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

[GoofGoof]

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.

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).

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

And yet, they're not.

What's your theory?

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

 

[LAKid53]

And yet, they're not.

What's your theory?

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]

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.

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]

They're waiting for Gov and Friends to actually do something that would be deemed illegal rather than just say it.

So nothing illegal has occurred yet?

 

[CaptainAmerica]

They're waiting for Gov and Friends to actually do something that would be deemed illegal rather than just say it.

Wait wait wait.

I was assured that they had an ironclad First Amendment claim because these actions were INDSISPUTABLY retaliatory for their speech?

 

[MisterPenguin]

So nothing illegal has occurred yet?

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.

 

[GBAB1973]

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.

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.

 

[Chi84]

Just a polite request to please stick to RCID and keep the name-calling out of this thread. It’s been going so well!

 

[Touchdown]

So what happens if the board isn’t confirmed by the senate before May 2nd? The Federal govt does allow the President to make Recess Apointments, does FL law allow the Governor to? If that’s a no, who runs the board of the district fka Reedy Creek

 

[MisterPenguin]

Wait wait wait.

I was assured that they had an ironclad First Amendment claim because these actions were INDSISPUTABLY retaliatory for their speech?

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]

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.

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?

 

[CaptainAmerica]

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.

Litigation isn't that fast. If you're really sure that your case is ironclad, you file for temporary injunctive relief now, before any potentially irreversible damage is done.

DeSantis would be long gone before any litigation here made its way through the courts.

 

[MisterPenguin]

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?

Litigation isn't that fast. If you're really sure that your case is ironclad, you file for temporary injunctive relief now, before any potentially irreversible damage is done.

DeSantis would be long gone before any litigation here made its way through the courts.

You asked, I answered. We obviously have different takes. Now we all know where we stand.

Good day to both of you.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Litigation isn't that fast. If you're really sure that your case is ironclad, you file for temporary injunctive relief now, before any potentially irreversible damage is done.

DeSantis would be long gone before any litigation here made its way through the courts.

Injunctions are somewhat neutralized because the courts are now outwardly political.

And you’re reading the tea leaves wrong on “long gone”

It’s looking more like “never leaving” and Disney I’m sure is weighing that

 

[Brian]

DeSantis is going to have to take a day off from his Disney crusade to address the 4:45am emergency alert virtually everyone in Florida got overnight.

 

[Chi84]

You asked, I answered. We obviously have different takes. Now we all know where we stand.

Good day to both of you.

People act like Disney retained Dewey, Cheatem and Howe. I guarantee you the Disney legal team isn't going to get sucked in by histrionics or people's feelings on what should be done.

If notices weren't sent to certain people, it was done on purpose. It may have been a calculated gamble, but it wasn't because Disney didn't read the statute or forgot to put the notices in the mail.

They're playing the long game here and there really is no way to predict what's going to happen. We're just having fun on a discussion board!

 

[CaptainAmerica]

And you’re reading the tea leaves wrong on “long gone”

No, I'm saying even if he runs for POTUS and loses, or never runs for POTUS in the first place, his term would be over before there would be any resolution to litigation here.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'd love to see how a state employee would get experience on how exactly to determine if something like RotR is safe.

The same way Disney does. There is already state criteria that Disney has to meet with its inspections. A lot of the information does come from the ride system manufacturer. All of this is tied back to things like ASTM standards

 

[lazyboy97o]

But yes, it's ludicrous to think a state inspector from DACS is more qualified to inspect rides at either WDW or Uni than the Imagineers who designed and installed them.

Walt Disney Imagineering and Universal Creative don’t do ride maintenance and inspections, that’s done by the park operations teams. They also generally don’t manufacture the ride systems.