Chi84
Premium Member
An illegal contract would be void. A failure to meet conditions would likely only make it voidable. (Exceptions and exclusions apply.)
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District
- Thread starter castlecake2.0
- Start date
Section 163.3215, F.S., provides both method of remedy and defines "aggrieved or adversely affected party".
"(2) As used in this section, the term “aggrieved or adversely affected party” means any person or local government that will suffer an adverse effect to an interest protected or furthered by the local government comprehensive plan, including interests related to health and safety, police and fire protection service systems, densities or intensities of development, transportation facilities, health care facilities, equipment or services, and environmental or natural resources. The alleged adverse interest may be shared in common with other members of the community at large but must exceed in degree the general interest in community good shared by all persons. The term includes the owner, developer, or applicant for a development order."
Chip Chipperson
Well-Known Member
That's a completely different scenario. Your hypothetical example involves an employee entering I to a contract without the authority to do so. Government entities can't just enter into contracts like that. There are bidding processes and approvals to obtain specifally to avoid such ethical violations. In the case of Disney, the board voted to accept the contracts at public hearings, so there was no such lack of authority and no secrecy. All we have is an allegation from the new combative board that affected landowners weren't mailed notices, but no such landowners have actually come forward to claim they actually are affected negatively and oppose the contracts.
flynnibus
Premium Member
And that’s what the board is asserting here… the contract was done illegally.
They aren’t trying to void it over agreement compliance or a impacted party raising a concern… they flat out assert the paper itself was invalid.
Right or wrong… that’s their basis. Claiming it has all these defects that make it void. Not terminating the contract from with it… but calling the wrong thing void on pretenses.
flynnibus
Premium Member
And when those processes aren’t followed - then what? Hour retort is essentially’thsts not allowed’…. But does not address shat happens afterwards. They are not bound to a contract that they found to done incorrectly… especially done illegally.
But that’s just it… that’s what they are contesting… that the deal was done with ghe correct authority, notice and with all these other impairments. They are trying to tear up the piece of paper… not enforce it’s exit clauses.
The lawyer outlined many more impairments (in their opinion). The vote to move to void the deal did not rely (or name) just that one defect iirc
The contract in this hypothetical is voidable. Furthermore, government employees have to annually disclose any outside employment, including volunteering, that would be deemed a conflict.
And no "district employee" would be authorized to execute an agreement on their own.
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
Stories like this certainly aren’t helping, offers no explanation except the state’s side:
apple.news
Florida board says it discovers another '11th hour' agreement with Disney — Reuters
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' new oversight board has discovered another "11th hour agreement" that allows Walt Disney Co to set its own utility rates at its Orlando theme parks, the board's chairman said on Wednesday.
apple.news
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
I think the point @flynnibus is making is that the notice requirement is not just for those negatively impacted. The point isn’t for the Board to predetermine who is negatively impacted but to solicit input into the decision making process. Someone should be able to object on the principal of lack of notice alone as that is the rule.
It’s a strong ideal but one that becomes muddier in practice. “I oppose this agreement that will benefit me because I wasn’t properly told about it” is a principled position but not one we expect to hear. There’s a nobility to saying you’ll start all over if anyone was missed, but it also lacks practicality if you’d be using additional resources to reach the same outcome because the missed party agrees with the decision.
A court of law would have to make that determination. As the Petitioner, the Board would have to show proof that at the time of execution of the Agreement, law prohibited such an agreement. Tough hill for it to climb.
Stories like this certainly aren’t helping, offers no explanation except the state’s side:
Florida board says it discovers another '11th hour' agreement with Disney — Reuters
Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' new oversight board has discovered another "11th hour agreement" that allows Walt Disney Co to set its own utility rates at its Orlando theme parks, the board's chairman said on Wednesday.
I'm getting rather perturbed with the government of this state calling any agreement executed prior to February 27, 2023 "11th hour".
P.S. If you don't think the State of Florida doesn't negotiate utility rates with the City of Tallahassee, to its favor as the City's largest consumer, think again. FSU has been considering for years generating its own power. I find this whole tactic ludicrous.
tissandtully
Well-Known Member
And large wire services repeating it…. Ugh
Even conservative media has had enough of this feud. From Larry Kudlow on Fox Business:
“I just want to observe that Governor DeSantis is close to making a fool of himself with his Walt Disney obsession. This has been going on now for months and months and months. And I would argue that it is unseemly, number one. A governor should not come crashing down on, if not biggest, one of the biggest businesses.…Also one other point, governors shouldn’t attack businesses. I think it sets a bad precedent. The cause may be just. I don’t like woke anymore than anybody else. But it’s not good for a governor of a state because it suggests maybe as a president he would be attacking business. And that’s what the lefties do, not what the conservatives do.”
