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

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
I was listening to a local call-in show on the NPR station in Orlando driving to Port Canaveral for a DCL cruise last Saturday. The two lawyers who were guests on the show made the point that while Disney may not have a strong case in some areas, they do when it comes to the right to enjoy use of the property it owns in the manner it deems best. And that the Florida Supreme Court has in prior cases ruled in the affirmative in instances like this.
 

AEfx

Well-Known Member
Have to beg to differ.
Millions visiting Disney parks per year. Bazillions spent on merch, movies, etc. worldwide.
Are they all rabid fans like us, of course not.
Are there absolute 'Disney is a blood sucking corporation we hate them' people out there, yes.
But yes, Disney has fans.

That really doesn't have anything to do with what I said, though. I never claimed that Disney wasn't a profitable business that many people give money to.

Money is spent even from people who actively dislike them (on both sides of the aisle, and both high-and low-brow culture) for various reasons. For just one example, go to any Star Wars message board, pretty much anywhere - reddit, or the big forums, etc. - and even though the vast majority of posts absolutely roast Disney as a company, those same people still spend hundreds and thousands of dollars each on Star Wars merchandise every year.

Another example is Disney+ - a highly successful venture - but how many people subscribe because they just love the Disney corporation, versus "my kid only shuts up if I play Frozen 2 on repeat every day", or because they gate-keep the content they want (Marvel, Star Wars, etc).

The entire point was - outside of fandoms, people do not have a great deal of affection for Disney as a company in the way some people who have posted seem to think. Like everyone is going to rally around them as poor victims, and change their mind politically or their vote based on this situation. Like "oh no, don't mess with Disney - that's one step too far!" It isn't 1980, or even 2000 any more.

Few other companies or entities jumping in to defend them, because in many ways, it's very hard for a company as profitable and powerful as Disney to be seen as some poor underdog victim. There are a lot of folks out there (especially in Hollywood) who absolutely despise DeSantis, but they are also chuckling out the other sides of their mouth because they don't dislike seeing Disney as a company get roughed up, at all.

And everyone else? Indifference. There is so much going on in the world right now, that what amounts to a spitting match over taxes on a theme park just doesn't hit the radar when in the end, it doesn't actually affect anything outside of Orlando at all.
 

afterabme

Active Member
I was listening to a local call-in show on the NPR station in Orlando driving to Port Canaveral for a DCL cruise last Saturday. The two lawyers who were guests on the show made the point that while Disney may not have a strong case in some areas, they do when it comes to the right to enjoy use of the property it owns in the manner it deems best. And that the Florida Supreme Court has in prior cases ruled in the affirmative in instances like this.
It is important to note that the makeup of the court has changed dramatically. This new court is remarkably different from previous ones.
 

Patcheslee

Well-Known Member
Looks like they're also worked on confirmation hearings today. Not sure what the step is after Ethics and Elections committee.
Screenshot_20230424_191518_Drive.jpg
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
The relevant committee in the Florida Senate votes on the nominee(s). If affirmed by the committee, it then moves to the full Senate for a vote.
We’ve had more than a few exchanges on whether or not sufficient notice was mailed to the appropriate parties, so in an effort to remain intellectually honest…

how can any official act undertaken by this board be viewed as legitimate or lawful if they haven’t had their appointment formally confirmed by the senate?
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
We’ve had more than a few exchanges on whether or not sufficient notice was mailed to the appropriate parties, so in an effort to remain intellectually honest…

how can any official act undertaken by this board be viewed as legitimate or lawful if they haven’t had their appointment formally confirmed by the senate?
I don’t think they care much about legitimate or even lawful. The Governor believes he has ultimate power because he won an election (and his supporters like to point this out too) so why should he be concerned with legitimate. As he said, he’s going to win over Disney no matter what.
 

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
We’ve had more than a few exchanges on whether or not sufficient notice was mailed to the appropriate parties, so in an effort to remain intellectually honest…

how can any official act undertaken by this board be viewed as legitimate or lawful if they haven’t had their appointment formally confirmed by the senate?

Because Florida law allows such. Until the Senate either confirms or rejects the nomination, it's an ad interim term under Florida law.

 

mkt

When a paradise is lost go straight to Disney™
Premium Member
Granted, the word transportation is there, but this is written vague enough and lacks a definition of what transport is in the context of this new rule that I could potentially see CFTOD goons... sorry, "FDOT Regulators" shutting down attractions that are on rails because they technically do transport you between locations.
 
Last edited:

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
That really doesn't have anything to do with what I said, though. I never claimed that Disney wasn't a profitable business that many people give money to.

Money is spent even from people who actively dislike them (on both sides of the aisle, and both high-and low-brow culture) for various reasons. For just one example, go to any Star Wars message board, pretty much anywhere - reddit, or the big forums, etc. - and even though the vast majority of posts absolutely roast Disney as a company, those same people still spend hundreds and thousands of dollars each on Star Wars merchandise every year.

Another example is Disney+ - a highly successful venture - but how many people subscribe because they just love the Disney corporation, versus "my kid only shuts up if I play Frozen 2 on repeat every day", or because they gate-keep the content they want (Marvel, Star Wars, etc).

The entire point was - outside of fandoms, people do not have a great deal of affection for Disney as a company in the way some people who have posted seem to think. Like everyone is going to rally around them as poor victims, and change their mind politically or their vote based on this situation. Like "oh no, don't mess with Disney - that's one step too far!" It isn't 1980, or even 2000 any more.

Few other companies or entities jumping in to defend them, because in many ways, it's very hard for a company as profitable and powerful as Disney to be seen as some poor underdog victim. There are a lot of folks out there (especially in Hollywood) who absolutely despise DeSantis, but they are also chuckling out the other sides of their mouth because they don't dislike seeing Disney as a company get roughed up, at all.

And everyone else? Indifference. There is so much going on in the world right now, that what amounts to a spitting match over taxes on a theme park just doesn't hit the radar when in the end, it doesn't actually affect anything outside of Orlando at all.
…tough one to sell here.

Disney has pull. The name has pull. Took about 100 or so years to build that up 😎
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
The relevant committee in the Florida Senate votes on the nominee(s). If affirmed by the committee, it then moves to the full Senate for a vote.
Right…which means the sub and ultimately the CHAIR holds the power.
Same as on the mighty Potomac…

…the pols like that arrangement.

It is what it is
 

JohnD

Well-Known Member
We’ve had more than a few exchanges on whether or not sufficient notice was mailed to the appropriate parties, so in an effort to remain intellectually honest…

how can any official act undertaken by this board be viewed as legitimate or lawful if they haven’t had their appointment formally confirmed by the senate?
Because the same holds true for Department secretaries and any other appointed office requiring confirmation. They immediately assume their role until confirmation in regular session. I would say 99.99% are confirmed. I don't know off the top of my head those not confirmed but there's probably somebody out there.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom