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

[UNCgolf]

I've done a little research into what really changes with this. In short, it's not much.

It seems to boil down to a few main things, in addition to removing the ability of RCID to build a commercial airport or a nuclear power plant, which was leftover from the 1967 agreement when they thought they were going to actually build EPCOT instead of a new Marvel roller coaster.

Correct me if I'm missing anything, but it seems the changes to RCID come down to these main bullet points, in no particular order:

• Renaming it from RCID to CFTOD.
• Board of Supervisors in charge of district, appointed by Governor and State Senate, with "No one who has worked for a theme park complex within three years will be permitted to serve, nor are landowners in the district permitted to serve." Board members will now be unpaid positions, with no perks given to them from Disney like comp tickets and DVC discounts.
• Current taxes, bonds and debts all remain the same as RCID and all are still Disney's responsibility to pay.
• New bylaws remove a lot of outdated 1960's terminology and phrasing, like references to "closed-circuit television".

What am I missing here? What's the big deal?

Is all this excitement just over that DeSantis ended a sweetheart land/tax deal for Disney and now DeSantis and the current Senate gets to choose the first Board of Supervisors, and future unknown Florida Governors and Senators will be choosing future Board members?

Well A. he didn't end any kind of sweetheart tax deal for Disney (because one never existed in the first place and thus there wasn't one to end), and B. my concerns (and I think a lot of other people's) have little or nothing to do with Disney itself and everything to do with government overreach and punishment of those considered a political enemy.
That's why it's so dangerous.

 

[TP2000]

You know the answers to these questions already. It’s a bigger issue than Disney.

No, I don't.

Until about two hours ago I had been led to believe by a few online reports several months ago that the local taxpayers in Orange and Osceola counties would be on the hook for lots of new taxes to pay for stuff RCID used to pay for, like ambulance and fire services. But it appears all of that taxation and service provisions remain the same and are still paid for by Disney.

Now I have read the taxes and bonds from RCID all remain the same. The ability for Disney to build weird 1960's stuff like nuclear power plants and jetports and "closed-circuit television systems" on its property is limited or revoked. The ability for Disney to operate as it sees fit all its theme parks and hotels and hospitality services on its property remains the same. The name of the governing Board changes, and those Board members can no longer be paid and perked up by Disney's bank accounts.

So what's the big deal? It seems to be fairly rational government oversight of the state's largest employer. A system of checks and balances, if you will.

Or am I missing some hidden component of this new government board that has yet to be revealed?

What's the Worst Case Scenario here people are worried about? Because I don't see any big deal in the summary texts or actual Bill language that I've read so far.

 

[LittleBuford]

No, I don't.

Until about two hours ago I had been led to believe by a few online reports several months ago that the local taxpayers in Orange and Osceola counties would be on the hook for lots of new taxes to pay for stuff RCID used to pay for, like ambulance and fire services. But it appears all of that taxation and service provisions remain the same and are still paid for by Disney.

Now I have read the taxes and bonds from RCID all remain the same. The ability for Disney to build weird 1960's stuff like nuclear power plants and jetports and "closed-circuit television systems" on its property is limited or revoked. The ability for Disney to operate as it sees fit all its theme parks and hotels and hospitality services on its property remains the same. The name of the governing Board changes, and those Board members can no longer be paid and perked up by Disney's bank accounts.

So what's the big deal? It seems to be fairly rational government oversight of the state's largest employer. A system of checks and balances, if you will.

Or am I missing some hidden component of this new government board that has yet to be revealed?

@UNCgolf answered your questions better than I could. I hope he’s cleared up your confusion.

 

[mkt]

Universal Studios and Publix and Darden Corporation don't get to operate in their own little bubble, so why should Disney?

Because when Disney bought in Florida, there was no public or private entity in the state of Florida with the resources to do what Disney did with the land.

Beyond that, everything Disney did with their land, was done to a standard higher than Florida's, all while paying extra taxes for the privilege.

 

[TP2000]

@UNCgolf answered your questions better than I could. I hope he’s cleared up your confusion.

