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

[Isamar]

A lot of the DeS fans are out there on social media claiming complete victory over Disney, but here’s an opinion from the flip side:

Ron DeSantis Claims Victory Over Disney And All He Had To Do Was Give Disney Everything They Wanted - Above the Law

This doesn't read like much of a win.

abovethelaw.com

Which reminds me that I meant to ask whether anyone here can opine about the water permit mitigation issues? They’re a very specific and prominent part of the settlement, so I suspect that clarifying their ownership holds significant value for Disney?

 

[Chi84]

How many of these objectives came about?

View attachment 775363

Does the CFTOD exist?
Was the RCID reconstituted?
Are board members elected by the landowners?
Do the development agreements enacted in early 2023 still remain in effect?

I'm not sure why you're asking me. My post was intended to clarify the legal process and the effect of particular rulings that take place during a court case. For example, the denial of a motion for summary judgment is not unexpected in a case that hinges on fact determinations.

Your post is asking about the merits of the settlement agreement, which has some people upset. I'm not one of them. Disney will be fine. There's plenty of room for negotiation, as pointed out by @mikejs78.

If you're asking whether the governor harmed Disney, then the answer is absolutely, especially by weaponizing the legislature to take actions that cannot be easily undone, if they can be undone at all. But he sunk his own ship in the process, leaving a warning for any other politicians who might get the same idea. Wealthy contributors fled from his lack of judgment in actively harming a major economic driver of his state's economy.

Other than an over-represented minority of people on these boards, people do not hate Disney. And if they do, it's because recent management decisions have made the place inaccessible to those who can't afford to visit and painful for those who can.

 

[monothingie]

I think the hint is in Jeff Vahle’s statement. DeSantis and Disney worked out a deal. That’s why we’ve seen so much change recently at the district.

“We are pleased to put an end to all litigation pending in state court in Florida between Disney and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District. This agreement opens a new chapter of constructive engagement with the new leadership of the district and serves the interests of all parties by enabling significant continued investment and the creation of thousands of direct and indirect jobs and economic opportunity in the State.”
-Jeff Vahle, Walt Disney World Resort President

Also, to my knowledge, other than Jeff, nothing has been said by anyone higher up at TWDC. Also no word of discontentment within the ranks of the company with the settlement announcement.

 

[Tha Realest]

I'm not sure why you're asking me. My post was intended to clarify the legal process and the effect of particular rulings that take place during a court case. For example, the denial of a motion for summary judgment is not unexpected in a case that hinges on fact determinations.

Your post is asking about the merits of the settlement agreement, which has some people upset. I'm not one of them. Disney will be fine. There's plenty of room for negotiation, as pointed out by @mikejs78.

If you're asking whether the governor harmed Disney, then the answer is absolutely, especially by weaponizing the legislature to take actions that cannot be easily undone, if they can be undone at all. But he sunk his own ship in the process, leaving a warning for any other politicians who might get the same idea. Wealthy contributors fled from his lack of judgment in actively harming a major economic driver of his state's economy.

Other than an over-represented minority of people on these boards, people do not hate Disney. And if they do, it's because recent management decisions have made the place inaccessible to those who can't afford to visit and painful for those who can.

I know you refuse to look at this as a win-loss issue, but can you articulate in any way how Disney achieved any of their objectives in this litigation or are otherwise in a comparatively better spot RCID/CFTOD-wise than they were in early 2022?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Also, to my knowledge, other than Jeff, nothing has been said by anyone higher up at TWDC. Also no word of discontentment within the ranks of the company with the settlement announcement.

The timing here is everything…

Are we silly enough to believe they’re isn’t a standing gag order here?

 

[WoundedDreamer]

I think the Occam's Razor argument is that Disney lost faith in their ability successfully litigate the lawsuits. I know this considered verboten, but if Disney really thought they could have won they would have demanded some more concessions. Disney has essentially given up everything for nothing in return. Yeah, there are new board members. But in a year DeSantis could fire them and put in the same old board members that could harass Disney. I don't think that's likely, but the point is that there are literally no guarantees. Disney has almost nothing to show for this fight except a promise from the governors office to play nice.

