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

Stripes

Premium Member
Standing is one issue.

The other is HB9 itself, which lists the consequences of not doing the mailing, is that ... there are no consequences:

View attachment 710898

As @lentesta pointed out above though, failure to mail to the landowners is specifically called out in FL law as not providing standing to nullify as long as the meetings were properly noticed.
I’m fairly certain that what @lentesta shared does not apply to a development agreement.
 

thomas998

Well-Known Member
Standing is one issue.

The other is HB9 itself, which lists the consequences of not doing the mailing, is that ... there are no consequences:

View attachment 710898
The problem is that you are looking at this one piece of legislation as if it is the only thing that controls the matter. If Florida is like most states it will have other legislation that can come into play which could impact the validity of what the board at Reedy did. I was involved in another state where a local government decided to ignore normal open meeting laws in the state and tried to hide behind some rules that the local government had drafted. The entire mess slogged through the courts for more than 2 years before a judge undid what the city council had done. I don't think anything is going to happen very quickly in this instance because both side seem to be hellbent on digging in and not giving up on anything. But given the Governor has already mentioned he's ready to build a prison near Disney I think it might be time for Disney to back off before things get really bad for them. I can see it now, Florida builds a special prison for sex offenders on one side, a halfway house on the other... maybe it is time for me to sell my Disney stock and buy share of Universal.
 

Brian

Well-Known Member
That's not going to be an easy thing for them to do.... The problem is whatever they do that would essentially invalidate the contract would likely have repressions throughout the state.
Agreed. But we all know he's hellbent on coming out on top, and will try it if necessary.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
The problem is that you are looking at this one piece of legislation as if it is the only thing that controls the matter. If Florida is like most states it will have other legislation that can come into play which could impact the validity of what the board at Reedy did. I was involved in another state where a local government decided to ignore normal open meeting laws in the state and tried to hide behind some rules that the local government had drafted. The entire mess slogged through the courts for more than 2 years before a judge undid what the city council had done. I don't think anything is going to happen very quickly in this instance because both side seem to be hellbent on digging in and not giving up on anything. But given the Governor has already mentioned he's ready to build a prison near Disney I think it might be time for Disney to back off before things get really bad for them. I can see it now, Florida builds a special prison for sex offenders on one side, a halfway house on the other... maybe it is time for me to sell my Disney stock and buy share of Universal.
What exactly should Disney give up? The ability to add theme park facilities to theme parks? And what does that fix? Why shouldn’t the state stop?
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member
The problem is that you are looking at this one piece of legislation as if it is the only thing that controls the matter. If Florida is like most states it will have other legislation that can come into play which could impact the validity of what the board at Reedy did. I was involved in another state where a local government decided to ignore normal open meeting laws in the state and tried to hide behind some rules that the local government had drafted. The entire mess slogged through the courts for more than 2 years before a judge undid what the city council had done. I don't think anything is going to happen very quickly in this instance because both side seem to be hellbent on digging in and not giving up on anything. But given the Governor has already mentioned he's ready to build a prison near Disney I think it might be time for Disney to back off before things get really bad for them. I can see it now, Florida builds a special prison for sex offenders on one side, a halfway house on the other... maybe it is time for me to sell my Disney stock and buy share of Universal.

Don't let his fear mongering force you into any financial decisions...

The scenario you lay out above is exactly why I think Desantis loses in court. We just can't set this precedence.
 

Brian

Well-Known Member
I don’t see that statute as a major concern. It’s just another lawsuit for Disney and one in which I believe they would have the upper hand.
It's awfully specific, though. What's your rationale behind why Disney would have the upper hand?
 

mikejs78

Premium Member

WDWFanRay

Well-Known Member
And the entire Rep party, I’m amazed they aren’t trying to shut this down.
This 1960’s era RCID is a completely unfair governmental advantage for Disney, which in the end is just a corporation. It flew under the radar for years, but it’s Disney’s fault for making it headlines. What did they expect? There really isn’t a dem or rep who’s going to put their neck out too far, to protect an unfair corporate advantage.
 

TheMaxRebo

Well-Known Member
That solar power field is the biggest hidden Mickey that I can think of.
Is it bigger than the one that is the center of Hollywood Studios .... well, it is less distinct lately (so maybe no longer counts) but when first built was my favorite hidden Mickey

sbe003712LARGE.jpg
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
This 1960’s era RCID is a completely unfair governmental advantage for Disney, which in the end is just a corporation. It flew under the radar for years, but it’s Disney’s fault for making it headlines. What did they expect? There really isn’t a dem or rep who’s going to put their neck out too far, to protect an unfair corporate advantage.
How was having a building code before one was required by the state an unfair advantage?
 

mikejs78

Premium Member
This 1960’s era RCID is a completely unfair governmental advantage for Disney, which in the end is just a corporation. It flew under the radar for years, but it’s Disney’s fault for making it headlines. What did they expect? There really isn’t a dem or rep who’s going to put their neck out too far, to protect an unfair corporate advantage.

And what unfair corporate advantage does Reedy Creek give Disney? Please enlighten us.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom