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

[mikejs78]

Disney stopped losing lawsuits

They haven't lost any lawsuits. They had one dismissed, but the appeals process needs to play out.

so incompetent with their relationship with RCID. The entanglement stuff was just so grossly stupid I couldn't believe it

What evidence of entanglement was presented? I read through the report - did not see any evidence, just accusations.

There's been very little soul searching on the part of Disney.

I'm unclear of why there needs to be. There are many in this thread who are highly critical of Disney in other areas - but not in this case. Maybe that should tell you something.

Only cries of free-speech suppression. That needs to change ASAP.

It absolutely does not and should not. Free speech is the bedrock of American society. If Disney gives up and ultimately loses, it will enable the government to punish anyone who simply states an opinion that doesn't align with the ruling party's point of view. That's how dictatorships are born.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

Disney needs to do some soul searching, just not about this. An appeal is the correct route as we have seen this judge and DeSantis be overturned/lose at the appellate level a good bit of late on some pretty similar issues.

Now, Disney may still lose in the long run but it is obvious that DeSantis has no intention of ever working with Disney as they already:

• Fired the guy who started all this.
• The replacement came in and said they needed to step back from the overt politics and last I checked has kept that promise.
• Offered to meet with DeSantis and work with him to find a solution but were rejected.
• Restructured their studios and announced they were going to focus on entertainment first.

So, why bother trying to appease someone who isn't interested and is on a timer? Play the long game and outlast him. Either you get a win in court or deal with the next guy and drop the court battle then.

Mainly because Disney has nothing to lose and everything to gain by putting this behind them. Some hardcore fans might be disappointed seeing Disney not continue to litigate this. But I think most fans would rather not see their beloved brand continue to be tarnished by this legal process. And I can say as a unhappy shareholder that I would prefer if they don't keep beating this dead horse.

They haven't lost any lawsuits. They had one dismissed, but the appeals process needs to play out.



What evidence of entanglement was presented? I read through the report - did not see any evidence, just accusations.



They had that until DeSantis decided to make it a campaign issue.



I'm unclear of why there needs to be. There are many in this thread who are highly critical of Disney in other areas - but not in this case. Maybe that should tell you something.



It absolutely does not and should not. Free speech is the bedrock of American society. If Disney gives up and ultimately loses, it will enable the government to punish anyone who simply states an opinion that doesn't align with the ruling party's point of view. That's how dictatorships are born.

There are exhibits included at the end of the audit. They include emails showing RCID staffers did not know what property belonged to them and what belonged to the firm. The RCID provided Disney with services that Disney should have provided for themselves. And of course there was also the incident when an RCID employee and the auditor were not allowed to access RCID property because Disney employees blocked them. It's illegal, obviously. I don't think it was intentional, but that won't necessarily stop them from getting in trouble. Disney should have had standardized procedures for all interactions involving the RCID. I was expecting their conduct and the RCID's conduct to be spotless. Instead, the audit found incompetence.

That's why I'm particularly taking aim at their lawyers. I don't think Disney (or the Cast Members involved) would have ever intentionally broken a law. But the fact they did indicates that they need better lawyers who can protect them in the future.

 

[peter11435]

And finally they should hire government affairs people who can build good relationships with local and state government.

You realize they had this and it worked perfectly for decades…. its breakdown was not caused by Disney.

 

[MagicRat]

……..nevermind…….I just want to enjoy my time here.

 

[mmascari]

And I can say as an unhappy shareholder that I would prefer if they don't keep beating this dead horse.

If they lose, CFTOD will create a drag and extra expenses in the running of WDW at best and use that power to influence Disney content in other ways at worst. Both of which will be detrimental to the stock. As a share holder, you should want them to win. The current structure and losing are both bad for business. Hence bad for the stock price.

They include emails showing RCID staffers did not know what property belonged to them and what belonged to the firm.

Literally anyone can look at the GIS data and see exactly who owns what. You could do it right now using the link in this thread to click anywhere in the district and see who owns it.

The RCID provided Disney with services that Disney should have provided for themselves.

Such as?

 

[mikejs78]

It was specifically done on accelerated timescale in order to preempt the state

Wrong again. It.had been in the works for years. It was approved by the state in the fall of 22 which was the last step needed before finalization of the agreement.

they accidentally had procedural issues and illegal components in the contract

What procedural issues? What illegal components? There aren't any. Ones identified do not invalidate the agreement according to the Reedy Creek Act, which was the governing legislation in this case. You're barking up the wrong tree.