He posted that as I was responding to you, so I've just responded to his points there. I still don't see it.

What do you see here that is going to change the way WDW operates for its customers and employees? Much less a change to the operation that would be troubling somehow?

I can't find anything yet. Especially after I learned just a few hours ago that the taxation and debts all remain unchanged. It's still 1967 when it comes to taxation and what Disney pays for to keep this tourist complex going.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Because when Disney bought in Florida, there was no public or private entity in the state of Florida with the resources to do what Disney did with the land.

Beyond that, everything Disney did with their land, was done to a standard higher than Florida's, all while paying extra taxes for the privilege.

This doesn’t matter. The facts don’t matter. It will just be an endless stream of falsehoods and misrepresentations spammed over and over again.

 

[mkt]

What do you see here that is going to change the way WDW operates for its customers and employees? Much less a change to the operation that would be troubling somehow?

The only noticeable changes I can foresee are projects in undeveloped land taking longer to complete, and infrastructure maintenance taking longer to complete and being done to "normal" government standards vs Disney standards (ie slower).

 

[TP2000]

A few points.

1- This shows that Florida cannot be trusted as a partner to honor its agreements for future businesses that may wish to expand in the state

That could be the case. It would also be up to current or future businesses to consider. Publix, Darden, etc. as existing big Florida businesses probably don't mind that Disney doesn't get to elect its own governing body for itself any longer, since they never got to do that themselves.

But future businesses that might consider moving to Florida? They'll have to decide if the laws on the books currently help them or hurt them compared to whatever state they currently are in, and go from there.

2- Out of the 5 people selected to the board, only two have potentially relevant experience.

The new board seems heavily tilted to people experienced with tax laws and corporate governance. That seems wise.

Disney's own Board of Directors is the same. For example, Mary Barra from GM never worked at Storybook Land Canal Boats, and Mike Parker from Nike never worked at Tomorrowland Terrace. Judith Estrin was a tech geek her whole life and has no hotel or theme park experience, not even so much as a breakfast buffet hostess. But they all still serve on Disney's Board of Directors, and allegedly make good decisions for the Walt Disney Company.

3- The governor has clearly said that this was retaliation for Disney's criticism. First amendment anyone?

Seems that would be up to the lawyers. But I'm not seeing a free speech issue here, more like a corporate governance issue.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The only noticeable changes I can foresee are projects in undeveloped land taking longer to complete, and infrastructure maintenance taking longer to complete and being done to "normal" government standards vs Disney standards (ie slower).

The district has control over projects on developed land. Things such as a like-for-like replacement of building elements or even a simple repainting can and do go through the building department for review and approval.

 

[mkt]

The district has control over projects on developed land. Things such as a like-for-like replacement of building elements or even a simple repainting can and do go through the building department for review and approval.

You've clearly never worked with government run by hyperpoliticized entities... like this.

Part of the reason I've been so vocal about this is that DeSantis's actions, and his appointees, remind me of the developing world/third world crap I dealt with for the half of my life outside of the US. I am not a fan of it, and this doesn't end well for anyone.

 

[mkt]

But future businesses that might consider moving to Florida? They'll have to decide if the laws on the books currently help them or hurt them compared to whatever state they currently are in, and go from there.

Now they also have to consider if whether or not the existing laws will be changed in retaliation for them practicing their legal right.

The new board seems heavily tilted to people experienced with tax laws and corporate governance. That seems wise.

Did we see the same resumes and linkedin profiles? All 5 are his political backers, 3 are major donors. Out of the five, only Peri and Aungst Jr potentially bring useful experience.

Disney's own Board of Directors is the same. For example, Mary Barra from GM never worked at Storybook Land Canal Boats, and Mike Parker from Nike never worked at Tomorrowland Terrace. But they still serve on Disney's Board of Directors, and allegedly make good decisions for the Walt Disney Company.

They know how to run businesses and aren't political ideologues.

