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

[Mr. Stay Puft]

A lawyer on twitter was saying if this is the best the state and new board has, they are in a tough spot if this goes to court. All they've really done is try to poke some holes in procedures and then try to inject a concept of "self dealing" with no real attacks on the legality of the agreement itself. And the self dealing angle he said is a tough case to make because by their very nature, special districts are set up for the benefit of the underlying entity that wanted the special district created. In other words, if Universal gets a special district, it would obviously be set up to benefit Universal.

Ya, and proving intent is very difficult to do in court. Even by the state.

 

[scottieRoss]

The only voting rights issues that have come up have been the rollback of some 2020 measures that were always meant to be temporary due to COVID. Putting voting procedures back to where they were pre-pandemic was not the gutting of voting rights that opponents framed it as.

Your claim about district maps is just false.

Supreme Court Turns Away GOP Challenges to Congressional Maps in North Carolina, Pennsylvania

Justices let stand congressional maps expected to be more favorable to Democrats than Republican proposals.

www.wsj.com

Except the Voting Rights Act lawsuit is currently moving forward in US Disctrict Court. Circuit Court of Appeals refused to dismiss it

A federal panel clears the way for a lawsuit challenging Florida's congressional redistricting map

The redistricting plan, which Gov. Ron DeSantis pushed through the Florida Legislature during a special session last April, was used in the elections amid constitutional challenges in federal and state courts.

wusfnews.wusf.usf.edu

 

[tissandtully]

Corporations have free speech in every state, including Florida. However, free speech has consequences sometimes

Sounds like you don’t understand free speech

 

[drnilescrane]

Maybe but knowing who is on the board and who the board is really working for, it's quite possible they have no desire to settle with Disney and negotiate a fair agreement. They want to lay waste and try to control what Disney is doing.

The problem is the District has limited ability to raise funding to actually fight this in court, which they're clearly aware of.

Due to Disney's successful litigation with the Orange County property appraiser, they hold a large amount in reserve that they know they have to refund. Clearly they want to tap that but Disney has a history of winning those cases.

They could raise taxes, but that'll *definitely* end up in a lawsuit.

They could more bond debt, but isn't the goal to retire bonds not add to them?

They could cancel future road projects, but Disney made sure those were all contracted out and had 100% beak clauses.

The District is legally prohibited from tolling roads by the enabling act.

They *could* charge for parking at Springs due to the stupid way Disney set up that agreement (in Anaheim they have a master lease with the city and operate the garages themselves, and gain ownership when the bonds expire), but that's peanuts.

Disney owns RCES. Disney sets the rates and charges the district, not the other way around. I guess they could charge $1m a dumpster to empty...

They could sell off some land surrounding Flamingo Crossings or Celebration for housing development, but for the restrictive covenants. Also putting housing or a prison over there really isn't going to affect Disney too much, but it will absolutely upset the residents of those FL House and Senate districts.

 

[mkt]

However, free speech has consequences sometimes.

Not from the government. That's LITERALLY the first amendment of the constitution.

Speech with government consequences is NOT free speech.

 

[Brian]

At some point, as this drags on, Trump will brag that he, and only he, could have taken on Disney and beaten them.

"Believe me, folks, if that had been me going up against Disney, it would be a much different outcome, much different. DeSanctus is a lightweight and couldn't even take on Mickey Mouse. They'd be coming to me crying saying "Sir... you were right all along." and I'd tell them, well we all have our own problems. And speaking of problems, how about that Taylor Swift? This is true, one night I was sitting in the beautiful south wing of Mar-a-Lago, really a magnificent property when you think about it, when Taylor Swift called me and said "Thank you, Mr. President, for making America great again." and I told her you know what, it must be exhausting always rooting for the anti-heroes. Good for you for finally coming around. And speaking of coming around..."

 

[CentralFLlife]

However, free speech has consequences sometimes.

It absolutely does!

In places like China, Russia, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc

 

[GBAB1973]

Not from the government. That's LITERALLY the first amendment of the constitution.

Speech with government consequences is NOT free speech.

One thing I have learned in the age of Trump, is that there are a lot of people, many conservatives, who actually don't understand the concept of free speech in this country.

 

[GBAB1973]

"Believe me, folks, if that had been me going up against Disney, it would be a much different outcome, much different. DeSanctus is a lightweight and couldn't even take on Mickey Mouse. They'd be coming to me crying saying "Sir... you were right all along." and I'd tell them, well we all have our own problems. And speaking of problems, how about that Taylor Swift? This is true, one night I was sitting in the beautiful south wing of Mar-a-Lago, really a magnificent property when you think about it, when Taylor Swift called me and said "Thank you, Mr. President, for making America great again." and I told her you know what, it must be exhausting always rooting for the anti-heroes, good for you for finally coming around. And speaking of coming around..."

LOL.

The sad thing is that this is totally believable. Maybe throw in a line or two about how at one time, Disney was so impressed with Trump Tower that they sent their best architects and designers to NYC to help them build their new hotels. And that Disney once wanted to create a new character based on him.

 

[Dan Deesnee]

Not from the government. That's LITERALLY the first amendment of the constitution.

Speech with government consequences is NOT free speech.

The constitution doesn't say anything about corporations and was written that individuals have free speech. If a corporation verbally attacks with the intent to harm a government and sitting government individuals, I'm guessing that could be uncharted legal territory.

If the Florida government is doing something wrong here, Disney will sue them and likely win.

Not sure. But to say the people of Florida no longer have free speech is absurd.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I think you also need one of the landowners who didn’t properly receive the notice to claim a grievance. If a landowner comes forward and says they didn’t know about this and therefore didn’t have the opportunity to provide public comment then that could be a problem. If nobody was harmed then there’s no issue. The mailing is only done to protect affected parties.

I can’t imagine the contorting a judge would have to do to justify letting the district move forward with an action. Their whole argument is that they didn’t tell others so they have to void the agreement so they can change the long established land use regulations to change them to something else they, and they alone, have in mind that did not come from those affected parties.

That they’re seeking to assume for themselves the unilateral authority to void contracts suggests they know they don’t have a case. It forces Disney to act against the “will of the people”.

 

[mkt]

One thing I have learned in the age of Trump, is that there are a lot of people, many conservatives, who actually don't understand the concept of free speech in this country.

They focused on a narrow interpretation of one amendment so intensely that they forget that there are more than 20 other amendments, plus all the articles before the amendments.

 

[Tinkwings]

 

[Dan Deesnee]

It absolutely does!

In places like China, Russia, North Korea, Saudi Arabia, etc

Actually, everywhere. I'm free to call my boss an idiot. Then I get fired.

 

[mmascari]

At some point, as this drags on, Trump will brag that he, and only he, could have taken on Disney and beaten them.

I head that just the other day, someone with tears in their eye said to him "If only you instead of Meatball Ron were taking care of Disney, we would have won!"

 

[mkt]

The constitution doesn't say anything about corporations and was written that individuals have free speech. If a corporation attacks with the intent to harm a government and sitting government individuals, I'm guessing that could be uncharted legal territory.

Nope, not uncharted. Grosjean v. American Press Co. in 1936 asserted that corporations have free speech, and subsequently Citizens United made corporations into people.

 

[drnilescrane]

I can’t imagine the contorting a judge would have to do to justify letting the district move forward with an action. Their whole argument is that they didn’t tell others so they have to void the agreement so they can change the long established land use regulations to change them to something else they, and they alone, have in mind that did not come from those affected parties.

That they’re seeking to assume for themselves the unilateral authority to void contracts suggests they know they don’t have a case. It forces Disney to act against the “will of the people”.

I love the cognitive dissonance of "these agreements are null anyway" and "we've going to get the legislature to retroactively void them".

Which one is it guys?

 

[Disorbust]

Didn't corporations become "individuals" in Citizens Untied?

 

[Brian]

I head that just the other day, someone with tears in their eye said to him "If only you instead of Meatball Ron were taking care of Disney, we would have won!"

"He came up to me, tears in eyes, big fella, and said: Sir..."

 

[tissandtully]

The constitution doesn't say anything about corporations and was written that individuals have free speech. If a corporation verbally attacks with the intent to harm a government and sitting government individuals, I'm guessing that could be uncharted legal territory.

If the Florida government is doing something wrong here, Disney will sue them and likely win.

Not sure. But to say the people of Florida no longer have free speech is absurd.

Uh, Citizens United