I saw that. Same in Miami.
The historic Ft. Lauderdale City Hall has been so damaged by floodwaters it is unsafe to occupy.
-
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
I saw that. Same in Miami.
The historic Ft. Lauderdale City Hall has been so damaged by floodwaters it is unsafe to occupy.
We planned on it.
But we decided the $1300 to upgrade two Pirate Passes to Incredipasses would be better spent on airfare to Europe for 3 people.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
….pssst…Miami and Ft. Lauderdale are the same place
el_super
Well-Known Member
Because they want this out of the news as soon as possible.
Disney does not like going to court. If the other news of this week wasn't a tip off: no matter how right you are morally, or what kind of rock-hard solid legal case you might have, you always try to settle to avoid going to court.
That's the playbook when you're judging the cost of going to trial is more than any award you might get.
Or if you want to avoid harsher jail time.
Last edited by a moderator:
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Last edited by a moderator:
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
They're waiting for Gov and Friends to actually do something that would be deemed illegal rather than just say it. Immediate injunction time.
Until they act illegally, Gov and Gang can claim First Amendment rights to just sound off with hyperbole. And such political speech tends to get a pass by SCOTUS.
And the longer they can string this out, the better for Gov to be gone campaigning for Prez or term-limited. Which means holding off legal suits until the bitter end and until absolutely needed.
GoofGoof
Premium Member
Eventually this almost certainly ends up in court, but what we got yesterday was nothing more than a political speech. No actions have been taken yet and no actual harm is done (legal harm based on the district not honoring the contract they freely entered into). Once the district stops Disney from doing something allowed in the contract they sue. If the district follows through on threats like selling or developing land if that violates the agreement they sue. Ultimately a judge will decide if the Contract is valid or not. The board and the legislature cannot just declare the contract void (I mean they can say that but it has no legal basis).
Last edited by a moderator:
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
They’re in a bit of uncharted water here…
Because it’s in chartered water…and frankly, there’s no accountability or precedent in either legislature or the courts here.
It’s like everything from the 20th century was tossed out the window in the last 5 and we’re intent on torching the furniture
For one, I think they were waiting to see what the Board would say and do at the meeting yesterday. If either of the bills currently making the rounds in the Legislature pass and are signed into law, thus allowing the Board of Supervisors to retroactively void the February 8th Agreement, I think you'll see them act. They will then have a law on the books they can petition the court to declare unconstitutional under Article I, Section 10.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
My take is they can’t predict the courts. Gee…wonder why?
I’d like to hear the Kid’s opinion on this?
@LAKid53
el_super
Well-Known Member
So nothing illegal has occurred yet?
CaptainAmerica
Premium Member
Wait wait wait.
I was assured that they had an ironclad First Amendment claim because these actions were INDSISPUTABLY retaliatory for their speech?
Lots.
But nothing that can be called 'harm' yet, e.g., they haven't held up a building permit until TBA is reverted back to Splash. Yet.
Disney doesn't have to cry "illegal" the moment it happens. They can bide their time. Collect evidence. Let the opposition make more unforced errors and see what their playbook is.
And I can see Disney stringing this out as long as possible. They won't pursue every avenue all at once. When the time comes, they'll object to one certain thing. And let that play out. Then, later, object to another thing. And let that play out. Disney's got a term-limit on their side.
To a point, maybe.
But where DeSantis is pushing this, I'd say it's getting more and more unlikely Disney won't find it's way into a court.
They do.
They have time to kill to assert that.
If they use that to wipe out all that Gov and Cronies have done, then Gov and Cronies will find another avenue of attack, such as attempting to pass another vengeful bill, but next time, to stop saying it's all about vengeance.
el_super
Well-Known Member
So Disney says the development agreement is good. CFTOD says it is not. Then what happens What action does the board take that you think will end up in court? Denying a building permit? Raising taxes? Affordable housing?
What makes it more advantageous to Disney to fight the multitude of singular actions from the board, rather than fight the take over in the first place?