Seems that would be up to the lawyers. But I'm not seeing a free speech issue here, more like a corporate governance issue.

Judges, not attorneys. Judges decide.

 

[TP2000]

The only noticeable changes I can foresee are projects in undeveloped land taking longer to complete, and infrastructure maintenance taking longer to complete and being done to "normal" government standards vs Disney standards (ie slower).

Twenty five years ago I would share your concern about something like that.

But in the last few decades Disney has become really good at dragging its feet on nearly everything. It takes them years and years to build a cloned coaster. They announce big projects and show swanky artistic sketches to the public, and then quietly cancel the project and forget about it. How long did it take them to turn Pleasure Island into Hyperion Wharf Disney Springs? Seven years? Eight years? And that was just a remodeled outdoor mall for goshsakes.

The newly autonomous governing board in charge of WDW property won't make much difference in how long it takes to open Tiana Mountain or build a new DVC tower, in my amateur opinion. Disney already drags stuff out for years and years on their own.

 

[mkt]

Disney already drags stuff out for years and years on their own.

If you think it's bad now, expect it to get worse.

 

[Chi84]

That could be the case. It would also be up to current or future businesses to consider. Publix, Darden, etc. as existing big Florida businesses probably don't mind that Disney doesn't get to elect its own governing body for itself any longer, since they never got to do that themselves.

But future businesses that might consider moving to Florida? They'll have to decide if the laws on the books currently help them or hurt them compared to whatever state they currently are in, and go from there.



The new board seems heavily tilted to people experienced with tax laws and corporate governance. That seems wise.

Disney's own Board of Directors is the same. For example, Mary Barra from GM never worked at Storybook Land Canal Boats, and Mike Parker from Nike never worked at Tomorrowland Terrace. But they still serve on Disney's Board of Directors, and allegedly make good decisions for the Walt Disney Company.



Seems that would be up to the lawyers. But I'm not seeing a free speech issue here, more like a corporate governance issue.

The issue people have is that the legislators’ express purpose for doing this to punish Disney for publicly opposing a controversial law.

The fact that the RCID legislation didn’t actually do much isn’t surprising since its sole purpose was to get political points. But it was clearly intended to convey the idea that those who disagree with the government risk retribution.

 

[TP2000]

Judges, not attorneys. Judges decide.

First you need an attorney to file a case. Disney has not filed a lawsuit claiming the Florida state government violated its First Amendment rights. And while I'm no lawyer, I can't see how that would be a valid case to begin with. For anyone.

I could see Disney's attorneys filing a case about overturning the RCID dissolution/renaming. But Florida's government also has attorneys and professionals who are adept at case law and constitutional law. I imagine there's a bunch of attorneys working for the state in Tallahassee that already went through this legislation with a fine toothed comb.

There was clearly clauses and abilities in the original law from 1967 to have it overturned and/or amended. As we've just seen.

The judges only get to work once the attorney's go to court. So far... no attorneys.

 

[Fordlover]

The problem for Disney is RCID allowed them to operate in a certain way that was good for business and propped up their whole company at times.

Now they are subject to meddling. And if that was the deal…they would have NEVER bought the land in the first place

And if they wouldn’t haven chosen a side, they would still have RCID right where it was.

 

[JoeCamel]

I’m aware, I’m just pointing out that the district has influence over a lot more than just undeveloped land. People keep narrowing in on certain things and missing the breadth of the actual authority. The district could absolutely interfere in things that are already done.

They could ban fireworks in the district......

 

[GoofGoof]

That could be the case. It would also be up to current or future businesses to consider. Publix, Darden, etc. as existing big Florida businesses probably don't mind that Disney doesn't get to elect its own governing body for itself any longer, since they never got to do that themselves.

But future businesses that might consider moving to Florida? They'll have to decide if the laws on the books currently help them or hurt them compared to whatever state they currently are in, and go from there.



The new board seems heavily tilted to people experienced with tax laws and corporate governance. That seems wise.

