hypocrisy. But the irony of someone obsessed with a certain closed Disney attraction asking this is not lost on me, so bravo, and thanks for the laugh.
flynnibus
Premium Member
No, it's exactly how the law is written.
House Bill 425 (2023) - The Florida Senate
www.flsenate.gov