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

[LAKid53]

Well they haven’t done it that way in like…forever

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.

 

[Tha Realest]

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]

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]

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.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

 

[Tha Realest]

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

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

Okay, thanks. It felt like they were skipping a necessary step

 

[mkt]

View attachment 712277

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.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

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]

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]

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.

 

[LAKid53]

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.

Precisely.

 

[castlecake2.0]

What’s the next step after the board says the agreement is void? Is it automatically void or does something more have to happen?

 

[GoofGoof]

What’s the next step after the board says the agreement is void? Is it automatically void or does something more have to happen?

Under current law the board has no legal authority to declare the contract void. It’s just for show at this point. If/when the legislature passes the bill that allows local governments to go back and void previously executed development agreements then the board will have the legal authority to void the contract.….at least until that bill is challenged. I think the court battle could end up being over that bill and whether it’s constitutional.

 

[Brian]

What’s the next step after the board says the agreement is void?

They're not going to say it. They'll declare it.

It's called the Michael Scott strategy. It's legally bulletproof.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

Random monorail shutdowns would most impact those staying at the most expensive WDW hotels, also known as those guests who spend the most, and pay the most taxes, when visiting Florida.

The stupidity never ends.

 

[Brian]

Random monorail shutdowns would most impact those staying at the most expensive WDW hotels, also known as those guests who spend the most, and pay the most taxes, when visiting Florida.

The stupidity never ends.

This assumes the front line state workers would be acting in bad faith, which I think is a bit unfair. Most state workers, especially the front liners, are not partisans and just want to make an honest living like those in the private sector.

Sure, they take orders from partisans higher up in the org chart, but to assume that they will all just acquiesce and not blow the whistle, and inspectors will descend on WDW and just randomly shutdown the monorails just to own the libs is a bit much.

Assuming the inspectors act in good faith, I'd say it's a good thing if there are shutdowns of the monorail system. It means there are safety concerns being identified which would (presumably) otherwise go unaddressed.

 

[mikejs78]

I'd say it's a good thing if there are shutdowns of the monorail system

The proposed law says that there will be shutdowns to *conduct* the inspections. That means that even an inspector operating in good faith, if they are told to shut down the monorail for 3 weeks to conduct the inspection else they will lose their jobs - is that going to be refused on principle by most inspectors? This governor has made it obvious that he will terminate people who aren't lockstep with him.

 

[Wendy Pleakley]

This assumes the front line state workers would be acting in bad faith, which I think is a bit unfair. Most state workers, especially the front liners, are not partisans and just want to make an honest living like those in the private sector.

Sure, they take orders from partisans higher up in the org chart, but to assume that they will all just acquiesce and not blow the whistle, and inspectors will descend on WDW and just randomly shutdown the monorails just to own the libs is a bit much.

Assuming the inspectors act in good faith, I'd say it's a good thing if there are shutdowns of the monorail system. It means there are safety concerns being identified which would (presumably) otherwise go unaddressed.

What moment in this entire saga suggests this will be done for legitimate reasons in a reasonable manner?

 

[Brian]

The proposed law says that there will be shutdowns to *conduct* the inspections. That means that even an inspector operating in good faith, if they are told to shut down the monorail for 3 weeks to conduct the inspection else they will lose their jobs - is that going to be refused on principle by most inspectors? This governor has made it obvious that he will terminate people who aren't lockstep with him.

I don't know of many examples of heavy machinery that can be safely inspected without shutting them down first. If an inspector is acting in good faith, they will keep the system down only as long as it takes to conduct the inspection.

Orders to conduct an inspection for any specific and minimum period of time would come from a partisan, and would almost certainly be widely reported by the media, thus presenting Disney with yet another opportunity to seek redress in court.

 

[JAB]

Random monorail shutdowns would most impact those staying at the most expensive WDW hotels, also known as those guests who spend the most, and pay the most taxes, when visiting Florida.

The stupidity never ends.

I have to wonder if they have no clue at all about WDW transportation and think that shutting down the monorail would shut down the parks because they assume it's the only way to get certain places, and they have no idea that there's alternate options - ferry boats from the TTC, walking paths for Contempo, GF, and Poly (and that there are also ferry docks for those resorts that they could put back into use if needed), and buses from MK to Epcot.

Reminds me of the "protestors" who thought that "no one can go to Disney World" because they blocked the back way into Disney Springs with their trucks, assuming that the Walt Disney World sign meant it was the main (and only) entrance to the resort.

 

[Brian]

What moment in this entire saga suggests this will be done for legitimate reasons in a reasonable manner?

Touché. Until now, DeSantis' plans have not relied upon front line state workers, only elected officials and political appointees. You're introducing a group of people into the mix who are generally not partisans, and who punch in every day to provide for their families. These same people would also be liable to blow the whistle, either publicly or through government channels, if they are asked to do anything unscrupulous.