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

[Tha Realest]

The OCTOD Board did not exist at the time of the execution of the Agreement. It was created on February 27, 2023. The Agreement was approved and executed on February 8, 2023.

HB 9B, now Chapter 2023-5, Laws of Florida, repealed Chapter 67-764, the Act which created Reedy Creek Improvement District. Unless the statute specifically stated it is the successor to the RCID Board of Supervisors, it is not. And I saw nothing in the law specifically stating it is.

If you’re arguing one party to a contract no longer exists and there is no successor in interest to said party….

….you’re arguing you no longer have a contract.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

But they were the party required to send the notifications as the government entity signing the agreement. I can’t see a judge saying they can void the contract because they failed to notify property owners.

Exactly. That would give any government entity in a similar situation a way to build themselves a way out of any contract just in case they later decide they don't like it. "Your honor, void this contract because we failed to notify property owners who might have been affected even though none of them have complained."

 

[flynnibus]

I own several small businesses. It’s unrealistic to stay out of politics altogether. This was identity politics, and this was the assumed understanding of context. We can debate in circles, but as a seasoned business owner that’s been through the school of hard knocks (not naive) , I try to stay out of politics in general. I’m not talking about my municipal and planning. I am involved in my downtown committee. Look the consensus with Disney executives is that if they could have avoided this situation with another approach, they would have.

So its not a ‘stay out of politics’ belief… it’s a ‘stay out of that conversation’ belief. Own your real meaning.

Well you clearly are making case by case decisions on what to be involved with… respect that others can too.

 

[GoofGoof]

Politely, that was my post. You misquoted and used something you'd previously quoted in another post by accident, unless you meant to respond to the same thing twice.

And it is absolutely splitting hairs, because it means you reap the known result of the thing you planted. If you sow wheat in spring, you reap wheat in autumn. If you plant plentifully, you get bounty in return. Again, government retaliation is not the known byproduct of free speech. It's the exact opposite of what you should be reaping. But have fun eating the eggplant your mustard seeds bear this fall, I guess.

Yeah I’m out on that one. I posted a joke. Never intended to actually engage in that discussion.

 

[flynnibus]

Which, since that appeared to be a point of contention at this meeting for members of the Board, they should have had some proof the requisite mailings weren't done. A list of eligible property owners that included up-to-date addresses. A simple phone call or email asking if the property owner received the mailed notice prior to the January 2023 meeting.

A point of contention here… and maybe in court… but not in the meeting. Their hired gun told them what… and they take it as fact

 

[LittleBuford]

I’ve noticed that this is a mostly pro-Disney forum, and if one says anything that’s a different perspective, one gets ganged up on here, with fallacies and emotional responses.

Not really. As a pixie duster, I often feel in the minority here. But on this particular issue, even those who are most critical of Disney are throwing their weight behind the company, because the vast majority of us agree that what DeSantis is doing is beyond the pale and has much wider implications that should concern everyone.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Simple question for everyone that thinks Disney deserves this because Chapek spoke out against a bill in Florida they didn’t like… do you also support liberal boards (schools, airports) punishing Chick Fil A because they spoke out against bills they didn‘t like?

Curious if the ”Disney deserves it crowd” really believes companies should be punished for voicing an opinion or if their support is purely based on partisanship.

 

[GoofGoof]

A point of contention here… and maybe in court… but not in the meeting. Their hired gun told them what… and they take it as fact

Remember too that the meeting today was more about PR than action. They wanted to put the Governor’s talking points out there because he’s taking a beating on this. Look around here and other places and you can see the Governor’s supporters parroting the statement that the contract is declared void.

 

[lazyboy97o]

They weren't a parry to the contract and there was literally no way for Disney or RCID to notify them since nobody even k ew that they would be appointed at that time. What would they argue? And since they're replacing the old R ID board, would they argue that RCID didn't notify itself?

Central Florida Tourism Oversight District is the Reedy Creek Improvement District. They are the same thing. The district was renamed and its powers amended, but it is the same legal entity.

Even if they were separate entities, as the inheritor of the agreement, the CFTOD would now be a party to the contract.

MCA, Inc. and Marvel Entertainment Group have not existed in years, but Disney and Universal are still the parties to their agreement.

 

[flynnibus]

Exactly. That would give any government entity in a similar situation a way to build themselves a way out of any contract just in case they later decide they don't like it.

Well they may find themselves civilly liable for the mistake… but I can’t see how a change of management results in a pass on their requirements for everyone else. That would be an ever bigger loophole.

