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

[mikejs78]

4. I've talked with another Florida attorney who verifies that the bond debt would go to Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista as they are the controlling government entity.

I don't see how that's possible.

• They are two separately-incorporated cities and the bonds belong to the entity that controls those cities - the controlling entity, Reedy Creek, which is more like a county.
• If the legislature dissolved a county, the bonds of the county wouldn't be transferred to the cities in the county, that would be impossible. They would go to the state.
• Reedy Creek is more than just these two municipalities - it also consists of unincorporated RCID land, which has some of the infrastructure in question. So, how does the bond debt related to the unincorporated RCID land get divided with the incorporated land of LBV and BL? And how does bond debt that applied to elements of both cities get divided among the two cities along with the unincorporated aspects?
• The statute doesn't say "controlling government entity". It says "the dissolution of a special district government shall transfer the title to all property owned by the preexisting special district government to the local general-purpose government, which shall also assume all indebtedness of the preexisting special district." The local general-purpose government which Reedy Creek was part of was the the two counties, since not all of the assets of Reedy Creek fall within LBV and BL.
• I have heard one theory that states that because Reedy Creek strattles two counties, and that things like bonds can't be split, that they could essentially end up transferring to the state - don't know if there's any validity to that.

 

[Prince-1]

Don't you know he has an 85.6% accuracy rate...

I do because he mentions it on a regular basis.

 

[GoofGoof]

I have heard one theory that states that because Reedy Creek strattles two counties, and that things like bonds can't be split, that they could essentially end up transferring to the state - don't know if there's any validity to that.

Wouldn’t that be ironic. The people behind this bill don’t really care if the taxpayers of Orange County get stuck with a billion dollars of debt to pay off because they didn’t vote for them in large numbers. Go explain to the people who did why the state budget has a deficit now because your political stunt backfired. I don’t think this actually happens, but that would be a tough one to sell to the peeps.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

“The Company” still owns lots of pockets of land in the town and everything that surrounds it.

Right, I just mean that it isn't technically WDW, not that Disney doesn't own any property there. Disney divested most of its interest in Celebation many years ago

 

[WDW Pro]

I don't see how that's possible.

• They are two separately-incorporated cities and the bonds belong to the entity that controls those cities - the controlling entity, Reedy Creek, which is more like a county.
• If the legislature dissolved a county, the bonds of the county wouldn't be transferred to the cities in the county, that would be impossible. They would go to the state.
• Reedy Creek is more than just these two municipalities - it also consists of unincorporated RCID land, which has some of the infrastructure in question. So, how does the bond debt related to the unincorporated RCID land get divided with the incorporated land of LBV and BL? And how does bond debt that applied to elements of both cities get divided among the two cities along with the unincorporated aspects?
• The statute doesn't say "controlling government entity". It says "the dissolution of a special district government shall transfer the title to all property owned by the preexisting special district government to the local general-purpose government, which shall also assume all indebtedness of the preexisting special district." The local general-purpose government which Reedy Creek was part of was the the two counties, since not all of the assets of Reedy Creek fall within LBV and BL.
• I have heard one theory that states that because Reedy Creek strattles two counties, and that things like bonds can't be split, that they could essentially end up transferring to the state - don't know if there's any validity to that.

Alright, very quickly because these are such good comments (even if you do like to take a dig at me):

1. It's the opposite way - RCID is supposed to be controlled by the two cities but they largely grant all decisions to the RCID board for a variety of reasons related to the pseudo nature of the city councils.
2. I don't think there's an established mechanism by which the state could dissolve a county. In the case of the Special District of RCID, it is literally controlled by the two municipalities.
3. We're actually trying to figure your third point out as it is a major legal sticking point. Golden Oak is outside RCID, but may not be outside the original RCID boundaries. Other than that, you'd have to show me on a map the areas of RCID that aren't in either Lake Buena Vista or Bay Lake. I haven't seen unincorporated RCID land.
4. You're referring to the old statute, correct? If so, the new statute overrides it specifically in its text.
5. That's one possibility, but almost certainly not going to occur. Orange County and Osceola County would probably set up new special districts to replace RCID with less pro-Disney (see higher local taxes and control) to take effect in June 2023. That would be if no injunction is granted or after a court ruling that RCID may be dissolved. Disney might also get Florida to reestablish RCID if they want to make political and sociocultural concessions, although I don't know how likely that is or how that would play out.

 

[GoofGoof]

I"m not an attorney, but I can ask That Park Place's legal analyst (a Florida attorney) if there is a statute regarding nuclear power plant ownership. Clearly that's different than other electric utilities, which I'm assuming you did not mean to conflate.

I can’t say specific for FL as I believe the remaining nuclear facilities there are not currently owned by municipalities but it’s not prohibited nationally. The South Texas Project Nuclear Generating Station is co-owned by the city of Austin, the city of San Antonio and a private company that acquired the interest from the former Houston Power and Light before it was broken up. So that plant was co-owned by 3 cities in Texas. Again, maybe in FL that’s prohibited. Federally they would prohibit foreign entities from having a controlling interest in a nuclear plant and they would also not grant a license to an entity that wasn’t financially sound. I’m not sure RCID has a balance sheet that would support that process even if they are backed by TWDC.