The issue with the CFTOD's so-called "procedural issues" is that they both lack evidence and standing (which affected landowner did not get notice?) and/or don't apply to Reedy Creek as they used procedural rules found in general Florida law, but that are overridden by provisions in the Reedy Creek Act, which took precedence over General Florida Law in Reedy Creek's case. There is nothing that Disney did that violated procedure. Nothing. At. All.

 

[RamblinWreck]

WDW is the lifeblood of the company. Iger needs to swallow his pride and contact the governor and strike some type of deal.

There are no deals to be made with people who have no capacity to make deals.

 

[RamblinWreck]

Just a quick question. How does Universal Studios invest and build with apparently no issues in Orlando? Last I checked Universal’s Epic Universe is progressing just fine.

Is this a serious question?

They aren’t subjected to an obstructionist, unelected board in a district that oversees them that was put in place specifically to cause problems for them.

 

[RamblinWreck]

Trying to make a case about the governor appointing the board members would be might be the dumbest legal move Disney could make, and in this case it would have plenty of competition (I really loved the "But universal got a district filing). The governor almost always appoints the first board of a special district, just like the governor at the time did for Reedy Creek.

Well, this isn’t a new district.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

Wrong again. It.had been in the works for years. It was approved by the state in the fall of 22 which was the last step needed before finalization of the agreement.





What procedural issues? What illegal components? There aren't any. Ones identified do not invalidate the agreement according to the Reedy Creek Act, which was the governing legislation in this case. You're barking up the wrong tree.

The issue with the CFTOD's so-called "procedural issues" is that they both lack evidence and standing (which affected landowner did not get notice?) and/or don't apply to Reedy Creek as they used procedural rules found in general Florida law, but that are overridden by provisions in the Reedy Creek Act, which took precedence over General Florida Law in Reedy Creek's case. There is nothing that Disney did that violated procedure. Nothing. At. All.

The audit goes through them. I know the audit isn't you cup of tea, but it's pretty comprehensive. I found the argument in the audit compelling along with the exhibits included. When I heard about the audit on this forum, I was expecting a partisan and just embarrassing document. Instead, I found a well researched and thorough document with the evidence to prove its claims. I immediately went from thinking Disney could win the state suit no problem to being pretty fatalistic. I always doubted the first amendment case (limiting the legislatures authority to regulate local governments seemed far fetched). But the state case on the contract I was expecting to be a slam dunk for Disney. The audit shocked me. I fully expect Disney is going to get defeated in the state case.

 

[RamblinWreck]

The audit goes through them. I know the audit isn't you cup of tea, but it's pretty comprehensive. I found the argument in the audit compelling along with the exhibits included. When I heard about the audit on this forum, I was expecting a partisan and just embarrassing document. Instead, I found a well researched and thorough document with the evidence to prove its claims. I immediately went from thinking Disney could win the state suit no problem to being pretty fatalistic. I always doubted the first amendment case (limiting the legislatures authority to regulate local governments seemed far fetched). But the state case on the contract I was expecting to be a slam dunk for Disney. The audit shocked me. I fully expect Disney is going to get defeated in the state case.

The state case doesn’t even have a reason to exist. The contract was voided retroactively by a new targeted law.

 

[Brian]

Disney appeals dismissal of free speech lawsuit as DeSantis says company should ‘move on’​

Disney appeals dismissal of free speech lawsuit as DeSantis says company should 'move on'

The company had said after Wednesday's decision that it would set a dangerous precedent if left unchallenged by giving states the green light to weaponize their powers to punish opposing viewpoints.

www.pbs.org

 

[Chi84]

The only thing that gives me any hope that justice or common sense will prevail is how forcefully the 11th circuit slapped down DeSantis for his complete disregard for the constitution and specifically the first amendment a few weeks ago.

This case is a bit more complex though.

There's a saying that hard cases make bad law. The situation here is unique in that retaliation is usually limited to its intended target. As another poster pointed out, the governor was so eager to start a fight with Disney for political purposes that he was willing to make the retaliatory law broad enough to cause collateral damage.

The courts are going to have to decide whether redressing this injury is worth extending or interpreting the law to cover such an unusual occurrence. The case will then stand as precedent and may cause some damage in unforeseen circumstances.

 

[Brian]

Easy for him to say after he put them in this mess.

