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

[GladToBeHear]

Why don’t you tell us why any of this justifies dissolving Reedy Creek Improvement District and dropping new taxes on the county residents?

They'll get the tax situation worked out. Believe me. That's about the only thing local government is good at. And they have a year to figure it out. They'll find a way to make Disney pay for all this.

As far as the why -- Disney put themselves in the middle of a political (and cultural) issue. They pushed it and the FL state government pushed back. That happens in politics. I wouldn't say I necessarily agree or support what the state government is doing -- but this is what happens. And both political parties do this.

It seems Disney leadership was smart enough to stay out of political issues for decades. Maybe a return to that strategy is in order.

 

[GimpYancIent]

this is just disingenuous.

I didn’t know anything about my teachers’ sex lives, no. But I was fully aware that my 4th grade teacher was the wife of one of the middle school teachers my brother had at the same time. I ended up having her husband as a teacher when I got to middle school as well. my 7th grade math teacher also lived a few doors down the street from me. I knew her family, and my brother was friends with her child. My kindergarten teacher, both elementary music teachers I had, my 7th grade English teacher - were all members of my church. Etc, etc.

Seeing our teachers out in the community was common. We didn’t know about “their sex lives,” but we did absolutely know who their spouses and families were, and in many cases interacted and had relationships with them outside the classroom.

Me, Myself and I none of us cared about any teachers' relationships we had things to do and better things to think about.

 

[Angel Ariel]

@GimpYancIent - I wasn’t making any jokes in this thread, so you may want to remove your laughing emoji as it is against the rules to use it to mock other posters.

 

[Angel Ariel]

Me, Myself and I none of us cared about any teachers' relationships we had things to do and better things to think about.

I don’t recall saying I cared about their relationships. Simply that I was aware of them, through a normal course of interaction and relationships in a community.

 

[GladToBeHear]

I really think you're confusing the types of things being realistically discussed in a classroom. This might be a little graphic, but bear with me.

If any teacher says "Hello kids, my name is Mr. Bob and I have a wife/husband named ..." that should be fine. It's not indecent, or trying to indoctrinate anyone to say such a thing. It just says "hey I have this family structure, and that's ok." This usually happens at the start of a year, so the kids realize "hey this person has a family, i have a family, and the kids next to me have a family. all of our families may look different or they may look the same, but a family is the people you live with and care about."

If any teacher says "Hello kids, I am a homosexual, and being homosexual is great. You should try it at recess, let's all pick partners." That has definitely crossed a line.
If any teacher says "Good morning kids, did anyone else here get laid like I did this weekend?" they crossed a line.
If a public school teacher says "When it comes to relationships, the Bible/Quran says..." it crosses a line.
If any teacher actually discusses with students any sexual acts with their partners, it crosses a line.

Not confused. I'm simply reiterating the intent of the bill. Discussion on sexual orientation and gender identity is a hot-button issue. There's not a societal consensus on how this should be taught to young children. All this bill aims to do is take it out of the classroom and put it with the parents.

That's all I have to say about the bill. I'll try and keep the rest of my comments on Reedy Creek.

 

[flynnibus]

Can’t wait for the morning cleanup. It’s like no one even bothers reading the moderator warnings. Let there be blood

 

[GladToBeHear]

That's all fine and dandy, but the bill just doesn't do that effectively -- and it goes far beyond that. If this bill only did what people are suggesting it does, most people wouldn't have a serious problem with it.

Instead it's a poorly written mess that's wildly ambiguous and also weaponizes private lawsuits as a scare tactic.

Maybe. We're going to have to see how this all plays out.

 

[GladToBeHear]

Those don't sound like the kind of people I want having ANY influence on children's public education.

Well, you're kind of making my point. There's no consensus. So just get it out of the classroom period.

 

[GladToBeHear]

Can’t wait for the morning cleanup. It’s like no one even bothers reading the moderator warnings. Let there be blood

I know. I'm thinking about this everytime I respond. This will all be gone in the morning.

I enjoy the discussion though. This would be an interesting talk to have in person. Over a beer.

 

[GimpYancIent]

@GimpYancIent - I wasn’t making any jokes in this thread, so you may want to remove your laughing emoji as it is against the rules to use it to mock other posters.

No mocking of anything or anyone on this thread by me and no not removing any laughing emojis because if what I read was funny to me and if I find something funny I laugh. Mock no.

 

[LittleBuford]

I don’t recall saying I cared about their relationships. Simply that I was aware of them, through a normal course of interaction and relationships in a community.

I can't believe it's got to the point where people are pretending that they went through childhood knowing nothing about their teachers' home lives. It's simply not believable.

 

[MandaM]

Well, you're kind of making my point. There's no consensus. So just get it out of the classroom period.

So, no teacher can have a picture of their spouse in the classroom, whether they’re gay or straight, right? Since that would show sexual orientation.

What about a little Johnny who has two moms? At the beginning of the year, when they’ll have a unit on families and kids all talk about theirs, can Johnny talk about his moms?

If someone has a problem with the fact that children will be “exposed” to the idea that gay or trans people exist in the classrooms, then, yes, they are homophobic or transphobic. And they need to homeschool, not force their prejudices on the rest of the class.

 

[Club Cooloholic]

Well, you're kind of making my point. There's no consensus. So just get it out of the classroom period.

Disney cartoons should not be shown at schools right, because your friends find it too much for their kids? Is ok if two fish kiss or is that too intense?
You don't need a consensus for something to be instituted in public schools. I am pretty sure there were a great many districts all over the country that had an issue with integration and there was far from a universal agreement among people in those districts over whether all men were indeed created equal. I mean there are some people that truly believe God made the earth in seven days, should we not teach evolution and and astro physics because it might conflict with parents that don't believe that and think they know what's best for their kids?

 

[Angel Ariel]

And that would be between your teacher (if they wanted to share with you), your parents, and you. And everything would probably be just fine. We can't legislate people's lives. This bill is about what happens in the classroom.

I’m well aware of that. I was responding to the disingenuous idea that knowing something personal about your teacher’s personal life or spouse equates to that teacher talking about their sex life with students. It’s a ridiculous assertion.

 

[lazyboy97o]

And hence why I wrote that the Florida legislature has the authority to modify the state statute to take into account the end of RCID.

This is exactly what the Florida legislature did when they eliminated RCID landowners' rights to vote on the measure to end RCID.

Section 189.072(2) states:

(2) OTHER DISSOLUTIONS.—​

(a) In order for the Legislature to dissolve an active independent special district created and operating pursuant to a special act, the special act dissolving the active independent special district must be approved by a majority of the resident electors of the district or, for districts in which a majority of governing body members are elected by landowners, a majority of the landowners voting [emphasis added] in the same manner by which the independent special district’s governing body is elected. If a local general-purpose government passes an ordinance or resolution in support of the dissolution, the local general-purpose government must pay any expenses associated with the referendum required under this paragraph.​

(b) If an independent special district was created by a county or municipality by referendum or any other procedure, the county or municipality that created the district may dissolve the district pursuant to a referendum or any other procedure by which the independent special district was created. However, if the independent special district has ad valorem taxation powers, the same procedure required to grant the independent special district ad valorem taxation powers is required to dissolve the district.​

The Republican controlled legislature brushed this aside by simply inserting this into the new law:

Notwithstanding s. 189.072(2),​

It was that easy to take away Disney's/RCID's rights to vote on this.

Who do you think the Florida legislature wants to tax right now, the people of Orlando or Disney?

In their current mood, they'll create new legislation that simply starts with something along the lines of:

Notwithstanding s. 125.01(1),​

None of this matters.

Disney almost certainly will triumph in court on First Amendment grounds.

At least until the Supreme Court decides to overturn Citizens United.

Randolph wasn’t talking about how state laws could be further modified with potential future legislation at a future legislative session. He was discussing the laws that exist right now. You’re calling him out for not baselessly speculating in a manner that defends actions undertaken without proper consideration.

And seeing as Orlando doesn’t really support the legislature or governor, I don’t think they really care if they suffer as well. If they did, they would have researched before acting because the costs are starting now.

 

[MandaM]

They'll get the tax situation worked out. Believe me. That's about the only thing local government is good at. And they have a year to figure it out. They'll find a way to make Disney pay for all this.

As far as the why -- Disney put themselves in the middle of a political (and cultural) issue. They pushed it and the FL state government pushed back. That happens in politics. I wouldn't say I necessarily agree or support what the state government is doing -- but this is what happens. And both political parties do this.

It seems Disney leadership was smart enough to stay out of political issues for decades. Maybe a return to that strategy is in order.

You either support the First Amendment or you don’t. The government retailing against a company for disagreeing with their policies is something you’d see in China and Russia. I am shocked at how many people who purport to value freedom support this fascist move. Not to mention that the government taking away control from a corporation and giving control to the state is the definition of socialism. I thought the right was opposed to that, and to censorship, but apparently it’s cool as long as it punishes the other side.

I’d also love to see one example of how both sides do this. When has a Democratic government ever enacted a law to punish a corporation for expressing a political opinion? If there’s not examples of it, then it’s not both sides.

 

[GladToBeHear]

Seriously. This is all going to be gone in the morning. I've said enough about the intent of the bill. Let's get back on topic.

 

[MandaM]

Or maybe just take it out of the classroom, period? And focus on things like math, reading, and recess. The bill is about classroom instruction.

But you didn’t answer my question. What happens to children with gay parents? Do we tell those kids not to talk about their parents?

And what about pictures of spouses? Or spouses coming into the classroom to say hello? Teachers’ spouses do that all the time. Or when Johnny’s moms volunteer in class? Can you not see how ridiculous it is to try and keep it out of school? Teachers don’t have to be instructing about it for it to come up. Just as it always comes up - but is 100% fine - when we’re talking about straight people.

 

[peter11435]

They'll get the tax situation worked out. Believe me. That's about the only thing local government is good at. And they have a year to figure it out. They'll find a way to make Disney pay for all this.

As far as the why -- Disney put themselves in the middle of a political (and cultural) issue. They pushed it and the FL state government pushed back. That happens in politics. I wouldn't say I necessarily agree or support what the state government is doing -- but this is what happens. And both political parties do this.

It seems Disney leadership was smart enough to stay out of political issues for decades. Maybe a return to that strategy is in order.

You are very mistaken. Disney has been involved in political issues in Florida and elsewhere for decades. This wasn’t new.

In this case they pushed and the state of Florida responded illegally

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

You either support the First Amendment or you don’t. The government retailing against a company for disagreeing with their policies is something you’d see in China and Russia. I am shocked at how many people who purport to value freedom support this fascist move. Not to mention that the government taking away control from a corporation and giving control to the state is the definition of socialism. I thought the right was opposed to that, and to censorship, but apparently it’s cool as long as it punishes the other side.

I’d also love to see one example of how both sides do this. When has a Democratic government ever enacted a law to punish a corporation for expressing a political opinion? If there’s not examples of it, then it’s not both sides.

The left has been going after Chick Fil A (and other businesses who are vocal against gay marriage) for nearly a decade, the current Florida vs Disney is the first case I can think of where it’s been the right going after the a business for expressing their freedom of speech.

There have been several laws passed that restrict businesses from opening in airport and other government connected businesses if they oppose “equality” requirements. Free speech is secondary to PC regulations in many states.

It’s very rare but this isn’t exactly new territory.