Either way it’s irrelevant since there’s a zero percent chance RCID builds a nuclear power plant. First, nobody is building them anymore since they are not a cost effective way to generate power. The construction cost is enormous and there’s way too much risk. It’s cheaper to build solar and wind and nat gas generation. Second, Disney would have no interest in being part of that. Nothing says safe tourist destination like passing out iodine pills at checkin in case there’s an accident and nothing says vacation kingdom like the periodic testing of the nuclear emergency sirens .

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Alright, very quickly because these are such good comments (even if you do like to take a dig at me):

1. It's the opposite way - RCID is supposed to be controlled by the two cities but they largely grant all decisions to the RCID board for a variety of reasons related to the pseudo nature of the city councils.
2. I don't think there's an established mechanism by which the state could dissolve a county. In the case of the Special District of RCID, it is literally controlled by the two municipalities.
3. We're actually trying to figure your third point out as it is a major legal sticking point. Golden Oak is outside RCID, but may not be outside the original RCID boundaries. Other than that, you'd have to show me on a map the areas of RCID that aren't in either Lake Buena Vista or Bay Lake. I haven't seen unincorporated RCID land.
4. You're referring to the old statute, correct? If so, the new statute overrides it specifically in its text.
5. That's one possibility, but almost certainly not going to occur. Orange County and Osceola County would probably set up new special districts to replace RCID with less pro-Disney (see higher local taxes and control) to take effect in June 2023. That would be if no injunction is granted or after a court ruling that RCID may be dissolved. Disney might also get Florida to reestablish RCID if they want to make political and sociocultural concessions, although I don't know how likely that is or how that would play out.

So to your 5th point, wouldn't creating a new Special District that will (for some unspecified reason) charge a higher tax rate be an example of harm to Disney? So then we would have multiple politicians on record as stating that the dissolution of RCID was because Disney spoke out about the other bill AND a verifiable financial harm imposed upon Disney as a result of the dissolution of RCID. Doesn't your lawyer friend see how that is an open and shut case for Disney if they claim a First Amendment violation? It's retaliation acknowledged by those who wrote, passed, and signed the bill and there is a provable financial penalty associated with it. In what alternate dimension is that okay in the United States?

 

[UNCgolf]

4. You're referring to the old statute, correct? If so, the new statute overrides it specifically in its text.

IIRC, it only ignores one specific part of the existing statute -- the one requiring approval of the majority of the district for dissolution. It did not attempt to override the section transferring property/debts to the local general purpose government.

I also think there's an outstanding question whether the use of that notwithstanding clause is enough to actually supersede the earlier law, since it is still in effect. It was not amended or repealed. I wouldn't be surprised if that's already been answered in Florida case law somewhere, though.

 

[GoofGoof]

So to your 5th point, wouldn't creating a new Special District that will (for some unspecified reason) charge a higher tax rate be an example of harm to Disney? So then we would have multiple politicians on record as stating that the dissolution of RCID was because Disney spoke out about the other bill AND a verifiable financial harm imposed upon Disney as a result of the dissolution of RCID. Doesn't your lawyer friend see how that is an open and shut case for Disney if they claim a First Amendment violation? It's retaliation acknowledged by those who wrote, passed, and signed the bill and there is a provable financial penalty associated with it. In what alternate dime sion is that okay in the United States?

I agree with this point on this whole thing not being OK but I’ll put that aside for a moment. One other thing I can’t seem to understand is how can a new special district charge a higher tax rate? It’s a fairytale. A taxing authority cannot just charge more in taxes because the Governor wants to see Disney suffer. The taxing authority charges taxes based on actual expenses and since the new district would be virtually the same as the old district the budget of expenses would be the same. There’s no mechanism to charge Disney real estate taxes and then funnel some of that money back to the state government or even the counties. This all seems like a pipe dream cooked up by people who want to see the Governor teach woke Disney a lesson. That’s not a viable way to do it.

 

[CAV]

Has anyone's mind been changed over these 236 pages?

 

[mikejs78]

1. It's the opposite way - RCID is supposed to be controlled by the two cities but they largely grant all decisions to the RCID board for a variety of reasons related to the pseudo nature of the city councils.

What's your source for this? The powers of Reedy Creek are enumerated in its charter, and in fact, the charter says that Reedy Creek's powers supercede that of the municipalities of BL and LBV (referred to in the charter as the city of Reedy Creek, which was later renamed LBV).

The District shall have the power to exercise any
of its rights, powers, privileges and authorities in any and all
portions of the District lying within the boundaries of the City
of Bay Lake, the City of Reedy Creek, and any other municipal
corporation or other political subdivision, heretofore or here-
after created or organized, whose boundaries lie wholly or
partly within the geographic limits of the District, to the same
extent and in the same manner as in areas of the District not
incorporated as part of a municipality or other political sub-
division.

2. I don't think there's an established mechanism by which the state could dissolve a county. In the case of the Special District of RCID, it is literally controlled by the two municipalities.

