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

[GoofGoof]

A hostile district absolutely could interfered with daily operations. Attractions and facilities could be shut down by order of the district.

For what? I didn’t think RCID had anything to do with ride safety or health inspections. Fire code violations is all I can think of but they would have to justify that.

 

[flynnibus]

For what? I didn’t think RCID had anything to do with ride safety or health inspections.

But the new one in this code does...

 

[peter11435]

A hostile district absolutely could interfered with daily operations. Attractions and facilities could be shut down by order of the district.

Yep. They could really interfere with all aspects of the operation of the resort. And they could use the threat of this interference to attempt to control all aspects of the company’s output. Not simply public statements like the one that started this, but also film and television output, news reporting, theme park content, training and hiring practices, and the overall social guidance of the company.

This could also lead to a very noticeable and significant loss of the “Disney bubble”. The implications of the state/governor having full control of roads, resources, and land within the district has not been adequately discussed in this thread.

 

[lazyboy97o]

For what? I didn’t think RCID had anything to do with ride safety or health inspections. Fire code violations is all I can think of but they would have to justify that.

The proposal is to give the district authority over amusement safety. The fire department has immense power and leeway, and finding violations at a place like Walt Disney World would not be difficult.

 

[GoofGoof]

But the new one in this code does...

The proposal is to give the district authority over amusement safety. The fire department has immense power and leeway, and finding violations at a place like Walt Disney World would not be difficult.

I didn’t know they were moving amusement safety. That makes no sense. I guess none of this does.

 

[GoofGoof]

The reason I said makes no sense is that ride safety and safety inspections are already governed by the state in FL but there is an exception for parks that have over 1,000 employees and also have their own in house inspectors. So is that law superseded or just for Disney and not everyone else?

 

[drnilescrane]

Well….yeah. I can’t disagree. The reason I said makes no sense is that ride safety and safety inspections are already governed by the state in FL but there is an exception for parks that have over 1,000 employees and also have their own in house inspectors. So is that law superseded or just for Disney and not everyone else?

Feels like they are trying to maintain the fiction that it's the "Central Florida Theme Park Oversight District"

 

[Disstevefan1]

The tail don't wag the dog.

Permits like these are formalities and administrative overhead once the actual criteria stuff is done. It's not like the permits are some fleeting window of opportunity to get something. They are just administrative overhead. The 5% isn't going to force the 95% to change.

Well, I am hoping for the best but expecting the worst.

Let's see what happens.

 

[The Mom]

If you are unable to post without crossing the line into opinions about political/social issues than please do not post.

 

[flynnibus]

The reason I said makes no sense is that ride safety and safety inspections are already governed by the state in FL but there is an exception for parks that have over 1,000 employees and also have their own in house inspectors. So is that law superseded or just for Disney and not everyone else?

TBD - like I mentioned when highlighting the text from the bill the other day, I'm not sure how this power would interact with existing state level oversight.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yep. They could really interfere with all aspects of the operation of the resort. And they could use the threat of this interference to attempt to control all aspects of the company’s output. Not simply public statements like the one that started this, but also film and television output, news reporting, theme park content, training and hiring practices, and the overall social guidance of the company.

This could also lead to a very noticeable and significant loss of the “Disney bubble”. The implications of the state/governor having full control of roads, resources, and land within the district has not been adequately discussed in this thread.

This is exactly why I keep saying that this is not actually about one issue or statement. It’s about a whole swath of issues. The board has no motivation for reasonableness.

I would agree that sending in the fire department or a new ride safety department to shut things down during the day or night sounds extreme and too blatant, but there are easy ways to make it sound reasonable. The district could require something as little as more paperwork on ride maintenance which would be an additional cost. You could have random inspections. Requiring the fire department to do more random inspections and clear out a building if they find an issue related to life safety as a precaution while they take a more thorough look seems fairly reasonable and exactly in line with providing more oversight, but in practice is a low bar that could easily be triggered by a misplaced ECV.

 

[flynnibus]

..basically the problem with any regulation that is ran by people you can't escalate around or motivate yourself. You're stuck with whatever they give you.. and in this case the board really is only accountable to the gov. So what, you gotta go grovel to the gov to lean on his goons to stop being so difficult?

Now you see how it will play out if done this way. The board can play difficult while still keeping the image of being impartial.. while not actually being impartial.

 

[sedati]

Now I'm actually hoping this escalates in a way that forces other companies to take a side. With silence being a form of acceptance, that may begin to not sit well with the employees and customers of the other big players in town. What then?

 

[GhostHost1000]

Now I'm actually hoping this escalates in a way that forces other companies to take a side. With silence being a form of acceptance, that may begin to not sit well with the employees and customers of the other big players in town. What then?

Companies should not take a side. Individuals can, but companies should focus on running their business. Companies taking any side publicly will likely cause more issues than it solves with the country and likely some employees, shareholders, and customers divided on various issues.

 

[GoofGoof]

Now I'm actually hoping this escalates in a way that forces other companies to take a side. With silence being a form of acceptance, that may begin to not sit well with the employees and customers of the other big players in town. What then?

They already have. Comcast/Universal was one of the corporations who signed the petition that was posted here many, many pages back that denounced the same types of bills Disney spoke out against. So did most of the major airlines and hotel chains, a number of restaurant companies and most of the cell phone and tech companies. The only difference is Disney was singled out for political gain. If people wanted to boycott every company who “has an opinion” they’d be living in a cave hunting their own food.

 

[Dranth]

Companies should not take a side. Individuals can, but companies should focus on running their business. Companies taking any side publicly will likely cause more issues than it solves with the country and likely some employees, shareholders, and customers divided on various issues.

SCOTUS disagrees with you.

 

[JoeCamel]

Companies should not take a side. Individuals can, but companies should focus on running their business. Companies taking any side publicly will likely cause more issues than it solves with the country and likely some employees, shareholders, and customers divided on various issues.

Unless you can find five Supremes to agree with you and overturn their previous ruling your "should not" has been deemed "they may" by the court. Dead horse at this time

 

[lazyboy97o]

Now I'm actually hoping this escalates in a way that forces other companies to take a side. With silence being a form of acceptance, that may begin to not sit well with the employees and customers of the other big players in town. What then?

Unfortunately misinformation about the District remains rather widespread, which complicates getting people to be concerned.

 

[GhostHost1000]

Unless you can find five Supremes to agree with you and overturn their pervious ruling your "should not" has been deemed "they may" by the court. Dead horse at this time

I’m not saying it’s a law, “they may” do whatever they want, I’m just stating my opinion and from my business experience, If I were running a company of any size, I would stay away from anything unnecessary that could cause any problems with the business, the shareholders, the employees, the customers, and its overall image.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I’m not saying it’s a law, “they may” do whatever they want, I’m just stating my opinion and from my experience, If I were running a company of any size, I would stay away from anything unnecessary that could cause any problems with the business, the shareholders, the employees, the customers, and its overall image.

Supporting interference in the running of other businesses is not going to protect your business from interference.