Disney's own Board of Directors is the same. For example, Mary Barra from GM never worked at Storybook Land Canal Boats, and Mike Parker from Nike never worked at Tomorrowland Terrace. Judith Estrin was a tech geek her whole life and has no hotel or theme park experience, not even so much as a breakfast buffet hostess. But they all still serve on Disney's Board of Directors, and allegedly make good decisions for the Walt Disney Company.



Seems that would be up to the lawyers. But I'm not seeing a free speech issue here, more like a corporate governance issue.

I suggest going back and reading pages and pages of discussion on this. I didn’t know much about how RCID worked or what its point was until digging into some details and reading stuff here. Why would Publix have any desire to have a special tax district? One for each store they operate? That makes no sense. The district provides municipal services to Disney‘s property which is larger than Manhattan. Disney pays local taxes to Orange and Osceola counties at the same rate as any other taxpayer in the county including Publix or Universal or some guy living in a private residence. In addition to the full set of local county real estate taxes Disney pays an ADDITIONAL tax assessment to RCID that covers specific services like utilities, roads and EMS services (fire and EMT). So RCID was never a tax break for Disney. What it did was allow Disney to control the level of services typically provided by the local government and the benefit for the local residents outside of the district is they didn’t need to foot the bill for those services. So RCID fire department was not paid for by Orange County taxpayers. The fire department who responds to Universal or Publix is. Same goes for roads and other municipal services.

So to answer the question of what changed, Disney lost control. So now a board appointed by the governor will collect additional taxes from Disney and decide how those tax dollars will be spent. They also increased control over stuff like attraction safety and inspections which is now under the new district. So if the board is properly motivated they can close attractions, close entire parks or make it difficult to open new attractions. The other thing that is lost is control of vendors. So for example when Disney controlled RCID they could pick whatever contractors they preferred to build a parking garage or new roads or pick up garbage. Now the board decides. So with this new anti-woke agenda they can disqualify any vendor who requires diversity training or has inclusion or diversity practices when hiring. The board are also political appointees who can now pay it forward by offering the road paving contracts to another “friend of the program”.

 

[TP2000]

None of the questions you're asking are relevant to what I said. The reasoning behind the bill is the reason for outrage; it does not matter if the bill is rational and legally sound.

Okay. I hadn't been following this topic as a Westerner for the past few months. It wasn't in the headlines out here.

What I had heard back before Christmas was that the local taxpayers were going to be on the hook for a bunch of taxes that Disney used to pay for via the RCID. That seemed alarming to me, but it was apparently false, or misinformation, or at best sloppy reporting on legislation still in progress.

Then the last few hours I got up to speed on this Florida topic, and here we are. And after reading a bit (still not an expert on this topic, but more informed than I was four hours ago), it seems to be much ado about nothing legislatively. It seems to be sound corporate governance taking over the RCID, something that probably should have happened at least 30 years ago.

 

[mkt]

First you need an attorney to file a case.

Well, no... you don't. They just make it easier.

I know. There's an attorney sitting to the right of me annoyed that I've spent more time on this board today than with her.

There's also the ones I grew up with. Namely my parents. And one of my siblings.

Not me though, I decided to save my soul. But being raised in that environment, while not making me an attorney by any stretch of the imagination, makes me also not an absolute idiot when reading laws and court decisions.

Anyway, anyone can file suit. No attorney needed. And filing some suits are shockingly easy. Wanna kill an afternoon? File a small claims suit against an entity that wronged you.

Disney has not filed a lawsuit claiming the Florida state government violated its First Amendment rights.

They have time. It's not like they have a 12 hour statute of limitations.

But Florida's government also has attorneys and professionals who are adept at case law and constitutional law. I imagine there's a bunch of attorneys working for the state in Tallahassee that already went through this legislation with a fine toothed comb.

For the pittance the state of Florida pays their attorneys? Doubt it. This is being billed out to private law firms.

There was clearly clauses and abilities in the original law from 1967 to have it overturned and/or amended. As we've just seen.

No. They wrote a new law that replaced the old one. That's how it works.