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

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Yes they can. The act was dissolved by the new bill. If the new bill is declared unconstitutional, then everything, including its repeal of the old act, is void.

Yeah…I “thought Better” of that…
But it doesn’t mean they can’t try another tactic…maybe even with some thought this time

 

[scottieRoss]

When it comes to resolution, the judge can issue an order that the dissolution was unconstitutional and roll back. Then have the 2 parties come up with a plan moving forward and enter it as a consent agreement. ie The state agrees to let RCID elect a new board and that it will not attempt to dissolve it or reconstitute it for X years. Then the state and Disney would be bound by the terms of the Consent Decree

 

[Bob Harlem]

Disney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument. The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts. This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.

 

[Figgy1]

Disney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument. The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts. This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.

What exactly is the state subsidizing? Disney pays taxes to the counties, state corporate tax and taxes to RC.

 

[esskay]

Yeah…I “thought Better” of that…
But it doesn’t mean they can’t try another tactic…maybe even with some thought this time

There would likely be a 'cooling off' period where they can't try it again for a certain period. Meanwhile RCID can put in place restrictions to make it pointless to even try.

I'm also not sure the state would want to try. If (or more likely when) they get their butt handed to them they'll switch to something else to try and draw focus away from their very public failure.

 

[mikejs78]

Disney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument. The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts. This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.

Everything that you just said is wrong.

• It's not a state subsidized profit center. In fact, Disney pays more in taxes because of the special district than its competitors.
• The state did not follow the procedures outlined for removing a special district. In fact, they didn't even remove the special district. They simply put in place a.new, Governor appointed board with taxing authority, which, by the way, is not allowed by the FL constitution.
• The state is also attempting to invalidate Disney's lawfully executed contracts, which makes it a federal issue under the contracts clause.
• It is a 1A issue - the legislation was done solely to punish Disney for its speech. This was repeated numerous times by the governor, multiple legislators including the sponsors of the bill, and outlined in the governor's book. This makes a potentially legal act (undoing a special district) illegal by virtue of its role in chilling political speech.

 

[esskay]

They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument.

Er...care to back that up?

Disney gets a minor tax break (Although still pays vastly more than anyone else would) owing to the amount of land they have. In exchange Disney has covered the maintenance and utility costs of RCID for decades. You take away RCID then you take away that expense from Disney, and it falls on the state.

Financially the state loses more by disolving RCID than Disney.

 

[peter11435]

Disney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument. The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts. This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.

Wrong

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Disney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument. The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts. This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.

Do me a favor…in 300 words or less, prove to me you know NOTHING about the Walt Disney company and Florida…

…wait…nevermind

 

[Dranth]

Disney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument.

This is a talking point that has been proven false many times over. Whoever you are getting your information from is just factually incorrect. Disney paid extra taxes because of RCID, not less and none of the money RCID collected went to Disney as profit.

The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts.

Yes, but the state did not follow the rules setup to remove said district. In fact, they passed a number of new laws to bypass the rules. Besides, in the end, they didn’t dissolve the district, they forcibly removed elected officials and installed appointed ones.

This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.

When state law runs afoul of the federal constitution it goes to federal court, not state but if the federal judge agrees with you they will throw the case out and tell Disney to refill with the state so this isn't an issue.

 

[peter11435]

Do me a favor…in 300 words or less, prove to me you know NOTHING about the Walt Disney company and Florida…

…wait…nevermind

He actually managed to do it in just 70!!

And proved he knows nothing about the constitution too! Impressive

 

[MagicHappens1971]

Disney is a wealthy company. They are not hiring an army of $2000 per hour attorneys to champion the first amendment. They see a state subsidized profit center being taken from them, and are hiding behind the first amendment argument. The Florida Constitution provides for these districts under the state codes including the provisions for removing said districts.

I’m not going to dignify these falsehoods with a response.

This is a straight up state law battle, not a Federal issue.

Wrong. Aside from the governors blatant attacks on Disneys first amendment rights, the portions of the lawsuit regarding contracts & due process are accurate and make this a federal issue.

Edit: In case you needed any further proof, these are direct quotes of DeSantis (&Co) from the suit.

 

[harry58]

I don’t see how it’s “unrelated” at all…

You want to talk about avoiding wages and taxes…lake nona is the poster child for it.

They should cancel it immediately…should have already, actually.

I live in Lake Nona. Curious as to why you call the area a poster child for avoiding wages and taxes.
Just to be clear, I dont believe imagineering should be relocated, even though it would probably help
my property values. Just wonder about your statements.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I live in Lake Nona. Curious as to why you call the area a poster child for avoiding wages and taxes.
Just to be clear, I dont believe imagineering should be relocated, even though it would probably help
my property values. Just wonder about your statements.

Sorry…not the area…this “arrangement”

 

[MagicHappens1971]

Just posting this here for posterity.

This Senator will be wrong….

DeSantis boasted about retaliating against Disneys first amendment rights….

The Rep who introduced the bill to the house publicly stated that they did this to punish Disney.

DeSantis and his pudding squad basically wrote this lawsuit for Disney.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Yes they can. The act was dissolved by the new bill. If the new bill is declared unconstitutional, then everything, including its repeal of the old act, is void.

Disney is seeking to overturn both laws, the original dissolution and the reconstitution. They’d go back to the before times.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

When state law runs afoul of the federal constitution it goes to federal court, not state but if the federal judge agrees with you they will throw the case out and tell Disney to refill with the state so this isn't an issue.

Bob Newsmax missed the part yesterday where they specifically waited until they could go to federal court - the “voiding” of land deals was the trigger - before they filed.

Like as if they just randomly typed it up in 5 minutes and dropped it off on their way to the Starbucks in Jacksonville…

 

[lazyboy97o]

It could be said they don’t really care about the development agreement because if they win they don’t need it. Just doesn’t make sense to sue multiple times, so they put everything in there.

Most of the complaint is about the development agreement. That’s the big thing they want because regardless of any other outcomes it keeps the most in place.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Just posting this here for posterity. View attachment 712861
This Senator will be wrong….

View attachment 712862
DeSantis boasted about retaliating against Disneys first amendment rights….
View attachment 712863
The Rep who introduced the bill to the house publicly stated that they did this to punish Disney.

DeSantis and his pudding squad basically wrote this lawsuit for Disney.

There really isn’t any dispute about standing or the facts of the case…

The question is what message do political courts want to send?
That’s the whole thing now.

If I had to bet…I’d lean obviously towards the money

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Most of the complaint is about the development agreement. That’s the big thing they want because regardless of any other outcomes it keeps the most in place.

Correct…but I bet they argue against the whole ball o wax