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

[Surferboy567]

Whatever made this possible, this is a win for both the state and Disney. This is a little humbling for Disney, but it's better for both parties to move on.

It is not a win that the governor of a state can attack you for saying you don’t support legislation. This however is ideal based thinking. When I put on my business cap I come to this conclusion. If they can put all this behind them though and as said here:

Those detested lawyers will ensure that the parties "make up" in a way that precludes unfair interference by the board. That's just what those hated, money-grubbing folks do.

precludes them from unfair interfering in Disney’s business then yes it’s probably better for this fight to end. ONLY though if the board stops their crusade against Disney. It’s most definitely a loss for Disney though. Since they lose reedy creek, have to deal with an outside board, and lost the ideological battle. It also depends on how these new agreements turn out and how the board decides to act.

 

[mikejs78]

This is Disney's tactical retreat.

I wouldnt call it that..... We don't know the full scope of what was promised.

 

[Doberge]

Future likely outcome seems moving toward both the State and Disney proxies each appointing board members.

Seems good for Disney that RCID moves won't be challenged, add that seems to lock in place past comprehensive plan and buys time while a new plan is made.

 

[Surferboy567]

Just because that may be the case doesn't mean that DIsney didn't have incentive to settle. Disney has plans to develop and expand WDW in the next few years. The outcome of lawsuits are years away, and that can affect those development plans. If they can get development agreements that meet their goals, that is motivation for them to settle even if they have a strong case. Settlement doesn't mean that one side or the other has a stronger case.

At the end of the day, this gives Disney a shorter path to certainty in growing and managing their business - which, for them, may be a huge win given their expansion plans. Many of us may not like it, given the Injustice of what was done, but the reality is Disney has a business to run and they have to do what's best for their business. If an opportunity presented itself that gave Disney that certainty and the ability to deal with a less combative board, I could see why Disney would jump at the chance, as much as I wish they didn't.

This is also a huge point I hadn’t considered to now. If they are truly looking to embark on huge announcements at D23 and follow though they will need the board’s cooperation in the long and short term.

 

[mikejs78]

It’s most definitely a loss for Disney though. Since they lose reedy creek, have to deal with an outside board, and lost the ideological battle. It also depends on how these new agreements turn out and how the board decides to act

I don't agree that this represents a loss for Disney. They are looking to solidify their plans and the federal suit still is ongoing. If they get the development agreement they want, they win. If not, the federal suit goes on.

Maybe this whole thing was a tactical way for Disney to get this out of state court, where they never wanted to be to begin with.

 

[mikejs78]

Any bets on whether Bridget fills out her term now that the board is poised to be more cooperative with Disney?

 

[wdwmagic]

Any bets on whether Bridget fills out her term now that the board is poised to be more cooperative with Disney?

I think she will hang onto any job she can.

 

[Surferboy567]

I don't agree that this represents a loss for Disney. They are looking to solidify their plans and the federal suit still is ongoing. If they get the development agreement they want, they win. If not, the federal suit goes on.

Maybe this whole thing was a tactical way for Disney to get this out of state court, where they never wanted to be to begin with.

I should have clarified it’s a loss if they get out of their federal lawsuit. Which is the only one I thought they were going to win anyways.

 

[OvertheHorizon]

1) Wasn't it reported months ago that Iger had reached out to DeSantis with talk of "settlement," but had been rebuffed?
2) When legislation first established CTFOD, I believe a statement by Josh D'Amaro noted that Disney was used to dealing with a variety of political entities/governments for their various parks and they would be able to deal with this new arrangement.
3) I agree with others who have pointed out that the recent changes in staff and Board at CTFOD may have been a precursor for Disney to reach this specific settlement.

 

[Brian]

I don't agree that this represents a loss for Disney. They are looking to solidify their plans and the federal suit still is ongoing. If they get the development agreement they want, they win. If not, the federal suit goes on.

Maybe this whole thing was a tactical way for Disney to get this out of state court, where they never wanted to be to begin with.

One would think that if they were to throw out the 2022 (?) development agreement made right before CFTOD, any new one would have to be materially different, in this case, more balanced.

 

[Disstevefan1]

This is also a huge point I hadn’t considered to now. If they are truly looking to embark on huge announcements at D23 and follow though they will need the board’s cooperation.

So business as usual. Huge announcements at D23, then in reality, nothing happens.... Well at WDW at least.

