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

[JoJoCal19]

If you've opined, I've missed it.

What is your theory on why Disney hasn't challenged anything yet?

I would say because unlike the Gov who just reacts without thinking things through, they are spending an inordinate amount of time crossing t's and dotting i's building a sound legal case. Just like they were working quietly behind the scenes (and open public forum if you looked in the right place for notices) on their Reedy Creek changes they made.

 

[Kamikaze]

I would say because unlike the Gov who just reacts without thinking things through, they are spending an inordinate amount of time crossing t's and dotting i's building a sound legal case.

On top of that, when you have say 10 examples of laws/regulations being broken instead of 2, it makes your case easier to win. They're letting the state dig themselves deeper. They'll file suit right before they absolutely need to, which would be whenever CFTOD can actually make any changes.

 

[LAKid53]

As I mentioned in my post, I get that they're trying the "throw everything at the wall" approach to hedge their bets; I'm just pointing out that this has led to contractions in their position which opens it up to more scrutiny and may hurt their argument in the end. This is fundamentally different from how Disney is handling things, regardless how many channels they use.

How is the state doing anything they can to undo the contracts even if it leads to contradicting themselves the "same" as Disney making one consistent argument in multiple channels? It's not.

And Disney's lawyers will repeatedly stress that in court. Several government entities - board of supervisors, governor, body that passes law, attorney general (state's legal officer) - repeatedly stating an agreement is invalid, void, illegal, etc., then passing legislation to invalidate said agreement tends to undercut one's argument in court. And makes one look stupid, especially the state's chief legal beagle...who should know what's legal and what is not.

Disney lawyer: "If you were told by counsel to the OCTOD Board of Supervisors and the state attorney general that this Agreement between RCID and TWDC executed on February 8, 2023 was invalid, void, illegal, why did you take the legislative step to pass a bill that LEGISLATIVELY invalidated it and have the governor sign it into law? Why didn't you just go to court and have a court confirm your position? How can you, LEGISLATIVELY, make something invalid that is already invalid? By passing this bill, isn't that saying the Agreement was, in fact, valid?"

Senate President:

 

[lazyboy97o]

If you've opined, I've missed it.

What is your theory on why Disney hasn't challenged anything yet?

I think they’re cowards.

Disney has not acted because they are risk averse cowards. That’s it. Plenty of actual harms have occurred. They thought appeasement would work. They wrongly assumed that if they just sulked away then that would be enough and it would go away. The assessment wasn’t one of right or wrong, it was about what assumed to be the easiest.

Even now, with clear attempts to impair contracts, Disney might not act. They might again convince themselves that “this time they’ll actually stop.”

 

[Lilofan]

If you've opined, I've missed it.

What is your theory on why Disney hasn't challenged anything yet?

Perhaps wait and see DeSantis dig his own grave and lie in it.

 

[peter11435]

The original bill was also illegal based on targeting a company based on its 1A rights, so they clearly DGAF.

Absolutely. But in that case they did something blatantly unconstitutional because they felt they had to punish Disney. In this case they are doing something unconstitutional for no reason at all if they honestly believe the contract is null and void.

 

[Disstevefan1]

The state from day 1 always had the lawful power to dissolve RCID. They just chose to let it be until now.

Folks are free to speculate as to why they chose to act now, but that does not make the dissolution of RCID unconstitutional.

Do I think this whole thing is a circus and is bad for Disney, the gov, and Florida, YES!

 

[peter11435]

The state from day 1 always had the lawful power to dissolve RCID. They just chose to let it be until now.

Folks are free to speculate as to why now they chose to act now, but that does not make the dissolution of RCID unconstitutional.

Do I think this whole thing is a circus and is bad for Disney, the gov, and Florida, YES!

States have the lawful power to arrest people. Arresting someone is not unconstitutional. Arresting someone for expressing their right to free speech IS unconstitutional.

 

[lazyboy97o]

And Disney's lawyers will repeatedly stress that in court. Several government entities - board of supervisors, governor, body that passes law, attorney general (state's legal officer) - repeatedly stating an agreement is invalid, void, illegal, etc., then passing legislation to invalidate said agreement tends to undercut one's argument in court. And makes one look stupid, especially the state's chief legal beagle...who should know what's legal and what is not.

Disney lawyer: "If you were told by counsel to the OCTOD Board of Supervisors and the state attorney general that this Agreement between RCID and TWDC executed on February 8, 2023 was invalid, void, illegal, why did you take the legislative step to pass a bill that LEGISLATIVELY invalidated it and have the governor sign it into law? Why didn't you just go to court and have a court confirm your position? How can you, LEGISLATIVELY, make something invalid that is already invalid? By passing this bill, isn't that saying the Agreement was, in fact, valid?"

Senate President:

It’s not even that they’re passing legislation to invalidate directly. They’re giving the board power to review it and reconsider it. The board wouldn’t need that power if they can invalidate it themselves the way they are claiming.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The state from day 1 always had the lawful power to dissolve RCID. They just chose to let it be until now.

Folks are free to speculate as to why they chose to act now, but that does not make the dissolution of RCID unconstitutional.

Do I think this whole thing is a circus and is bad for Disney, the gov, and Florida, YES!

Why do you keep repeating lies that you know full well are lies? Especially since you’ve repeatedly acknowledged that your statements are false? What is the purpose? Is it just for the lolz?

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Folks are free to speculate as to why they chose to act now, but that does not make the dissolution of RCID unconstitutional.

It’s not speculation - it’s government retaliation. That’s a fact.

Universal really needs to speak up soon - for both the way another theme park is being treated and for the way their LGBT team members are being treated by the state.

 

[Disstevefan1]

States have the lawful power to arrest people. Arresting someone is not unconstitutional. Arresting someone for expressing their right to free speech IS unconstitutional.

As I say, folks are free to speculate as to why, but the state always had the power to do it, and it was considered many times over the decades and was previously decided it was more trouble than it was worth.

Its looking like they were right.

Disney is powerful and they don't mind spending money.

 

[pdude81]

they don't mind spending money.

I don't know that I'd go that far

 

[flynnibus]

Disney lawyer: "If you were told by counsel to the OCTOD Board of Supervisors and the state attorney general that this Agreement between RCID and TWDC executed on February 8, 2023 was invalid, void, illegal, why did you take the legislative step to pass a bill that LEGISLATIVELY invalidated it and have the governor sign it into law?

“Nuke it from orbit… it’s the only way to be sure”

Besides… who is the lawyer going to ask that to, who is both the district and the legislature? These are two different groups moving within their own lanes

 

[peter11435]

As I say, folks are free to speculate as to why, but the state always had the power to do it, and it was considered many times over the decades and was previously decided it was more trouble than it was worth.

Its looking like they were right.

Disney is powerful and they don't mind spending money.

Except there is no reason to speculate as to why. The state has been abundantly clear as to why they have done this. They have repeatedly claimed and boosted that it was done as retaliation to punish Disney for exercising their first amendment right. They have not only stated this in the media but also in official debate on the house floor. There is no speculation.

 

[Disstevefan1]

It’s not speculation - it’s government retaliation. That’s a fact.

Universal really needs to speak up soon - for both the way another theme park is being treated and for the way their LGBT team members are being treated by the state.

RCID was a perk given to TWDC from the State. They are within their power to take it away; they don't need a reason.

If I was the gov, I would have let it be.

 

[flynnibus]

Why do you keep repeating lies that you know full well are lies? Especially since you’ve repeatedly acknowledged that your statements are false? What is the purpose? Is it just for the lolz?

Slow thread… time to toss some stink bombs

 

[peter11435]

RCID was a perk given to TWDC from the State. They are within their power to take it away; they don't need a reason.

If I was the gov, I would have let it be.

RCID was not a perk. And from a legal standpoint it was not given to TWDC

 

[CaptainAmerica]

repeatedly stating an agreement is invalid, void, illegal, etc., then passing legislation to invalidate said agreement tends to undercut one's argument in court.

That cuts both ways, and Disney did the exact same thing.

Jeff Vahle's February 10 statement read, in part, "we are focused on the future and are ready to work within this new framework," which is a puzzling thing to say if you later plan to claim that the new framework was an illegal retaliatory measure taken in violation of your First Amendment rights.

RCID was not a perk. And from a legal standpoint it was not given to TWDC

If it wasn't a perk, then how is losing it retaliatory?

 

[peter11435]

If it wasn't a perk, then how is losing it retaliatory?

Is not being arrested a perk?