Another guest, conservative radio host Mark Simone, added, “Donald Trump would be in a room with Disney working this out. DeSantis’s problem was, it was easy to slap Disney around. They had the dumb CEO. But he’s gone. [Bob] Iger is here. And Desantis is no match for Iger, who’s 10 steps ahead of DeSantis on every move.”
“I just want to observe that Governor DeSantis is close to making a fool of himself with his Walt Disney obsession. This has been going on now for months and months and months. And I would argue that it is unseemly, number one. A governor should not come crashing down on, if not biggest, one of the biggest businesses.…Also one other point, governors shouldn’t attack businesses. I think it sets a bad precedent. The cause may be just. I don’t like woke anymore than anybody else. But it’s not good for a governor of a state because it suggests maybe as a president he would be attacking business. And that’s what the lefties do, not what the conservatives do.”
Another guest, conservative radio host Mark Simone, added, “Donald Trump would be in a room with Disney working this out. DeSantis’s problem was, it was easy to slap Disney around. They had the dumb CEO. But he’s gone. [Bob] Iger is here. And Desantis is no match for Iger, who’s 10 steps ahead of DeSantis on every move.”
flynnibus
Premium Member
But they are doing it… and basically forcing disney to respond.
The board isn’t regulating themselves… and the district’s attorney is telling them to do it. Basically daring disney to challenge it
flynnibus
Premium Member
Didn’t have to ask you when you were the one offering your statement unsolicited.
This is a thread talking about disney/rcid/Florida- if your comments don’t apply to that situation maybe this thread isn’t the place for them
flynnibus
Premium Member
This…the notice process for both open meetings and the agreement are not about the entities picking who is or is not relevant. The standard exists to avoid that conflict.
And that the board acting to void the agreement is not as an impacted party or on behalf of some unnamed party… but purely on how the agreement was enacted itself. Stop thinking of what is ‘the way’ and just listen to what they are acting on.
No - they are simply going on the process itself being wrong… thus claiming it can’t be real. Not based on severity, impact, or even judging… just flat out saying ‘not done correctly… so it doesn’t get to stay… the end’
I’m not supporting their position… i’m just saying the debate should be about what they have been pursuing… not what people think is the valid path
flynnibus
Premium Member
Which is what they are justifying their move with here… saying you can’t do what the old board did
‘You can’t do it that way… you didn’t follow the rules… so the whole thing doesn’t exist’
It’s all an argument of no proper notice for ghr process… the deal is voided because it never was legit go start.
Ignore the dispute process… they are way further upstream then thag in their justification.
I don’t agree with them… but i think there are clearly points lawyers are going to make arguments for both sides
drnilescrane
Well-Known Member
I guess the long and the short of it is - the legislature is unlikely to repeal resign to run. They've dangled it like a carrot this entire session, got Desantis to sign controversial bills at 11pm, but I can't see how they are going to do that this session with the timeline we have.
The governor seems determined to run for president.
So what happens after that? Is the CFTOD BoS going to continue their crusade independently? Does the Lt Gov of Florida care about any of this?
I actually think Disney doesn't care about any of this. Their goal was to protect their interests in the short term - at the very least tie it up in the courts - and wait it out. It seems inevitable.
If they can't build a major project at WDW in the short term... does it matter? Especially when everybody is on your side?
The governor seems determined to run for president.
So what happens after that? Is the CFTOD BoS going to continue their crusade independently? Does the Lt Gov of Florida care about any of this?
I actually think Disney doesn't care about any of this. Their goal was to protect their interests in the short term - at the very least tie it up in the courts - and wait it out. It seems inevitable.
If they can't build a major project at WDW in the short term... does it matter? Especially when everybody is on your side?
Vegas Disney Fan
Well-Known Member
Session ends in 2 weeks. We still don't have a budget. State constitution requires a budget bill agreed to by the joint Conference Committee be "cooled" for 72 hours before either chamber can vote on it. And it must be the bill agreed to by the Conference - no amendments may be added. If either chamber or both don't pass what the Conference agreed to, then the whole process starts all over again. Typically the last week of session is nothing but budget negotiations.
It's nice to see conservatives apply their principles of freedom, free market, pro-business, and no-picking-winners over emotion, but, I don't recall when the former president was in the same room with Bezos to work out their differences.