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

[scottieRoss]

OK, for all of you math majors out there.
If you sign a bill on February 27 to change RCID to CFTOD
then you want to Ex Post Facto a Land Development Agreement made within 3 months before the change from elected supervisors to appointed supervisors (within 4 months of the new status), would you not want to make the bill effective before July 1? You know, 4 months and 4 days after the change in status?

 

[mmascari]

If I were Iger, I'd be calling up DeSantis and trying to game out a mutually agreeable solution to the issue, where nobody comes out with egg on their face. What that solution would look like, I'm not sure, but one of these guys went to Yale and Harvard, and the other has run a Fortune 50 company for over a decade. In other words, they're both intelligent men; I'm sure they can figure something out.

Doesn't matter. The only resolution where some pundit, commentator, that guy, or some other ad doesn't frame Ron as loosing is one where he get's direct control over some Disney content. Where Ron is able to punish Disney for releasing something or get them to not release it. Anything else will be to small for enough of a group reporting it that the base will see it as a loss. The goal was set and now he's stuck with it.

Conversely, that's one thing that isn't negotiable to Disney. There is no outcome where Disney voluntarily agrees to let anyone dictate their content. They'll bend to sales, public perception, and impact to stock prices. But, they'll never give someone outside the company any creative control.

So, you've got an impasse. Between the two, I think Disney is less likely to back down first. While they're clearly less likely to go big in public, that doesn't mean they're going to roll over. Giving an outsider creative control would be a death blow to the company.

 

[peter11435]

It being bad legislation and it being a good thing for Disney to opine on are two different things. Disney's comments ed off more people than they appeased, and that's just bad business.

If it’s bad business they will find out from their customers. The government has no business taking action.

 

[TalkingHead]

Why did Disney not deal with this issue more forthrightly before the new board was installed? A lot of us were amazed they didn’t attempt litigation at the time. So they opted to try a clever maneuver that has been depicted as shifty. Did they think DeSantis and state Repubs would leave it at that?

They should have pursued litigation before it got to this point. Too clever by half.

 

[peter11435]

Why did Disney not deal with this issue more forthrightly before the new board was installed? A lot of us were amazed they didn’t attempt litigation at the time. So they opted to try a clever maneuver that has been depicted as shifty. Did they think DeSantis and state Repubs would leave it at that?

They should have pursued litigation before it got to this point. Too clever by half.

They pursued this “clever maneuver” when the plan was for the district to be dissolved

 

[Chi84]

It being bad legislation and it being a good thing for Disney to opine on are two different things. Disney's comments ed off more people than they appeased, and that's just bad business.

Why do you think that? There's a huge group that doesn't care either way about the comments and some that disagree with Disney but kind of like that freedom of speech thing.

 

[GoofGoof]

Why did Disney not deal with this issue more forthrightly before the new board was installed? A lot of us were amazed they didn’t attempt litigation at the time. So they opted to try a clever maneuver that has been depicted as shifty. Did they think DeSantis and state Repubs would leave it at that?

They should have pursued litigation before it got to this point. Too clever by half.

What difference would it make? This new bill to void the contract goes back 3 months but they could have said a year if the contract was signed this time last year.

 

[TalkingHead]

They pursued this “clever maneuver” when the plan was for the district to be dissolved

Yeah, the writing was on the wall by that point, and they screwed up by not pursuing it in the courts. Still can, I presume. Will they?

 

[TalkingHead]

What difference would it make? This new bill to void the contract goes back 3 months but they could have said a year if the contract was signed this time last year.

What difference would it have made to attempt in courts to block the state’s wrestling away control over a 1A issue?

 

[lazyboy97o]

Why did Disney not deal with this issue more forthrightly before the new board was installed? A lot of us were amazed they didn’t attempt litigation at the time. So they opted to try a clever maneuver that has been depicted as shifty. Did they think DeSantis and state Repubs would leave it at that?

They should have pursued litigation before it got to this point. Too clever by half.

It’s fallacy of appeasement. Yes, they thought acquiescing would make it go away. Even now, they’re not speaking out hoping it’ll help. Even if the present “fight” stalls out, it is now known that Disney is an easy target for attack as long as you think it out a bit more.

 

[GBAB1973]

Why did Disney not deal with this issue more forthrightly before the new board was installed? A lot of us were amazed they didn’t attempt litigation at the time. So they opted to try a clever maneuver that has been depicted as shifty. Did they think DeSantis and state Repubs would leave it at that?

