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

[lazyboy97o]

It was a bad law by the legislature. And it was a mistake to comment by Disney. And it was wrong for the Governor to retaliate. But I don't like special districts controlled by private parties as a matter of principle. And the five member board appointed by the governor is a joke.

I have no cognitive dissonance holding those positions simultaneously.

Except that’s not how you’ve previously represented these things. You praised the law. You’ve praised the retaliation. Both under the “I’m okay with an outcome I like even if for bad reasons” excuse.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

You praised the law.

Citation needed.

 

[Lilofan]

I think we are all missing the point of how cool a coaster would be going in and around a prison.

( this is sarcasm and not meant to be a endorsement..before people start hammering me over the head)

The defunct Discovery Island ( aka Tropical Alcatraz ) , escape from your prison cell with no AC and to get to freedom swim the Seven Seas Lagoon where hungry looking for dinner.

 

[LSLS]

I disagree. I think that DeSantis needs and wants an off-ramp, lest he be viewed as "losing" to Disney by his base, and compromising his future political ambitions.

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.

None of this to say that Disney is obligated to make amends, or did something wrong in the first place, but clearly this situation is just going to keep getting more and more ridiculous with each passing day, and, despite the protestations of some, they can't just pickup WDW and move it somewhere else. Disney would be wise to open the lines of communication up right at the top of the org chart and start working towards an off-ramp where DeSantis can claim "victory" with his base and Disney doesn't take a huge PR and/or monetary hit, or compromise on their claimed values.

Again, should Disney have to do this? No. But clearly this situation will just continue escalating, so it would be wise for Disney to attempt to put a stop to it sooner rather than later.

I would have agreed with you a month ago. But all this now is because desantis and his board brought up the contracts they didn't realize. This wasn't the media putting it out there, they did it themselves, this was they had plans of things they were going to hold over Disney, found out they couldn't, and then went and complained to the world about it. I don't think this is about a political win anymore, I think he's believing everything he says.

 

[James Alucobond]

Citation needed.

I haven’t been following everything, but you definitely did praise the retaliation as strategically intelligent in the broader context of his campaign. I think you called it crack to his base.

Though I would argue that we shouldn’t encourage crack usage even though people might like it.

 

[scottieRoss]

I posted a few pages back and tried to be cute, and I think it got missed.
The new law they have proposed goes into effect July 1, 2023
It requires the new board to look back at Land Development Agreements made in the last 3 months of the old bill.
It gives them 4 months to do the lookback and either ratify or void the LDA.
The problem is that the HB9B Became effective on February 27, so when the new law becomes effective on July 1, the look back period will have passed.

 

[Disney Analyst]

I posted a few pages back and tried to be cute, and I think it got missed.
The new law they have proposed goes into effect July 1, 2023
It requires the new board to look back at Land Development Agreements made in the last 3 months of the old bill.
It gives them 4 months to do the lookback and either ratify or void the LDA.
The problem is that the HB9B Became effective on February 27, so when the new law becomes effective on July 1, the look back period will have passed.

 

[JAB]

I posted a few pages back and tried to be cute, and I think it got missed.
The new law they have proposed goes into effect July 1, 2023
It requires the new board to look back at Land Development Agreements made in the last 3 months of the old bill.
It gives them 4 months to do the lookback and either ratify or void the LDA.
The problem is that the HB9B Became effective on February 27, so when the new law becomes effective on July 1, the look back period will have passed.

I might have misread, but the way I read it was that it was within 3 months of a change to how the board was selected, so it won't matter when the law gets enacted or when they try to void the agreements.

 

[Touchdown]

I’m not a lawyer but here’s the thing about contract law, it’s dull, boring, and given how old the cases sited are pretty darn established. It also appears to go against the philosophy of most conservative “strict constructionists” to change it. I’m sure Disney chose this path for this reason.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I might have misread, but the way I read it was that it was within 3 months of a change to how the board was selected, so it won't matter when the law gets enacted or when they try to void the agreements.

But it only gives the new board four months after taking office to do the review. That’s the problem.

 

[scottieRoss]

I might have misread, but the way I read it was that it was within 3 months of a change to how the board was selected, so it won't matter when the law gets enacted or when they try to void the agreements.

Correct, if the LDA was changed in the 3 months prior, which it was, they have 4 months to review and decide to ratify or void the LDA.
However, the law goes into effect on July 1, 2023 and HB9B went into effect on February 27. So the 4 month clock to make changes will have run out before the new law will go into effect

 

[Fido Chuckwagon]

Im not a lawyer but it seems to me that the state mearly needs to show that RCID and Disney had a "self serving" collusion happening

I’m not a brain surgeon, but it seems to me that if they operate on that there brain, and remove the wiggly parts, that should fix ‘er right up!

 

[scottieRoss]

But it only gives the new board four months after taking office to do the review. That’s the problem.

it is more of the rush to punish Disney and they forget to look at what it really means.

 

[lazyboy97o]

it is more of the rush to punish Disney and they forget to look at what it really means.

Again. I so want this to now go through as is just to watch them all realize they messed it up again.

 

[JAB]

But it only gives the new board four months after taking office to do the review. That’s the problem.

Sure, but the way the bill is written, wouldn't the board be able to "review" and vote on it now (i.e. within 4 months), and then just wait for the bill to be signed to enforce their vote retroactively?

I know they've been making questionable decisions, but I can't imagine even the FL legislature would bungle things so badly as to put an unmeetable deadline in their own unconstitutional retribution bill. Then again...

 

[lazyboy97o]

Sure, but the way the bill is written, wouldn't the board be able to "review" and vote on it now (i.e. within 4 months), and then just wait for the bill to be signed to enforce their vote retroactively?

I know they've been making questionable decisions, but I can't imagine even the FL legislature would bungle things so badly as to put an unmeetable deadline in their own unconstitutional retribution bill. Then again...

There’s no legal authority to do it right now. Although this whole situation is predicated on the idea that residents should treat proposed legislation as though it is law, so maybe they’d try.

 

[Mr. Stay Puft]

 

[DCBaker]

Here's a direct link to that amendment -

https://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=663255.docx&DocumentType=Amendments&BillNumber=0439&Session=2023

 

[schuelma]

Here's a direct link to that amendment -

https://www.myfloridahouse.gov/Sections/Documents/loaddoc.aspx?FileName=663255.docx&DocumentType=Amendments&BillNumber=0439&Session=2023

Ok I'm not trying to be an ..but I would bet a lot of fictional dollars Disney lawyers will have no trouble getting out of that language.

This is all performative. Sad for Orlando, at least in the short term.

 

[JAB]

There’s no legal authority to do it right now. Although this whole situation is predicated on the idea that residents should treat proposed legislation as though it is law, so maybe they’d try.

While they don't have the authority to void the contract yet, I can't see why they wouldn't be able to "review" it and hold a toothless vote indicating their future intent just to have it on the record, which it seems is all the new law will have required them to do since they intend to apply it retroactively.

I hope I'm wrong and they did hilariously paint themselves into a corner with their own bill, but I'm guessing they'll find a way to say they complied with the law.