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

[Chi84]

That is debatable. Either way, your response purposely pivots from the fact that RCID was not created for "Epcot and it's possibility of residents". It was created to build up the area Disney owned, and not cripple Orange & Osceola county as they didn't have the ability to provide municipal services to Disney. As I mentioned above, the closest powerline was 15 miles away from the district. Disney pays 86% of RCID taxes.

I'll continue with actual proof of anything I'm asserting.

In 2004, the FL Office of Program Policy and Government Accountability drafted a report, "The primary purpose of the special act was to grant the district a wide range of governmental powers to be used to promote recreation-oriented projects, economic development, and tourism within district boundaries. The Legislature determined that realization of these objectives meets a valid public purpose that would benefit “all properties, persons, and enterprises within the district.”

Oh, does that expressly state that they intent was not Epcot? Yes it does.

Board/Landowner Qualms:
"Historically, each board member has been deeded approximately five acres of land by an affiliate of the Walt Disney World Co." and "each landowner is entitled to one vote for each acre of land owned; as the largest landowner, the Walt Disney World Co. is entitled to the most votes."

Oh wait, this states that in the act the FL House you just mentioned passed in 1967, that the board would be made up of the largest landowners. Can you prove that didn't know Disney would always be the largest landowner?

From the same report (2004), RCID had generated nearly a BILLION dollars worth of public infrastructure. FOR FREE (paid for by Disney)

"RCID is proud of its role in advancing the state’s economic growth by facilitating the development of a world-class tourist destination. Since its creation by the Florida Legislature in 1967, RCID has facilitated $785 million worth of public infrastructure – including roads, utilities and wastewater treatment facilities – at no cost to the residents of Central Florida."

This is a little bias as it comes from RCID, but in the same report "In conclusion, the establishment of RCID may historically prove to be one of the most beneficial economic development initiatives ever negotiated by the Florida Legislature. RCID strongly discourages consideration of any option that could interfere with this success."

I can do this all day, but I have to hop on a Zoom meeting, so I'll be back in an hour or so.

Thanks for all the supporting authorities. Unfortunately, I doubt they will make a difference to people who are being disingenuous.

 

[el_super]

Iger could have chose to say nothing or given a bland statement.

He didn't. Which tells me he's very confident Disney will prevail in this.

Iger's statement wasn't all that bold, and there was an odd pivot halfway thru where he shifted the focus from Disney, to his own personal thoughts on the matter. Iger may personally think what the governor is doing is wrong, but Disney as a corporate entity still wants to work with Florida and will still be doing business in Florida regardless. The statement here is tempered a bit, which does benefit them as it appears they are being the rational adult in this dispute. But unlike their other threats, as they made against Georgia before, they cannot threaten to pull out of the state or pull back spending. Despite all the other outside reasons why Lake Nona doesn't make sense, Disney still hasn't announced a move to pull out of that project.

Disney's position here comes across to me as more akin to "please stop hitting me" rather than fighting back.

 

[el_super]

RCID wasn't implemented to just enable EPCOT. Stop the freaking revisionist lectures.

I love the implication here that the one person who decided to research this and write a book on it, now must be peddling misinformation because it doesn't align with the current political agenda.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I love the implication here that the one person who decided to research this and write a book on it, now must be peddling misinformation because it doesn't align with the current political agenda.

There is plenty more than just one book, not to mention primary sources that are easily available.

 

[Chi84]

I love the implication here that the one person who decided to research this and write a book on it, now must be peddling misinformation because it doesn't align with the current political agenda.

He does have some interesting thoughts on the subject.

DeSantis’s Disney oversight board ‘a combustible mix’ of culture warriors: Expert

Richard Fogelsong, Disney Historian and “Married to the Mouse: Walt Disney World and Orlando” Author, joins Yahoo Finance Live to examine Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' new tourism oversight board, how appointed members clash with Disney's corporate and employee culture, and CEO Bob Iger's...

finance.yahoo.com

 

[peter11435]

Can you really state unequivocally that every member of the Florida house that voted to pass the Reedy Creek act in 1967, believed that Disney would ALWAYS be the sole landowner?

If they didn’t they were ignorant. That was always the plan and the company was not shy about that detail .

 

[peter11435]

I love the implication here that the one person who decided to research this and write a book on it, now must be peddling misinformation because it doesn't align with the current political agenda.

There’s plenty of documented evidence including in the 1967 charter, the Supreme Court ruling in 1968, and subsequent messaging from the state and legislature over the decades that the districts primary intention was to facilitate tourism, not to facilitate a futuristic city.