They should have pursued litigation before it got to this point. Too clever by half.

They were forthright.

They literally followed the notification laws and did this all out in the open. They advertised the meetings where the agreement was discussed/approved.

 

[Chi84]

What difference would it have made to attempt in courts to block the state’s wrestling away control over a 1A issue?

Legal decisions like when to take action and what action to take are uniquely particular to circumstances that we may not be completely familiar with. Disney did what it wanted to do and so far it seems to be working just fine. It's not like you have to file a lawsuit the moment something affects you - there's plenty of time for Disney to act.

 

[peter11435]

Even now, they’re not speaking out hoping it’ll help.

It’s almost as if their speech has been chilled….

 

[TalkingHead]

They were forthright.

They literally followed the notification laws and did this all out in the open. They advertised the meetings where the agreement was discussed/approved.

The only people who think it's shady are those listening to DeSantis and his minions who are now in scramble mode after getting depantsed because they were too busy celebrating to pay attention to what was happening out in the open in the very district Ronnie D wanted to control.

Point is it’s depicted by those mouthpieces as shifty because it wasn’t done with Disney publicly announcing its moves. Good gamesmanship, bad politics.

All I’m asking is why didn’t they take this to court instead of playing coy?

 

[Chip Chipperson]

It seems like maybe a case of bad reporting. I don’t know what to take as the so called expert‘s opinion and what’s added by the writer.

If the legal battle ends in the state’s favor, DeSantis promises public safety pay raises and a reassessment of property value to potentially have the company pay more in taxes in Orange and Osceola counties. Kramer predicts it will be a tough case for Disney to win.

This is not a shown as a quote from Kramer so hard to say if he said it or not. So if this entire statement actually came from Kramer he’s not very credible. No legal battle is necessary to give pay raises to RCID EMS. The district controls that with or without the development agreement in place and the idea that the district somehow controls the tax assessment for the counties is also a fairytale. The governor literally made that up. So if this expert is actually saying he believes this will happen if Disney loses a hypothetical lawsuit then he’s not very credible. He also doesn’t specify what case will be tough for Disney to win.

Legal analyst explains challenges with nullifying Reedy Creek agreement

"It always depended on the state of Florida playing ball with Disney," legal analyst Steven Kramer said.

www.wesh.com

Yep, that all seems like BS to try to win over the firefighters and EMS and anyone who supports them getting raises. "If they don't get a raise, it's Disney's fault!"

 

[flynnibus]

I think this covered that point:

So basically the only 2 parties affected by the agreement are Disney as the master developer and RCID. Both obviously received notification.

But one might argue the limitations on RCID, impacted the other RCID constituents because the limitations on RCID's ability to do something on behalf of other RCID constituents.

 

[GBAB1973]

Point is it’s depicted by those mouthpieces as shifty because it wasn’t done with Disney publicly announcing its moves. Good gamesmanship, bad politics.

All I’m asking is why didn’t they take this to court instead of playing coy?

Because court takes time and is costly. They were generally open to seeing what DeSantis was going to propose. Maybe DeSantis would have proposed something they could live with? Filing a suit immediately creates nothing but more bad blood. So they kept quiet to see what DeSantis and the GOP legislature would do. When it was clear they had no desire to work with Disney and wanted control to leverage Disney, the company made the moves they made.
. Disney announced their moves publicly. It was all done out in the open. It wasn't gamesmanship or whatever. They literally followed the law, held open meetings, etc.

 

[GhostHost1000]

Dang this thread is moving faster than Disney price increases

 

[lazyboy97o]

They were forthright.

They literally followed the notification laws and did this all out in the open. They advertised the meetings where the agreement was discussed/approved.

They have not been forthright in just working to put to a stop to this. They thought if they cowered and walked away, even if they did grab some of their toys, it would go away.

 

[GoofGoof]

But one might argue the limitations on RCID, impacted the other RCID constituents because the limitations on RCID's ability to do something on behalf of other RCID constituents.

That’s fair, but the development agreement didn’t really change anything. There’s nothing in that agreement that implies Disney will or can do anything other than build theme parks and resorts. Maybe an increase in traffic or sight line issues but since we are talking about businesses and not residential homes for the most part I’d think that’s less relevant.