Of course it benefits them. What's wrong with that?
It also benefits the state and the taxpayers.
Now I'll ask you - other than "Big evil corporation", what about RCID is problematic in any way? And what does this bill specifically do that addresses those supposed problems?
Well, I'm told that a new draft of the RCID legislation coming tomorrow will require that they bring back Food Rocks. So that's one thing.
Kidding aside, I'm not suggesting that dissolution was the right move. RCID ceasing to exist without a replacement would have deleterious effects on the Central FL economy. However, as others have pointed out, Disney can exert control and powers usually delegated to a local government, something which other competitors in the space
currently cannot say the same. Notwithstanding the benefit to the taxpayers, that is a bargain worth studying and scrutinizing.
Unfortunately, that was not the catalyst for the dissolution in the first place. Political revenge was. The aforementioned "level playing field" argument was used, rather poorly, as an attempt to masquerade the reality, diminishing what I see as a legitimate concern by alienating those smart enough to see through the rather transparent attempt at making it seem like it's not retribution.
One of the major things I take issue with is RCID being able to issue tax-free bonds for projects which directly benefit Disney. Classic example are the Disney Springs parking garages. Disney should absolutely have had to pay for those themselves. Did they pay for them by way of taxes to RCID? At the end of the day, yes, but they still realized tax savings since they were paid for using government bonds. Universal had to pay taxes to build their parking garages.
ETA: What could have been a fruitful, thoughtful and possibly bi-partisan conversation about how to address the "level playing field" quandary was instead turned into a laughing stock by using it as an excuse to exact political revenge.