China will be getting more stuff since Iger LOVED China

 

[MisterPenguin]

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/03/27/business/disney-desantis-florida-lawsuit.html?unlocked_article_code=1.f00.3RRK.zE4VP3gf8Sxq&smid=url-share

By J. Edward Moreno and Brooks Barnes -- March 27, 2024, 12:05 p.m. ET​

​

The Walt Disney Company and Gov. Ron DeSantis of Florida have reached a settlement over control of a special tax district that includes the Disney World theme park in Orlando, the company said on Wednesday.​

​

“We are pleased to put an end to all litigation pending in state court in Florida,” Jeff Vahle, president of Walt Disney World, said in a statement. He added that the agreement “opens a new chapter of constructive engagement” and would allow the company to continue to invest in the resort.​

​

Disney and Mr. DeSantis have been fighting for two years over Disney World, the 25,000-acre theme park and resort complex south of Orlando and one of the state’s largest employers.​

​

In response to Disney’s criticism of a Florida education law that opponents called “Don’t Say Gay,” Mr. DeSantis took over the tax district, appointing a new board and ending the company’s long-held ability to self-govern Disney World as if it were a county.​

​

Before the takeover took effect, however, Disney signed contracts — quietly, but in publicly advertised meetings — to lock in development plans worth some $17 billion over the next decade. An effort by Mr. DeSantis and his allies to void the contracts resulted in Disney suing Mr. DeSantis and the tax district in federal court. The new appointees then sued the company in state court.​

​

The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District held a meeting on Wednesday in which the board discussed a settlement that was proposed by Disney.​

​

A federal judge dismissed the lawsuit Disney filed against Mr. DeSantis in January and the company promptly vowed to appeal. As part of the settlement on Wednesday, Disney agreed to pause that effort but not drop it entirely.​

​

This month the State of Florida and a group of parents and teachers challenging the education law reached a settlement that clarified its reach. That settlement made clear that the law applied only to formal classroom instruction.​

​

This is a breaking news story. Check back for updates.​

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

At the end of the day, this gives Disney a shorter path to certainty in growing and managing their business - which, for them, may be a huge win given their expansion plans. Many of us may not like it, given the Injustice of what was done, but the reality is Disney has a business to run and they have to do what's best for their business. If an opportunity presented itself that gave Disney that certainty and the ability to deal with a less combative board, I could see why Disney would jump at the chance, as much as I wish they didn't.

I wonder if this was part of the behind the scenes discussions.

We have this amount of dollars to invest in our properties. Anaheim is working with is. We're starting to make plans there.

Do you, Florida, want us to continue to invest which is a win for both sides?

 

[CaptainAmerica]

the federal suit still is ongoing

Technically, yes. But the writing is on the wall. The thing is over.

EDIT: Actually, no, not even. The current posture of the federal suit is that it was dismissed by a judge because Disney didn't have standing. Disney can appeal the standing ruling (which they're now on record as agreeing not to do), but it is not "ongoing."

 

[DC0703]

I don't agree that the fundamental conflict that drew Disney in was insubordination/their content and ideals. They were being used as a political pawn in a game that is no longer being played. But there is no way to test who is right or wrong other than the test of time. My prediction is that this is the last we will ever hear about the district.

And even if the game were to be revived in future years, the beat up on Disney strategy was a clear loser that is not likely to occur again.

I agree. On the surface, it will look like Disney caved and DeSantis will take a victory lap. Behind the scenes, the CFTOD probably agreed to stay out of Disney's way and let business continue as it did under Reedy Creek.

If Disney is dropping all lawsuits, they are doing so because the situation is benefiting them in some substantial way.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Not much to say

The timing is obvious…

The outcome is probably the least of evils at this point.

What will make this ok in the long run is a new strategic direction…more entertaining and less crusading…that is what made them fodder for fringe political zealotry in the first place

Give me rogue squadron and don’t make it suck

 

[lazyboy97o]

One would think that if they were to throw out the 2022 (?) development agreement made right before CFTOD, any new one would have to be materially different, in this case, more balanced.

Development agreements lock in the zoning regulations. So the only way they change in a material way is if they undertake the multiyear process to first change the comprehensive plan.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I don't agree that the fundamental conflict that drew Disney in was insubordination/their content and ideals. They were being used as a political pawn in a game that is no longer being played. But there is no way to test who is right or wrong other than the test of time. My prediction is that this is the last we will ever hear about the district.

And even if the game were to be revived in future years, the beat up on Disney strategy was a clear loser that is not likely to occur again.

It was political from the get go

That will pass with time…I’d guess when X becomes the elders…just a hunch.

 

[Surferboy567]

So business as usual. Huge announcements at D23, then in reality, nothing happens.... Well at WDW at least.

China will be getting more stuff since Iger LOVED China

Usually I’d agree with you, but their is significant evidence to the contrary.

 

[FerretAfros]

The reason this whole thing started no longer exists. The government never had any viable, legitimate reason for interfering in Disney's business so there's no reason to believe the district won't go back to being handled the way it was all those years. The only difference may be in rewarding connected politicians with lucrative, but powerless, appointments.

Lucrative appointments for which the property owners (mostly Disney) must finance, despite not having any say in who is appointed to the board or whether the board considers their best interests.

While the appointments themselves may not be as appealing as they once were, they're still far from being "powerless." The board makes policy decisions that will have wide-reaching impacts on the development, operations, and function of the subject properties. They'll set the overall vision for the manner in which development is able to proceed, and create objectives for the types of infrastructure should be built within the district, and what future development that infrastructure can or can't support. Even seemingly-simple changes like increasing or decreasing staffing levels for plan reviewers and inspectors can have dramatic impacts on how easy it is to get projects approved and constructed.

The gears of bureaucracy grind slowly, but it's the board alone who can set them in motion, and the property owners have no say in who is appointed to the board.