JoeCamel
Well-Known Member
Package deal, include the parks.......
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District
- Thread starter castlecake2.0
- Start date
drnilescrane
Well-Known Member
Ok, I'll take that at face value that others are saying that.
I'm not saying that. All I'm saying is, Reedy Creek serves a decent purpose that is good for the state, and good for Disney. But the scenario that RCID was created for no longer exists, and tidying things up isn't a bad thing. I'm arguing for the opposite of special treatment.
The problem is this has become wrapped up in the separate issue of the governor's retribution. So of course since it's now all political, we can't possibly have a conversation about the merits of special district reform.
Last edited by a moderator:
BuddyThomas
Well-Known Member
Would you care to cite specific examples of what you are talking about? No? Didn’t think so.
Elijah Abrams
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- Yes
NOT FUNNY! I just wanted to know if the bill will affect Disney World.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
The District was created to promote tourism. That purpose still exists. You haven’t made any independent case for these reforms beyond vague issues that you don’t really define. These matters have been reviewed, the powers of the District are regulated. Why does the District using the Florida Fire Prevention Code need to be reviewed?
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian
Well-Known Member
I don't think it would be unreasonable, given the present circumstances, to set this up where the state gets three appointees to the board and the RCID landowners elect three.
Disney, on the other hand, would certainly like to maintain its special district powers and privileges, and Orange and Osceola counties sure as heck don't want the RCID debt. A compromise is needed, and I think splitting the board would be a good start. DeSantis can claim he is ensuring "proper oversight" of the district, and Disney could still have significant influence on its operation.
Disney, on the other hand, would certainly like to maintain its special district powers and privileges, and Orange and Osceola counties sure as heck don't want the RCID debt. A compromise is needed, and I think splitting the board would be a good start. DeSantis can claim he is ensuring "proper oversight" of the district, and Disney could still have significant influence on its operation.
Last edited by a moderator:
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Does having internet services provided by Comcast qualify as having a contractual relationship with a company that owns a theme park? How many people in the state actually meet these board requirements? We’re talking hundreds of thousands of people involved in contractual relationships with just Disney and Comcast, not to mention smaller entities like SeaWorld and Merlin Entertainments.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
What is the state conceding in these mutual concessions you propose?
Brian
Well-Known Member
Complete control of the board.
The fact remains that the district as we know it today will be dissolved come June. Disney has to engage with the state, unless the courts intervene, if they wish to have a similar arrangement put back into place.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
If we ever meet, you can give my $50 and I won’t punch you in the face and take your whole wallet. What a great compromise we’ve come to!
You’re not describing a concession. You’re still giving the state what it wants, the ability to punish Disney when they engage in undesirable but perfectly legal activity.
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
As a tv drama this would be fascinating, as something real that has huge implications on the legality of governments punishing dissenting speech it’s terrifying though.
I never thought it would get to this point, I’d have bet a million dollars they’d resolve this behind closed doors with no fanfare and with very little actually changing, the fact it’s still going is mind boggling.
I never thought it would get to this point, I’d have bet a million dollars they’d resolve this behind closed doors with no fanfare and with very little actually changing, the fact it’s still going is mind boggling.
Last edited by a moderator:
Brian
Well-Known Member
Then they need to file a lawsuit and try to get the original RCID back, because right now, it's being dissolved in June, and the plan for its replacement is a completely state-appointed board.
Only the state can create a replacement special district. If Disney wants one (they do), they'll need to work with the state, or, as previously suggested, file a lawsuit on the various grounds that have been discussed ad nauseam in this thread. There is no third option, and Disney (and other parties on its "side") has yet to file a lawsuit.
A 3/3 split would ensure gridlock, and force the state appointees to bargain in good faith with the landowner appointees, and vice versa. Nothing can happen, if the by-laws are setup correctly, without gaining the support of at least one member of "the other side." It's a better scenario, in my opinion, than a completely state-appointed board where the landowners have near-zero influence on the administration of a special district which controls their land.
Again, if Disney wants a special district come June, there is no third option. It's either work with the state to secure more favorable terms, or file a lawsuit and hope they win.
Last edited:
How does this work for the residents of Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista along with all the landowners in the district? How does the state just take control of the board without any agreement from all these parties?
How is Disney not fighting this?
How is Disney not fighting this?
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
You can’t file a lawsuit over proposed legislation.
A 3-3 split does not require bargaining. The point of the state appointees is not to provide good faith oversight. They are there to inflict harm and stalling work is a harm. This isn’t actually about the issues of land use. The reasons for why a se wage treatment plant upgrade is a good idea are absolutely meaningless if the issue holding up the project is the content of the latest movie release.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
This cannot yet be fought. There’s definitely a wisdom in not pointing out legal flaws now while they can be addressed.
drnilescrane
Well-Known Member
My personal opinion - if this goes to the courts, which it should if it passes as currently written - then the headline we'll see is "Reedy Creek residents file lawsuit".
Disney themselves will try hard not to be the litigant.
mightynine
Well-Known Member
They likely will, but right now it’s still just a draft bill. Fight when you have something that’s passed.
Brian
Well-Known Member
You can, however, file a lawsuit over enacted legislation (that being the legislation which dissolves RCID in June).
I'm inclined to agree with you. However, if only the state can create a special district, and if Disney wishes to have a special district, they have to engage with the state, or file a lawsuit to attempt to overturn the legislation which dissolves RCID in June.
Last edited by a moderator:
mikejs78
Well-Known Member
It's been said that the legislation passed last year actually doesn't apply to RCID because of the way it was written.
GhostHost1000
Premium Member
Disney really should learn to just focus on their business and not create such a mess in the PR world these days. Regardless of any side you are on, this and other bad PR things over the last few years all could have been avoided and they keep doing it to themselves