Don’t follow the rules… so that if caught… you just say ‘well it didn’t hurt anyone so who cares about the rules’??

 

[Heath]

Not really. As a pixie duster, I often feel in the minority here. But on this particular issue, even those who are most critical of Disney are throwing their weight behind the company, because the vast majority of us agree that what DeSantis is doing is beyond the pale and has much wider implications that should concern everyone.

That was a succinct and polite response. Thank you

 

[flynnibus]

Remember too that the meeting today was more about PR than action.

Nah … their hired lawyers to find dirt.. and those hounds reported what they think they should fight on. Not PR… just next step in their process. This isn’t a staged meeting for the cameras… its a step to progress towards their end game.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

It’s a generalization because generally the state of Florida, and political factions are divided in half. Which is why the country is so polarized and our elections are so close, and our government split basically into half.

But you said half of Disney’s customers…. I’m gonna guess that a majority are for LGBT rights.

If it’s “bad business” then the Disney company wouldn’t be selling Pride Merch and hosting a pride night with pride specific character outfits!

 

[Chi84]

I think we’re spinning our wheels because we can’t be sure we know all the pertinent facts. I guarantee you that nothing whatsoever was said here that Disney’s legal team didn’t already know. And we won’t know why they did what they did or what they’ll do in the future until more information comes out.

 

[LittleBuford]

Source?

It really wouldn’t matter if ninety percent of Disney’s customers opposed their stance. The company is—or rather should be—free to take whatever position it wants without fear of government retaliation.

 

[Tha Realest]

I think we’re spinning our wheels because we can’t be sure we know all the pertinent facts. I guarantee you that nothing whatsoever was said here that Disney’s legal team didn’t already know. And we won’t know why they did what they did or what they’ll do in the future until more information comes out.

To some degree. Whether or not notice was provided, and what’s the appropriate remedy under the law, are debatable issues. Whether sufficient “evidence” has been presented, and who bears the burden at various junctures, are also fine for spirited debate.

Insisting that the CFTOD isn’t a successor under the law or in fact is just pure silliness and really makes me question the claimed experience of some on here.

 

[GoofGoof]

Simple question for everyone that thinks Disney deserves this because Chapek spoke out against a bill in Florida they didn’t like… do you also support liberal boards (schools, airports) punishing Chick Fil A because they spoke out against bills they didn‘t like?

Curious if the ”Disney deserves it crowd” really believes companies should be punished for voicing an opinion or if their support is purely based on partisanship.

I know this question isn’t to me but the answer is it’s based on partisanship. I partially blame social media for this. Before social media we were all forced to interact with people who had different opinions more. With social media you can carve out who you interact with and live in the echo chamber. As a result people have become more and more intolerant of opposing views. Now we have this new wave of cancel culture where if a company won’t follow the way I think I cancel them. Disney and Budweiser right now but others as well. In the past people had less issues with interacting with people and companies with opposing views. Now not so much. In this case I suspect most of the people saying Disney should stay out of politics want them to because they like the products but disagree with their stance on this issue. If their politics lined up they would have no issue with it.

 

[MagicRat]

I am not saying anything else because if I do the mods will take this down.

 

[durangojim]

Simple question for everyone that thinks Disney deserves this because Chapek spoke out against a bill in Florida they didn’t like… do you also support liberal boards (schools, airports) punishing Chick Fil A because they spoke out against bills they didn‘t like?

Curious if the ”Disney deserves it crowd” really believes companies should be punished for voicing an opinion or if their support is purely based on partisanship.

I think there’s a much smaller Disney deserves this crowd than people would have you think. Most conservatives are appalled that a government would interfere with business in such a way. It’s like we’re all living in The Upside Down

 

[BuzzedPotatoHead89]

Simple question for everyone that thinks Disney deserves this because Chapek spoke out against a bill in Florida they didn’t like… do you also support liberal boards (schools, airports) punishing Chick Fil A because they spoke out against bills they didn‘t like?

Curious if the ”Disney deserves it crowd” really believes companies should be punished for voicing an opinion or if their support is purely based on partisanship.

I’d take it one step further and ask what if Governor Newsom declared that patrons of Chick-fil-A by speaking out against same sex marriage in the past would be required to pay a 50% “fairness tax” that wasn’t applied to McDonalds or Burger King?

How about if the (liberal) city of Santa Monica added a $1.50 added city recycling tax per In-N-Out soda cup for “promoting non-inclusive sponsored religious speech” for including bible verses?

These examples are obviously facetious and ridiculous at face value but so is using the power of the state to punish a company for weighing in on an education bill and replacing a local board for no clear reason.