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

mikejs78

mikejs78

Well-Known Member
flynnibus said:
My guess is their simple strategy is to define a new district, in the same spot, make the law say it rolls all obligations, but has new scope and somehow redefine the admin so disney doesn’t get to own all the admin positions.

How you get there is kinda messy… there are a lot of requirements and ifs and buts in the law and state constitution now around how these get created. But I’d bet money that’s their plan. RCID II - under new management
Click to expand...

The thing is I don't think they can do this. The home rule provision of the constitution would require a vote of any residents of said new district. Disney would just be able to vote it down. The reason it works for other entities in the state is because usually there aren't any residents, or there are any municipalities involved as we have in the case of LBV and Bay Lake.

There's also the question on whether a newly constituted district would satisfy the provisions of the contract - given that the contract specifically references the entity of Reedy Creek. They can't modify any of the powers of Reedy Creek and still maintain the bond contract, which is basically what Fitch said today.
 
MickeyLuv'r

MickeyLuv'r

Well-Known Member
ParentsOf4 said:
Conversely, if you agree with what Disney has done, buy more Disney stock, purchase more Disney products, watch more Disney movies, and plan more WDW vacations.

Especially that last one! :)

(Says the person whose next Orlando trip is a week away. :))
Click to expand...
I slightly have to wonder on the last one a little.

WDW is a vacation destination. I think many vacationers want to escape when they vacation. They might not be eager to think about politics. Or to enter any location that has become a target of social media kookiness.
 
flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
mikejs78 said:
The thing is I don't think they can do this. The home rule provision of the constitution would require a vote of any residents of said new district. Disney would just be able to vote it down. The reason it works for other entities in the state is because usually there aren't any residents, or there are any municipalities involved as we have in the case of LBV and Bay Lake.

There's also the question on whether a newly constituted district would satisfy the provisions of the contract - given that the contract specifically references the entity of Reedy Creek. They can't modify any of the powers of Reedy Creek and still maintain the bond contract, which is basically what Fitch said today.
Click to expand...

Like i said messy… tho I don’t think flat out impossible. I don’t rate my law comprehension that high that make that assertion :)

As fof the obligations- rollover isn’t that big of a deal IMO. This is already handled in other dissolution of cities,etc. this is not new ground.

Plus look at reedy creek itself… it’s creation included simple broad statements about assuming everything from the preceding drainage district. But still… city dismantling… including bonds… has been done.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
disneyglimpses said:
DeSantis mentioned that legislation would be forthcoming to handle the issue of debt, etc. What other nonsense could they possibly be planning?
Click to expand...
I had read somewhere that he said all options were on the table and he was looking at potentially cancelling around half a billion dollars of various tax incentives TWDC was in the state. These were tax breaks offered through various programs including the most recent round related to bringing 2,000 jobs from CA to FL. This could all be political postering, but this whole situation has made FL a much less desirable place for companies to invest money in and move jobs to if they went forward with revoking additional tax incentives it could have massive negative impacts on future investment. I keep saying this, but the economy is cyclical and it won’t stay this good forever. Very short sighted.
GimpYancIent said:
One thing is for sure the Florida economy is too diverse for this RCID issue to cause it to tank. Exaggerations are not helpful.
Click to expand...
That diversification is a double edged sword in this struggle. It’s easy to attack Disney since they have no way of pulling out of FL or moving WDW. Same for most of the tourism industry and obviously stuff like agriculture and international trade ports which cannot easily be moved. Some of the other industries can. So with biotech/pharma or manufacturing or other industries large corporations are taking notice. If the reputation is that FL is no longer pro-business and any incentives the government gives you can be revoked if you speak out in any way against the Government that hurts the chances of companies wanting to move more jobs to the state. This is especially a problem while other states are still pro-business and will gladly still offer incentives that won’t be revoked on a whim.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
mikejs78 said:
Establish a new district without the ability to run a nuclear power plant. Call it a victory.
Click to expand...
That’s actually not a bad idea. Disney and RCID have absolutely no intention of ever building a nuclear power plant so it’s no harm to them. For some odd reason this aspect of the district has caught fire in conservative talk circles like it’s somehow evidence of horrible wrongdoing on the part of Disney. So strip it out and be done. Win/win
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
castlecake2.0 said:
Are none of these news outlets reporting that the Governor thats trying to stick it to Disney is the same one giving them hundreds of millions of dollars in tax breaks for Lake Nona?
Click to expand...
DeSantis said this action is just a first step and when asked about Disney potentially paying less in taxes without RCID he said that Disney will pay its fair share of taxes one way or another. Reading between the lines they are looking into the additional $580M in state tax credits Disney has. That includes the credits negotiated in the Lake Nona deal. The open question is whether there is still time for Disney to pull out on that project if the tax credits are at risk. That would be a major blow to the local community and from the overall size of the complex looks like it’s big enough for a lot more than the 2,000 jobs they were moving from CA. Is it possible if the deal falls through instead of adding thousands of jobs they actually move thousands out of FL? Who knows, but that’s what I would be leading with in any negotiation if I were Disney.
 
