This may explain the silence. While I think this law could be struck down in a first amendment complaint as well it seems as a number of other approaches - ultimately Disney may just choose to keep silent and let DeSantis have his big political moment and then quietly work this out with state officials when the dust settles and no one is paying attention anymore or have the district make a legal complaint less politically charged than a first amendment complaint.
The very state officials that would “work this out” are the ones who created the mess in the first place. Why would they change their mind? This is almost certainly going to court, but a proper case takes time to prepare. There’s also no benefit in saying something and adding fuel to the baseless sound bites.
Well by work this out I mean wait until after the mid term election. Eventually even absent the courts someone has to figure out how this would work and ultimately it may result in essentially the same arrangement without nominally repealing the bill.
I just don’t think you know me that well
Until the state decides to use emminent Domain to seize Disney land.
Why would they do that? What are they going to build in place of it? What would they need the land for? No government nor population of a state would sit quiet for taking over a healthy company employing 70000 people just for kicks.
The enabling legislation and court ruling focus on developing tourism, not building a city.
Oh, they won't seize land that Disney has built on. Just other undeveloped land in the bubble.
You got some mommy/no pony for your birthday issues there, friend…
I don't know. Based on some of the things DeSantis is saying this week, I'm starting to think that he believes that he can take down Disney. Guy has hubris.
That is how the state of Florida might have defined it, but Walt wanted complete control over his city and didn't want any interference from the state. The only reason there was a theme park built was to provide both a place for the city residents to work and to give the impression, at least on the surface, that it was just a tourism development. It was that as well, but I don't believe that was Walt's motivation for asking for the independence nor was it necessary just to build a theme park.
The Reedy Creek Improvement District was established *after* Walt died.
Walt was dead. Even As a city, it would have been a tourist attraction and developing tourism is a key part of the legal basis for the District, both in the actual legislation and in the subsequent court ruling,
He is a rather novice politician looking for fame…and at the end of the day - donations for campaigns and PACs…lucrative “consulting” jobs for the rest of his days.