If Disney could have forced concessions, they would have.

 

[Chi84]

I know you refuse to look at this as a win-loss issue, but can you articulate in any way how Disney achieved any of their objectives in this litigation or are otherwise in a comparatively better spot RCID/CFTOD-wise than they were in early 2022?

Why on earth would litigation place them in a better spot than they were prior to a violation of their civil rights? At best, litigation would return the status quo, which was not likely to happen given the legislature’s involvement.

Litigation has many purposes, not all of them expressly stated or readily apparent. Maybe they intended to join the fight to ensure that DeSantis with his anti-Disney agenda didn’t become president of the United States.

 

[Chi84]

I think the Occam's Razor argument is that Disney lost faith in their ability successfully litigate the lawsuits. I know this considered verboten, but if Disney really thought they could have won they would have demanded some more concessions. Disney has essentially given up everything for nothing in return. Yeah, there are new board members. But in a year DeSantis could fire them and put in the same old board members that could harass Disney. I don't think that's likely, but the point is that there are literally no guarantees. Disney has almost nothing to show for this fight except a promise from the governors office to play nice.

If Disney could have forced concessions, they would have.

No one can predict how litigation will turn out. I’m not sure of the most recent numbers, but around 95% of federal civil cases settle before trial. That’s always where these cases were headed. The only reason they went on as long as they did was to wait for DeSantis to be done with this as a campaign issue.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

No one can predict how litigation will turn out. I’m not sure of the most recent numbers, but around 95% of federal civil cases settle before trial. That’s always where these cases were headed. The only reason they went on as long as they did was to wait for DeSantis to be done with this as a campaign issue.

They folded rather quickly…it’s still not a fantastic look

It’s not like there’s and Elaborate PR game going on that is hitting the fan April 3rd…
We must be missing something

 

[MR.Dis]

There's a lot of nuance with the court cases that isn't apparent from news reports. The state case required determinations of fact issues, which means it was unlikely to go out on summary judgment for either side. That's why depositions were being taken - to flesh out what facts needed to be determined in court.

In the federal case, the district judge dismissed the case at the pleadings stage based on his determination of the law (in fact, the application of a single case), which is the easiest determination to overturn on appeal. The appellate court would give no deference at all to the district court's judgment. And that particular judge has a history of being overturned by the 11th circuit. See Warren v. DeSantis USCA11 No. 23-10459 (reversing Allen Winsor), where the concurring judge stated "the state can't exercise its coercive power to censor so-called 'woke' speech with which it disagrees. What's good for mine is (whether I like it or not) good for thine." That's the decision that stood - not Judge Winsor's judgment.

Where courts are involved, this kind of nuance is everything. The point is that neither of these cases were anywhere near to being over when this settlement was reached.ake

The first thing Disney's attorneys would do is take a deep dive into each member of the circuit court. Do a profile of each judge and how they would most likely rule on Disney's appeal. If Disney thought they had a better than even chance of winning this appeal, they would never had agreed to the compromise. Stating that Disney had a good chance of winning appeal is just plain disingenuous.

 

[Chi84]

The first thing Disney's attorneys would do is take a deep dive into each member of the circuit court. Do a profile of each judge and how they would most likely rule on Disney's appeal. If Disney thought they had a better than even chance of winning this appeal, they would never had agreed to the comprise. Stating that Disney had a good chance of winning appeal is just plain disengenuous.

That’s not true, at least not in my experience. Are you an attorney or have familiarity with federal practice?

 

[Isamar]

OK, I expect this take to be roundly dismissed by all sides, but I’ve always assumed that Disney never expected the DA and RC’s to survive this fight. They were guaranteed to force a direct conflict right out of the gate, and maybe that was the point. They could wait for dozens of minor retaliatory moves to amount to the basis for a lawsuit, or they could say “we’re going to have this fight, so let’s just do it”.

 

[Dranth]

I know you refuse to look at this as a win-loss issue, but can you articulate in any way how Disney achieved any of their objectives in this litigation or are otherwise in a comparatively better spot RCID/CFTOD-wise than they were in early 2022?