UNCgolf

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
DeSantis said this action is just a first step and when asked about Disney potentially paying less in taxes without RCID he said that Disney will pay its fair share of taxes one way or another. Reading between the lines they are looking into the additional $580M in state tax credits Disney has. That includes the credits negotiated in the Lake Nona deal. The open question is whether there is still time for Disney to pull out on that project if the tax credits are at risk. That would be a major blow to the local community and from the overall size of the complex looks like it’s big enough for a lot more than the 2,000 jobs they were moving from CA. Is it possible if the deal falls through instead of adding thousands of jobs they actually move thousands out of FL? Who knows, but that’s what I would be leading with in any negotiation if I were Disney.
Click to expand...

I don't think there's any question Disney could pull out if they wanted. I've seen companies back out with construction almost complete; it's just a sunk cost.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
flynnibus said:
Like i said messy… tho I don’t think flat out impossible. I don’t rate my law comprehension that high that make that assertion :)

As fof the obligations- rollover isn’t that big of a deal IMO. This is already handled in other dissolution of cities,etc. this is not new ground.

Plus look at reedy creek itself… it’s creation included simple broad statements about assuming everything from the preceding drainage district. But still… city dismantling… including bonds… has been done.
Click to expand...
Bonds have also prevented attempts at dissolution. That’s why I’ve mentioned Robert Moses. He kept authority going by keeping the bonds going even though dissolution planned or expected.
 
mikejs78

mikejs78

Well-Known Member
flynnibus said:
Like i said messy… tho I don’t think flat out impossible. I don’t rate my law comprehension that high that make that assertion :)

As fof the obligations- rollover isn’t that big of a deal IMO. This is already handled in other dissolution of cities,etc. this is not new ground.

Plus look at reedy creek itself… it’s creation included simple broad statements about assuming everything from the preceding drainage district. But still… city dismantling… including bonds… has been done.
Click to expand...

But in those cases there wasn't a specific provision about not removing powers from the district. This is a very different situation than your typical bond because of the language that is in the bond contract. It's almost like this whole thing was set up to prevent something like this from happening to begin with.

chrisvee said:
. They will create a new district with a new name and take away some meaningless powers then try to spin their way to victory in the public eye.
Click to expand...
I'm sure Disney is going to want it to be called Reedy Creek. But maybe it's Reedy Creek something instead of improvement district.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
mikejs78 said:
But in those cases there wasn't a specific provision about not removing powers from the district. This is a very different situation than your typical bond because of the language that is in the bond contract. It's almost like this whole thing was set up to prevent something like this from happening to begin with.


I'm sure Disney is going to want it to be called Reedy Creek. But maybe it's Reedy Creek something instead of improvement district.
Click to expand...
Why even change the name? I‘m sure there’s an administrative cost of changing out all the signage, letterhead and other items with the name on it. As long as they can claim it’s “different” who cares if the name changes.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom