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

[JusticeDisney]

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.

Again, you clearly do not understand how the law works. You cannot file for an injunction on an anticipatory basis.

 

[flynnibus]

I am moving on to #2. I‘m assuming if the contract was illegal anyway there would be no need to bring up the notice issue. I guess it’s a throw a bunch of poo at the wall and see what sticks scenario. The only evidence the presented that the contract could be illegal was that e-mail screen shot which IMHO proves nothing legally. Again more of a PR stunt as they new the images would get tweeted out in an attempt to put doubt in people’s minds.

Again I object to the 'PR stunt' label. This is what lawyers do... start with the largest land grab you can because you can't generally expand/change your complaints w/o merit. It's better to get an idea defeated then it is to not take the shot. That's why I noted what I found interesting from their legal review was the substance of advising on what is strong/weak. Instead they asked for 'what can we do' and got the typical 'heres everything we could concievably attack it with' response.

AKA they asked for ammo, and the lawyers stretched to find as much as they could.. even if of doubtful quality.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Again, you clearly do not understand how the law works. You cant not file for an injunction on an anticipatory basis.

That's my point.

I'm saying Disney's case isn't ironclad. When I say "this is what you do when your case is ironclad," and Disney isn't doing that thing, it means their case isn't ironclad.

 

[JusticeDisney]

That's LITERALLY my point.

I wasn't saying "Disney is obviously going to sue and win summary judgment within hours." I was mocking the people who were saying that.

We are not talking about the same thing. You keep questioning why Disney hasn't taken any legal action at this point, and I am trying to explain to you that they cannot because nothing has actually occurred yet.

 

[JusticeDisney]

That's my point.

I'm saying Disney's case isn't ironclad. When I say "this is what you do when your case is ironclad," and Disney isn't doing that thing, it means their case isn't ironclad.

No. You said that if they really think that their case is so ironclad, they don't wait and instead take legal action right now. That statement by you demonstrates a fundamental ignorance of how the law works.

 

[TeriofTerror]

this thread has turned into a hydra. i cut myself away from reading it after getting caught up & 5 more pages pop up shortly after

I just had a comment deleted from this thread, and I swear to whomever's diety of choice that I have no idea why it merited that action. I've been trying really hard to behave myself!

 

[flynnibus]

You know, going back and reading the original RCID charter, Section 23(3)(d) , which deals with zoning laws and comprehensive plans, might say the Board isn’t required to give notice.

I gotta imagine though if you are leveraging something defined in another statute (the developer agreement one) that those standards apply to. This action wasn't in the normal course of the district's granted activities (covered by the RCID act), it's a concept pulled from the other law.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Part of me thinks this is a bump in the road in the 50 plus history of WDW.

Another part of me says it's a turning point.

The ultimate loser in all of this in my opinion are the people of central Florida, maybe people of the whole state.

 

[Chi84]

Again, you clearly do not understand how the law works. You cant not file for an injunction on an anticipatory basis.

At a minimum there has to be something to enjoin.

 

[JusticeDisney]

At a minimum there has to be something to enjoin.

That is correct.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I meant to respond to this earlier but got distracted. Back on topic.

This is just a wild theory with no actual facts to support it and assumes no notices were sent which we don’t know to be true but hear me out. Someone mentioned pages ago that FDOT technically owns some land adjacent to the district. If the lawyers determined that FDOT would qualify as an impacted landowner that would be problematic. If RCID sent notice to multiple other land owners but skipped FDOT that may seem really suspect too. Is it possible that’s the reason they didn’t send notices out? FDOT would obviously inform the Governor and they could accelerate passing the bill to seize control of the district before the agreement was officially done. I would assume if they did that they would have looked at precedent in past cases and looked at the risks associated with the contract being voided over failure to notice. Just a wild theory but as you say, if that step wasn’t taken it was most likely skipped on purpose.

I find the idea that FDOT needs to be notified a bit specious. By that standard they need to be notified for all sorts of decisions because they own roads and slivers of roads all over the place. It’s also not really their business to be for or against whatever is happening next to a road.

 

[Vacationeer]

I just had a comment deleted from this thread, and I swear to whomever's diety of choice that I have no idea why it merited that action. I've been trying really hard to behave myself!

It could be as simple as off topic, or in response to something off topic. Don’t take it personally.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

At a minimum there has to be something to enjoin.

Standing could be very interesting here.

Typically, the courts have rejected the argument that a plaintiff has standing based on their status as a taxpayer who doesn't like how their tax dollars are being spent. But how does that work if you're 85% of the tax base?

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Part of me thinks this is a bump in the road in the 50 plus history of WDW.

Another part of me says it's a turning point.

The ultimate loser in all of this in my opinion are the people of central Florida, maybe people of the whole state.

I’m still optimistic any impact is going to happen behind the scenes, bureaucratic red tape, more hoops to jump through, more fees, etc.

Nothing has gone the way I expected so far though, if they actually did something as petty as allow a dive motel to build on RCiD land I wouldn’t be surprised at this point.

 

[lentesta]

I gotta imagine though if you are leveraging something defined in another statute (the developer agreement one) that those standards apply to. This action wasn't in the normal course of the district's granted activities (covered by the RCID act), it's a concept pulled from the other law.

The whole section is about exemption from county and state zoning and development statutes.

ETA: Section 18 seems to say the same thing for services. I’m not sure notice was required for anything the board did in February.

 

[Ripken10]

Curious question - with the announcement today of the new cabins, could this be the "trigger point" for the dispute in courts (I guess potentially something else could come before it, or is it even simpler then that?). Disney announces new project. Likely they feel it is in the developmental plan they can do this without Board's approval. Board feels they can't based on them voiding the contract...so when disney does build...let the real fun begin?

 

[el_super]

So it’s difficult for them to go scorched earth and look like the aggressor in the eyes of the general public.

I agree with this, but this is also why I think some from of compromise or settlement will be reached. Disney may be willing to fight/sue, in order to stop a prison from being built near them, but are they going to sue to stop ride safety inspections? Or affordable housing? Or pay raises for first responders? Those headlines write themselves.

 

[RobbinsDad]

In


I’m still optimistic any impact is going to happen behind the scenes, bureaucratic red tape, more hoops to jump through, more fees, etc.

Nothing has gone the way I expected so far though, if they actually did something as petty as allow a dive motel to build on RCiD land I wouldn’t be surprised at this point.

I just can't see any of his building threats actually coming to fruition. Tough rhetoric to muster the far right is one thing, but to actually build something that could devalue the land that the CFTOD maintains would be political suicide for DeSantis and his lackeys. Florida is a red state now, no doubt about it, but there are plenty of other red politicians within the state who would be ready to pounce on this political faux pas. DeSantis is popular, but he's not indomitable.

 

[DCBaker]

Here's the agenda for the next Board of Supervisors meeting, which will be held April 26 at 9:30am.

https://www.rcid.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/04-26-23-BOS-Agenda-FINAL.pdf

 

[lazyboy97o]

You know, going back and reading the original RCID charter, Section 23(3)(d) , which deals with zoning laws and comprehensive plans, might say the Board isn’t required to give notice.

View attachment 711438

There’s also a clause that says they don’t need to give notice if they have prior written consent of landowners.