I know you are asking someone else but from my point of view, it looks like Disney got a lot of what they wanted while being realistic.

• They are getting a known Disney friendly appointed to head up the district.
• They are reverting to the 2020 plan which is what RCID already had in place.
• They get direct input on any changes made to that plan.
• The district is giving up one of the big ways it had to mess with Disney in the form of the mitigation credits, conceding that Disney owns them and promising to not impede Disney.
• The original law that caused all this has been altered to account for the concerns many, including Disney had.
• They did not have to cede any creative control to the state in terms of promises on types of content.
• They are not giving up their ability to restart the federal appeal (which is rare to see in a settlement).

As for that last point, I know some people think an appeal of the federal lawsuit is a long shot but the judge handed out a very unusual dismissal in this case, relying on his personal misinterpretation and application of another ruling. Further the 11th circuit has been rather busy over turning this particular judge of late including similar decisions he made on other questionable Florida laws. Why anyone thinks this ruling is safe vs. the others is a mystery to me. That doesn't mean Disney was guaranteed to win in the end but there was a VERY high probability the suit could be either restarted to address specific concerns and language or the ruling itself be tossed out to allow the case to proceed.

Now, what does Disney lose? Basically, the ability to elect their local government and by extension the ability to control it more directly. That is certainly a big one and I am sure they are not happy with it but Disney is being realistic and pragmatic. Even if they won the federal suit, it would be a colossal mess to try and restore everything and meanwhile the state could just keep passing more and more laws until eventually they get one to stick to accomplish the same goal.

At the end of the day, while this isn't an across-the-board win, it isn't bad either and certainly frees them up to finally start moving forward. Meanwhile they can continue to lobby and who knows what happens down the line.

Maybe this isn't very satisfying to those of us who are not fans of executive overreach but some kind of settlement was always the most likely outcome.

 

[mkt]

The first thing Disney's attorneys would do is take a deep dive into each member of the circuit court. Do a profile of each judge and how they would most likely rule on Disney's appeal. If Disney thought they had a better than even chance of winning this appeal, they would never had agreed to the compromise. Stating that Disney had a good chance of winning appeal is just plain disingenuous.

There's more than one way to win than just go in court.

This way allows them to negotiate a new development agreement (which I am almost certain will be a copy of the one that caused this controversy), and DeSantis saves face.

 

[Chi84]

I know you are asking someone else but from my point of view, it looks like Disney got a lot of what they wanted while being realistic.

• They are getting a known Disney friendly appointed to head up the district.
• They are reverting to the 2020 plan which is what RCID already had in place.
• They get direct input on any changes made to that plan.
• The district is giving up one of the big ways it had to mess with Disney in the form of the mitigation credits, conceding that Disney owns them and promising to not impede Disney.
• The original law that caused all this has been altered to account for the concerns many, including Disney had.
• They did not have to cede any creative control to the state in terms of promises on types of content.
• They are not giving up their ability to restart the federal appeal (which is rare to see in a settlement).

As for that last point, I know some people think an appeal of the federal lawsuit is a long shot but the judge handed out a very unusual dismissal in this case, relying on his personal misinterpretation and application of another ruling. Further the 11th circuit has been rather busy over turning this particular judge of late including similar decisions he made on other questionable Florida laws. Why anyone thinks this ruling is safe vs. the others is a mystery to me. That doesn't mean Disney was guaranteed to win in the end but there was a VERY high probability the suit could be either restarted to address specific concerns and language or the ruling itself be tossed out to allow the case to proceed.

Now, what does Disney lose? Basically, the ability to elect their local government and by extension the ability to control it more directly. That is certainly a big one and I am sure they are not happy with it but Disney is being realistic and pragmatic. Even if they won the federal suit, it would be a colossal mess to try and restore everything and meanwhile the state could just keep passing more and more laws until eventually they get one to stick to accomplish the same goal.

At the end of the day, while this isn't an across-the-board win, it isn't bad either and certainly frees them up to finally start moving forward. Meanwhile they can continue to lobby and who knows what happens down the line.

Maybe this isn't very satisfying to those of us who are not fans of executive overreach but some kind of settlement was always the most likely outcome.

