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

[el_super]

So you don’t agree with government attacking free speech, but you’re ok with it because Disney is bad and they haven’t made a legal challenge (yet).

I'm OK with Disney losing control of RCID because I disagree with the whole setup of RCID.

Thinking that Disney is being punished by loosing control of RCID is admitting, at some level, thier retention of control over their own oversight has a great amount of value to them. This is where you get into the murky area of what value RCID has and whether a corporation should have that power.

So from my perspective, where RCID was mostly a liability to Disney, they aren't really being punished by having it removed. It was something that was always going to be on the table.

Has Disney's speech actually been changed by what happened? Have they singled any creative content decisions that represent a shift in what they were producing? Did Disney call HRC and ask for their donations back? As far as I know, that hasn't happened yet.

 

[GimpYancIent]

Understand that, however I’m making the argument from the perspective of how we define a person in this country. Regardless of who speaks on behalf of a corporation, regardless of how that corporation may or may not be retaliated against for the actions of the people that work there, that corporation made up of all those individuals is still one entity with all the same first amendment rights as the people who work there.

Nice rhetoric, point, the people working there are not being retaliated against. All the people working there do not agree with the corporation's statements, the people working there have a right to their own opinions and statement. It's the corporate management that works to override and suppress workers free speech.

 

[BringMeTheHoriz]

Nice rhetoric, point, the people working there are not being retaliated against. All the people working there do not agree with the corporation's statements, the people working there have a right to their own opinions and statement. It's the corporate management that works to override and suppress workers free speech.

Correct, it is not the people working there being retaliated against.

But then the corporation’s singular collective voice, regardless of whether or not everyone who works there agrees with it or not, is subject to the same protections as all those individual’s voices. That singular corporate voice is what’s being retaliated against. Again, the nuisance is why I hate the ruling but I don’t make laws, just try and abide by them haha!

 

[mightynine]

I'm OK with Disney losing control of RCID because I disagree with the whole setup of RCID.

Thinking that Disney is being punished by loosing control of RCID is admitting, at some level, thier retention of control over their own oversight has a great amount of value to them. This is where you get into the murky area of what value RCID has and whether a corporation should have that power.

So from my perspective, where RCID was mostly a liability to Disney, they aren't really being punished by having it removed. It was something that was always going to be on the table.

Has Disney's speech actually been changed by what happened? Have they singled any creative content decisions that represent a shift in what they were producing? Did Disney call HRC and ask for their donations back? As far as I know, that hasn't happened yet.

Again, we got it - you're fine with an attack on free speech (the move to dissolve RCID came after the statement made by Chappie, 'member? There was no discussion of it before) as long as it gets rid of a thing you didn't like.

 

[el_super]

What is a specific thing in RCDI do disagree with?

I don't agree with the idea of a company being granted rights to tax (or not be taxed) as they see fit.

Instead of creating RCID, should Disney have kept the entire RCDI property as private property with private roads? Just put the toll plazas at the edge of the entire thing?

Disney could have worked with Florida and the county government to get what they neeeded, without setting up RCID. Florida gave up too much granting them the RCID. The idea of local/state government throwing money at corporations isn't really new, but it's still something I am personally against.

We get it. You hate Disney's speech on assorted topics, and hate the way the company is run. Just not enough to stop using their products, stop discussion them online, or remove them from your life. Tough choice there.

hahahaha really? You think I hate the company and the way it's run? That's .... different.

I'm generally happy that Disney is choosing not to fight this. I have no issues with Disney contributing to pro-LGBT+ groups and standing up for their Cast Members in Florida. I don't think that this is a punishment and I generally don't think that their direction is going to change at all by what is happening in Florida. If they have to produce movies to a global audience, they will continue to promote themes and stories that support what the majority of people want to see (and that's apparently not what the governor of Florida wants to see).

Personally, I have already made a decision not to visit Florida and support that state after their whole pandemic response.

Where I absolutely disagree, is this idea that my inalienable right to free speech has to be secured by a corporation riding in on a white horse. To be fair though, I am not a resident of Florida, so if things really are that bad, then the people in Florida need to be trusted to make their own good decisions.

 

[DocMcHulk]

Conspiracy Theory: Can this new board force Disney to pay off the debt that the district holds? I'm wondering if this new board can be used to "punish" Disney by forcing them to shell out $1 billion with little notice.

 

[mkt]

Disney could have worked with Florida and the county government to get what they neeeded, without setting up RCID. Florida gave up too much granting them the RCID. The idea of local/state government throwing money at corporations isn't really new, but it's still something I am personally against.

Back in the 70s Florida - outside of a few urban centers - was mostly a backwater.

Do you believe the state had the resources to do what Disney did on their land?

 

[peter11435]

I don't agree with the idea of a company being granted rights to tax (or not be taxed) as they see fit.

So after nearly 500 pages of this discussion you still don’t understand how the tax situation worked.

 

[flynnibus]

Conspiracy Theory: Can this new board force Disney to pay off the debt that the district holds? I'm wondering if this new board can be used to "punish" Disney by forcing them to shell out $1 billion with little notice.

No

These are bonds - funded by revnues and taxes. Taxes that are capped in what they can be.

 

[el_super]

So after nearly 500 pages of this discussion you still don’t understand how the tax situation worked.

OK... So how does the tax situation work? I know that Orange County has been at odds with Reedy Creek for decades and the two always seem to disagree about what is and is not taxed appropriately. My understanding was that the district allowed them to avoid certain taxes that the country would normally leverage and that they are also entitled to certain other tax free benefits.

Probably not all that much if Disney is willing to give it up now, but certainly enough that Disney kept RCID in place for nearly 60 years.

 

[MisterPenguin]

I don't agree with the idea of a company being granted rights to tax (or not be taxed) as they see fit.