He's not alone in saying it. According to the article:

“Maybe Disney should go back to lobbying and writing checks,” said Richard Foglesong, a Rollins College professor emeritus who wrote a definitive account of Disney World’s governance in his book, “Married to the Mouse: Walt Disney World and Orlando.”

“As the judge’s ruling shows, they erred in using the courts to resolve a political question,” Foglesong said Thursday. “Everyone knows the Legislature’s act was retaliatory toward Disney. It just wasn’t provable by legal standards.”

 

[Figgy1]

He's not alone in saying it. According to the article:

So a company should have to resort to bribery?

 

[Brian]

So a company should have to resort to bribery?

According to Foglesong, yes.

Imho, this does strike me as a political question and not a legal one. Disney would be wise to pressure DeSantis and the legislature by withholding future development, and mounting a public relations campaign against them, in order to bring him to the negotiating table.

That's how this gets resolved, in my mind. Disney may have a case against CFTOD for monetary damages, but there wouldn't be a remedy to revert things back to the old RCID.

 

[WoundedDreamer]

According to Foglesong, yes.

Imho, this does strike me as a political question and not a legal one. Disney would be wise to pressure DeSantis and the legislature by withholding future development, and mounting a public relations campaign against them, in order to bring him to the negotiating table.

I don't think this a winning strategy. This is a critical time for Walt Disney World. Universal is launching an onslaught with Epic Universe. While the park is not too appealing to me, I know many fans of HP, Nintendo, and Universal in general who will be in their glory. At the very least Epic Universe seems likely to make the Florida market more competitive. At worst it could actually cause attendance at WDW to stall or even contract.

At the same time Walt Disney World is increasingly stale. Space Mountain, Big Thunder, and the Fantasyland dark rides all need investment to get them up to 21st Century standards. DHS remains terribly under built. Epcot needs further investment. And DAK is could use more too. This is the time when Disney needs to go all out. And with Epic Universe's opening date looming closer and closer, all we know about is a Princess and the Frog makeover of Splash Mountain and Country Bears singing Disney tunes.

And what I was able to discern very quickly from the presentation was Epic Universe is only phase 1. Universal will probably get building new lands as soon as the theme park opens. Universal is frankly terrifying. Disney lost their chance to go on strike. Grandstanding is not going to beat Universal. Only new rides will. It's like the barbarians are at the gates and Disney is not bothering to take any precautions. It's wild and insane.

Disney can't afford not to invest in Florida.

 

[mmascari]

willing to make the retaliatory law broad enough to cause collateral damage.

There's definitely a subtle but important difference between "this thing targets X and Y, Z were impacted as collateral damage" and "this thing impacts X, Y, Z, and X is arguing they were targeted".

In both cases, X, Y, and Z are all impacted.

Certainly groups creating the impact have been known to go to great lengths to make it look like the second one. The second is also useful cover for all kinds of bad behavior.

In this specific case, the judge's ruling to me seems to be that it's the second. That reading only the law and nothing else, that the law doesn't specifically say "Disney", so it must be the second. If the only other things that existed were media interviews and public speaking, that might make sense. The whole "there's no way to know what the legislature was thinking" line of argument. However, the official record of debate from the legislature sessions exist. We even refer to statements made in session as "entering them on the record". If we're to ignore that official record and treat it the same way as random media statement, then what's the point of that official record. In this specific case, while not in the text of the law, there are direct statements targeting Disney in the official record. That record should be considered in the goal of the legislation.

Of course, this does mean, people will be more careful next time, to not enter this type of statement into an official record and avoid this problem.

 

[mmascari]

Imho, this does strike me as a political question and not a legal one.

It was a political question, right up until the legislature passed the first law. Then, it became a legal one. As legal interactions go, when they passed the second law, it got much worse. It was the governor and legislature that converted this from a political to a legal interaction.

Disney would be wise to pressure DeSantis and the legislature by withholding future development, and mounting a public relations campaign against them, in order to bring him to the negotiating table.

Isn't that exactly what they did? Not even so much future development, but just public relations and future political spending.

Instead of bringing DeSantis and the legislature to a negotiating table, or even starting any kind of dialog at all, DeSantis and the legislature responded by using the power of the state to remove representative governing from the district and replace it with political appointees.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Disney should wait it out.

TWDC should take this time, not to fight useless battles, but to plan a response to EPIC, and have a real actual plan if they need to react to EPIC.