Can I hire you to answer all the other questions directed to me ?

 

[flynnibus]

They’re a very specific and prominent part of the settlement, so I suspect that clarifying their ownership holds significant value for Disney?

I don't know the details... but given the history of how land management is done in the area, including offsets and trades... one can assume those credits are essential to Disney to be able to develop the land that they have, and having them specifically with Disney instead of the district, is probably tied to Disney being a developer/land owner.

I don't think this is monetarily driven, but likely just about the power to develop land and the constraints they normally are facing with water management, etc in the region.

 

[lazyboy97o]

OK, I expect this take to be roundly dismissed by all sides, but I’ve always assumed that Disney never expected the DA and RC’s to survive this fight. They were guaranteed to force a direct conflict right out of the gate, and maybe that was the point. They could wait for dozens of minor retaliatory moves to amount to the basis for a lawsuit, or they could say “we’re going to have this fight, so let’s just do it”.

The agreements were created at a time when the land was set to become unzoned. They ensured that Disney didn’t end up stuck with land that would all have to be reviewed and reconsidered for zoning.

 

[flynnibus]

A lot of the DeS fans are out there on social media claiming complete victory over Disney, but here’s an opinion from the flip side:

Ron DeSantis Claims Victory Over Disney And All He Had To Do Was Give Disney Everything They Wanted - Above the Law

This doesn't read like much of a win.

abovethelaw.com

I really don't buy into this guy's take that it's everything Disney wanted...

To take from his quick closing summary..
"In other words, Disney gets a new, friendly negotiating partner, all the board’s rules tossed, a commitment that the entity can’t mess with the interests Disney cared about, and the parties agree that the company can maintain its most powerful lawsuit as a cocked gun to the temple of the new entity to be invoked if the negotiations don’t go Disney’s way."

New board members? Who cares.. they all reported to the same boss. They weren't acting rogue.
'All the board's rules tossed' - The board hadn't done anything to harm Disney yet. And I don't know what he thinks is thrown out.. only the changes Disney shoehorned in before the district came in (the restricted covenants and dev agreement) are being tossed out. The District accepts to not challenge stuff done before they took over. All the stuff like the District changes, employees, budget, etc all that is intact.

And he skipped over how Disney loosened the RCES monopoly... and gives the state a free pass on all the BS they did setting all this up.

The way I see it, all Disney has is a new negotiating opportunity with the state and gave up all their state legal pressure in return. The only 'gain' they have they didn't before is they got rid of some district board members... which ultimately is something that was at the whim of DeSantis all along.

 

[flynnibus]

I know you refuse to look at this as a win-loss issue, but can you articulate in any way how Disney achieved any of their objectives in this litigation or are otherwise in a comparatively better spot RCID/CFTOD-wise than they were in early 2022?

You're asking who won in the 5th inning of the game.

 

[mmascari]

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

​

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.​

Remember this timing. Disney didn’t sue in federal court until the development agreement was challenged. They were prepared to work under the new structure with some guardrails.

I wouldn't call it a win for Disney but if they get a slightly altered version of the development agreement pushed through, they will take that as it locks down the board in a pretty significant way. If the new agreement isn't to their liking, then the lawsuit gets picked back up. If the board breaks the new agreement after it is signed, a new lawsuit is filled.

Presumably Disney thinks this new plan will give them guardrails they can work under. Many of us were surprised at the first plan being good enough for Disney. That this one is the same pattern isn’t a surprise that it doesn’t feel good enough when reading it, but Disney must believe it is.

There really is no teeth there for the District to do anything different from what they have already set out to do. Disney better have damn good faith in the new developer agreement they already working on.. because this settlement obligates to the District to do virtually nothing.

The new development agreement has to come after the new comprehensive plan and any changes to the zoning regulations. I don’t think we should expect it any time soon because otherwise you largely get the agreement they just killed.

Whatever guardrails come out of the settlement, along with what the status quo was while it was all in dispute, and the new status while it unfolds. Disney must feel they’re good enough to work under. It seems wrong from the outside, but it’s never been clear why Disney was willing to live with any of it. That difference between good and good enough must be a chasm.