 

[Tha Realest]

There is plenty more than just one book, not to mention primary sources that are easily available.

One wonderful primarcy source is TWDC’s own EPCOT film, which was shown to Florida legislators a few months before they signed the RCIA and set out Walt’s intentions of building an Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow.

One quote from the man himself: “In Disney World, about 20,000 people will actually live in EPCOT. Their homes will be built in ways that permit ease of change so that new products may continuously be demonstrated. Their schools will welcome new ideas so that everyone who grows up in EPCOT will have skills in pace with today’s world.”

 

[lazyboy97o]

One wonderful primarcy source is TWDC’s own EPCOT film, which was shown to Florida legislators a few months before they signed the RCIA and set out Walt’s intentions of building an Experimental Prototype Community of Tomorrow.

One quote from the man himself: “In Disney World, about 20,000 people will actually live in EPCOT. Their homes will be built in ways that permit ease of change so that new products may continuously be demonstrated. Their schools will welcome new ideas so that everyone who grows up in EPCOT will have skills in pace with today’s world.”

So? The legislature didn’t just watch a movie and then pass a law.

 

[flynnibus]

If they didn’t they were ignorant. That was always the plan and the company was not shy about that detail .

The correct response to that post is... "Can you really state unequivocally that every member of the Florida house that voted to pass HB 9B, believed that they were not targeting Disney in response to their activism?"

 

[flynnibus]

See the problem is here... we expect people to actually read a book or research before drawing conclusions.

What we need here is a comic book... Donald Moves to Florida... that can outline this for people.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

So? The legislature didn’t just watch a movie and then pass a law.

If they did, they would have done more research than the current group passing legislation here.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I can find a dozen posts saying the world is flat, so what?

You want to go research it feel free to go pull the microfiche from that time frame but they were digitizing things for the internet back then. But go ahead, if you are too dense listen to reason.

You have been provided sources that are available online.

 

[mmascari]

I can find a dozen posts saying the world is flat, so what?

You can find a dozen posts saying the world is flat explicitly showing references to back that up?

You seem to have missed that part.

You want to go research it feel free to go pull the microfiche from that time frame but they were digitizing things for the internet back then. But go ahead, if you are too dense listen to reason.

It's not my claim, it is your unsupported assertion.

In direct conflict of many references showing the reverse. Using "do your own research" isn't very convincing that you're not just making up stuff.

 

[el_super]

There’s plenty of documented evidence including in the 1967 charter, the Supreme Court ruling in 1968, and subsequent messaging from the state and legislature over the decades that the districts primary intention was to facilitate tourism, not to facilitate a futuristic city.

Primary by what definition? Please post actual sources. The enabling legislation seems to suggest that both goals were just as important.

 

[el_super]

So? The legislature didn’t just watch a movie and then pass a law.

How do you know?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Primary by what definition? Please post actual sources. The enabling legislation seems to suggest that both goals were just as important.

Then go read the court decision.

 

[lazyboy97o]

How do you know?

Because the timeline of events is well documented.

 

[bpiper]

Given what we just saw with the union negotiations, I'm having trouble believing Disney would spend $250 million of their own money to make the commute of CMs and third-party participants easier.

The problem is that traffic congestion is causing cast to be late for work. Resort busses are being caught in the backups and all the CP busses coming from Flamingo crossing are caught in the traffic jam making them late for work. Time is money.

 

[el_super]

Then go read the court decision.

Which one? The 1968 one? I pulled up a summary from here: https://law.justia.com/cases/florida/supreme-court/1968/37569-0.html

In the present case we are convinced that the measures and improvements contemplated by the District are designed to encourage and develop those purposes spelled out in the enabling act. Successful completion and operation of the District no doubt will greatly aid the Disney interest and its contemplated Disneyworld project. However, it is obvious that to a lesser degree the contemplated benefits of the District will inure to numerous inhabitants of the District in addition to persons in the Disney complex.​

Numerous inhabitants would seem to suggest, again, that they still envisioned the district as having residents other than just Disney no?

In fact, thinking timeline wise here, does it make sense that anyone in 1968 would have realized that EPCOT as a city was cancelled?

Either way it seems that they were deciding whether enabling the district was a violation of state law, which it wasn't. That isn't to imply that it wasn't founded under false pretenses.

Because the timeline of events is well documented.

What does the timeline have to do with the thoughts/motivations of the individual Florida legislators? I'm sure somewhere down the line some of them wrote on the matter or published their own opinion, but really at this point those are details that are not worth the effort to recover.

Without being able to go back in time, there's absolutely no factual way to state that Florida did not consider EPCOT in their reasoning for approving Reedy Creek.