Now, see, you bought into the false narrative and lies that the governor and legislature lied about.

WDW pays its fair share of county taxes in exactly the same way Universal does.

WDW does *NOT* have the power to tax themselves for county services. Which they don't receive, even tho they *are* paying taxes to the county.

They "tax" themselves thru the RCID to pay **above and beyond county taxes** for the infrastructure of their own property. Which normally would be provided for by the county.

So WDW is paying county taxes and not getting county services; but the taxes they pay is going to pay for county infrastructure... which Universal enjoys.

So, they pay taxes *twice*.

So, poor Universal, right? They don't have this same sweetheart deal, right? Well... the county is paying for part of the new roads servicing Epic Universe. And Universal is paying the rest. So, for this project, Universal is paying twice (once to the county for ordinary taxes and again to pay for the road it wants). And Disney's taxes to the county are also paying for part if it! So, in the end, Universal is getting the same special service from the county that WDW gets from the RCID.

The RCID was created by the legislature because when WDW was being built, the county, being mostly farmland and swamps, couldn't afford to create the infrastructure for WDW. And so, they gave WDW the ability to raise funds through bonds and run their own county-like district. And, on top of that, pay the counties taxes for providing nothing to them.

Some sweetheart deal, huh?

The governor and legislators who created this bill very explicitly said they were punishing Disney. Which is a clear violation of 1st Amendment rights. Then they added the lie that WDW had a sweetheart no-taxation deal... which was a lie, in order to put a veneer of legitimacy to the whole thing.

Don't believe their lies.

 

[jinx8402]

OK... So how does the tax situation work? I know that Orange County has been at odds with Reedy Creek for decades and the two always seem to disagree about what is and is not taxed appropriately. My understanding was that the district allowed them to avoid certain taxes that the country would normally leverage and that they are also entitled to certain other tax free benefits.

Probably not all that much if Disney is willing to give it up now, but certainly enough that Disney kept RCID in place for nearly 60 years.

Disney disagree's with the county's assesment of the value of their land. The same exact thing I am able to do with my town over the assesment. Of course, that changes how much they pay, but does not change the fact that they are taxed at the same rate as every other land holder in the county even though they don't even use all of the county services.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

It makes all the difference here. Disney isn't fighting back because there is no guarantee they will win and the political costs and brand image for Disney is not worth the fight. That wouldn't be true for the city of Miami would it? Ignoring the context doesn't automatically make two things the same.

Ok, so this situation is actually WORSE than the Miami hypothetical example since there is a clear chilling of speech AND a chilling of their desire/ability to fight it in court.

 

[MisterPenguin]

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

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:

• 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.

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

You're missing the thing we keep telling you and you refuse to address:

The governor and legislator passed this bill with the intent to punish Disney.

And the board appointed by the governor can do that by pretty much shutting down whatever they wanted if Disney were to ever speak up against the governor and legislators and their agenda.

 

[MisterPenguin]

Disney disagree's with the county's assesment of the value of their land. The same exact thing I am able to do with my town over the assesment. Of course, that changes how much they pay, but does not change the fact that they are taxed at the same rate as every other land holder in the county even though they don't even use all of the county services.

Not to mention that Universal keeps joining Disney in suing the county appraiser over the evaluation of their properties.

This is not related to the RCID at all.

 

[mmascari]

I don't agree with the idea of a company being granted rights to tax (or not be taxed) as they see fit.

Who do you think RCID is taxing?
What tax do you think is being avoided because RCID exists?

(None of which will change with the current law.)

Disney could have worked with Florida and the county government to get what they neeeded, without setting up RCID. Florida gave up too much granting them the RCID. The idea of local/state government throwing money at corporations isn't really new, but it's still something I am personally against.

What local/state money do you think setting up RCID threw at Disney?

Florida DID work with Disney to figure out a way to create, and continuing to maintain still, the public services they needed. That way was setting up a special tax district to provide those services with the ability to tax above and beyond the existing county taxes to pay for those services. They set it up so that only the property within the district is required to pay those taxes.

Would you have preferred the entire county funded those services?

Do you even know what parts of RCID you disagree with that is factually correct? Or, do you just disagree with the incorrect reporting that it grants them tax breaks?

 

[peter11435]

OK... So how does the tax situation work? I know that Orange County has been at odds with Reedy Creek for decades and the two always seem to disagree about what is and is not taxed appropriately. My understanding was that the district allowed them to avoid certain taxes that the country would normally leverage and that they are also entitled to certain other tax free benefits.

Probably not all that much if Disney is willing to give it up now, but certainly enough that Disney kept RCID in place for nearly 60 years.

It doesn’t work anything like that.

First of all the county and Reedy Creek have not been at odds with each other. Disney has disagreed with the county over the appraisals of many of their properties. Which is their right to do. They have typically won those fights.

Disney is required to pay all taxes to the county just like any other taxpayer. The district does not exempt Disney from paying taxes.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Disney disagree's with the county's assesment of the value of their land. The same exact thing I am able to do with my town over the assesment. Of course, that changes how much they pay, but does not change the fact that they are taxed at the same rate as every other land holder in the county even though they don't even use all of the county services.

Florida also requires that the tax be paid, in full, before the assessment can be challenged.

 

[mkt]

OK... So how does the tax situation work?

Disney pays Orange/Osceola Counties and Reedy Creek.

They're double taxed.

 

[Chi84]

Nice rhetoric, point, the people working there are not being retaliated against. All the people working there do not agree with the corporation's statements, the people working there have a right to their own opinions and statement. It's the corporate management that works to override and suppress workers free speech.

The first amendment only applies to government actions. Corporations can suppress their workers’ speech all they want. If you don’t like it you work elsewhere. (Some exceptions apply)