They can. Article VIII Section 1 of the state Constitution.

Counties may be created, abolished or changed by law

3. We're actually trying to figure your third point out as it is a major legal sticking point. Golden Oak is outside RCID, but may not be outside the original RCID boundaries. Other than that, you'd have to show me on a map the areas of RCID that aren't in either Lake Buena Vista or Bay Lake. I haven't seen unincorporated RCID land.

https://www.rcid.org/wp-content/uploads/2019/09/RCID_City_Owner2019.pdf

4. You're referring to the old statute, correct? If so, the new statute overrides it specifically in its text.

No, the new statute doesn't override anything, except it attempts to override the need for a vote by the residents in order to dissolve the district (which current state law has). There's an open question as to whether the way they did this is legal.

5. That's one possibility, but almost certainly not going to occur. Orange County and Osceola County would probably set up new special districts to replace RCID with less pro-Disney (see higher local taxes and control) to take effect in June 2023. That would be if no injunction is granted or after a court ruling that RCID may be dissolved. Disney might also get Florida to reestablish RCID if they want to make political and sociocultural concessions, although I don't know how likely that is or how that would play out.

Orange County wants no part of this. They will probably set up a district as similar to the one that exists today as they are allowed to by law, unless this gets thrown out or the legislature preempts then.

 

[Brian]

Has anyone's mind been changed over these 236 pages?

No, but your post is the best I've seen in at least 150 pages.

 

[Willmark]

Now who's trimming out all the wall of text, where I explicitly said those answers.


Sure.


"usually going to side with businesses in almost any matter as well but" - So, if you usually side with business "but", then you in this instance you are NOT siding with business. If you didn't mean to say you're not siding with business. Please update and let us know that you usually side with business and do in this case too. Which is the exact opposite of the word "but". If you're going to say that I've corrupted your context by not including it. Including the trimmed text should actually show the opposite. Instead it reinforces it. So, either you lied then or it's a lie now that you're for Disney/RCID in this.

Also, incapable of reading the wall of text.


What does this mean then?


Either it has a purpose or it does not. That looks like you said it's purpose is murky today. Even without the second line, the "what's the purpose" in the context of the "gives you pause" is clearly "just asking the question" that you have a pause (meaning it's not good) and that you're "just asking the question" if it serves a purpose. A discussion technique that clearly shows the intent that it serves no purpose.


I think you need to slow down and read the response, and the last hundred pages to see what's actually being discussed instead of throwing out random "gee seems bad, but I don't really mean it's bad" type of bad faith statements.


If you have an actual item to add to the discussion, please do. Something that having or removing RCID would help or harm. Otherwise, you're just throwing out half statements to skirt political discussion. I was clear in my statements about what RCID brings to the situation here. There's already 100 pages worth of incorrect bad faith statements on what things RCID is imagined to do that are harmful and give Disney some unfair advantage over everyone else.

Yep I figured I’d trim out statements, when in Rome and all.

As to you getting hung up on my second part? I’ve made my comments, I’ve stated that I think Florida is stupid for this fight, how it benefits no one, amongst a host of other statements in various posts today. My pause? That’s what you keep coming back to? You see my statements as “ it not in this case?”

If you choose to keep trying to dissect something? Don’t know what to tell you. But good on you I guess for fighting some weird fight?

In fact this reminds me of the Mask in the Parks thread.

 

[mikejs78]

Isn't Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista inheriting all of RCID's property and debt a good thing?

It solves the debt problem Orange and Osceola County would face (without a change to existing statutes), and allows Disney to continue to exercise control over local government.

The Reedy Creek Act is an incredible document and reflects the State Of Florida's strong desire to bring Disney to central Florida in 1967. Disney would lose some powers. Clearly, Disney wants to keep RCID as is. But if this happens, is it really a such bad thing for Disney?

Not really.. Bay Lake and LBV don't have the same power of taxation as Reedy Creek does.

 

[mikejs78]

No, but your post is the best I've seen in at least 150 pages.

I've actually seen some people shift their thinking.

 

[Willmark]

No, but your post is the best I've seen in at least 150 pages.

No but it sure reminded me to read this forum less!

(Queue applause by those who are gladdened by such statement! )

 

[DisneyDebRob]

Has anyone's mind been changed over these 236 pages?

Mine has. I said i wasnt going to have another beer.. but looks like i might.

 

[DisneyDebRob]

No but it sure reminded me to read this forum less!

(Queue applause by those who are gladdened by such statement! )

I kid.

 

[flynnibus]

"The governor's great mystery plan" appears to be a partisan dig... I don't do politics or partisanship in how I try to assess facts.

Ok, then please try to find the facts of this great plan then. Until then, it's vaporware because it's so great and such a big deal.. he's apparently shared it with none of the impacted parties.

So right now... it's a plan that must be with his girlfriend who lives in Canada.

 

[Willmark]

I kid.

It’s all good, maybe the thread needs a snickers or an alpaca? Anyone tried those?

Or better yet an alpaca eating a snickers?