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

[mkt]

Fender or Gibson? Martin or Taylor? Epiphone or Squier? Marshall or Vox?

THE PEOPLE NEED TO KNOW LEN!

STILL WAITING LEN.

 

[Stripes]

Wow. If you actually believe this you probably ought to do some reading (away from here) to get the actual facts on how and why Reedy Creek was created and how the Florida Supreme County has upheld the need and benefit from it multiple times over the decades. You are listening to the ‘talking points’ about taxes and don’t understand that they actually pay more than the other competitors so that I as a taxpayer don’t have to pay to build their roads, water treatment plants, power facilities, etc.. Did they derive ‘benefit’ from this structure, yes- but the residents of the surrounding counties also derived benefit by not having to pay for all the services needed to support the vast development they’ve done over the last half century.

As someone directly impacted by this mess, both my job and my home it makes me crazy when people flippantly throw out talking points without doing the homework to learn all of the facts of the whole thing.

Precisely. Disney paid a much higher tax rate than other businesses in Orange County and Osceola County do, including their competitors. These taxes pay for virtually all of the municipal services and infrastructure required to operate the vast resort which otherwise would’ve been paid for by Orange and Osceola County taxpayers. In return, Disney, as majority landowner, controlled who sat on the board of the district and thereby control to a large extent land use of their own land. Keep in mind, Disney still pays Orange County property taxes, Osceola county property taxes, Florida corporate income tax, and sales tax (which is passed on to guests, of course).

It was a mutually beneficial arrangement. Disney paid the bills for their resort including the cost of municipal government services and infrastructure that would ordinarily be passed on to all local taxpayers and in return they had majority voting power over the district’s board. The legislature initially wanted to dissolve the district, but reneged on that because they didn’t want to raise taxes on local residents in order to pay for the cost of the services and infrastructure the counties would inherit.

Now Disney will still be paying higher tax rates than everybody else and they no longer have any say in how those taxes are spent because the board is now appointed by the governor. In fact, the new board will be increasing taxes on Disney in order to pay for their expensive lawyers to defend their rights to control what Disney can do on Disney’s land with Disney’s money. I seem to recall the founding of this country was incited by the idea that there can be no taxation without representation. Well, that’s what Florida has done here.

It’s sick.

@donaldtoo If this move is really about putting everyone on an even playing field, can you name another theme park or any entity in Florida whatsoever that is subject to the land-use power and 30-mill taxing power of a special district controlled by political appointees?

I‘ll help you out. You’re not gonna find one.

 

[LAKid53]

So what is Disney’s benefit here with RCID?

It’s been said by some on here they don’t get a financial break, and may even pay more in taxes.

Many of those same people have also said they don’t get an unusual break in terms of various approvals.

Yet their actions - the development agreement, restrictive covenant, lawsuit - suggests they really wanted to keep the status quo above and beyond the principle of defending themselves.

So what benefits did Disney enjoy through this arrangement?

As a part-time resident and property tax payer in Orange County, I'm not harmed by the development agreement, convents or permitting RCID provided. As others have stated, Disney's building codes meet or exceeds the state's - which wasn't enacted until 1998.

 

[mkt]

You think TWDC is the only company given tax incentives to attract them to Florida? Suggest you check out what Amazon gets when it opens a new distribution center in the state. Check out what Leon County threw their way for the new one off I-10. Especially what Devoe Moore got.

If you really want to cry, look at the crap sweetheart deal the City of Miami did to get Marlins Park.

After the stadium is paid off, the team will have gotten a Billion Dollar stadium for free.

 

[hopemax]

So, you’re telling me the RCID wasn’t a monetary advantage for Disney…Disney took a monetary hit in Florida on that deal…?!

If you are going to fight this battle, a more appropriate cynical** view of RCID would be that it was a "greasing the palm" type of deal. You've heard of those right? Where people pay others off to get what they want, make things go smoother & quicker, to look the other way, etc. Disney paid for autonomy. They weren't running a shakedown operation on the state. It's the other way "business" rolls; not everything is about tax breaks.

** I don't want to hear from the rest of you, that I'm saying that's the extent of what the RCID was. I mean look at the context of who and what I am replying to!

 

[peter11435]

It’s been said by some on here they don’t get a financial break, and may even pay more in taxes.

Theres no “may even pay more in taxes” about it. It’s a prove-able fact that they pay more in taxes because of RCID. This isn’t up for debate. Tax information is public record and available for you to see if you’re interested in actually being informed. You don’t need to guess.

 

[mkt]

I just Disney thinks their crap doesn’t stink, and they’re the only real game in Florida.

Also, how does this warrant the blatant constitutional violations the government has taken against them?

 

[BuzzedPotatoHead89]

So what is Disney’s benefit here with RCID?

It’s been said by some on here they don’t get a financial break, and may even pay more in taxes.

Many of those same people have also said they don’t get an unusual break in terms of various approvals.

Yet their actions - the development agreement, restrictive covenant, lawsuit - suggests they really wanted to keep the status quo above and beyond the principle of defending themselves.

So what benefits did Disney enjoy through this arrangement?

TWDC through RCID retain a level of autonomy in exchange for paying for services traditionally covered by the local government by issuing bonds and approving permits, etc. While you could argue this is a form of “self-governance” this is not a unique to TWDC.

If everyone has a problem with the RCID and it’s status my only position is this - dissolve all existing special Florida statewide special districts (there are over 1,000), pass the collective bond debt to the state in the form of general obligation bonds and raise property taxes across the board so no one local government is inflicted more than another. Call it the “Florida Freedom Tax Assessment”. Problem solved.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

So what is Disney’s benefit here with RCID?

It’s been said by some on here they don’t get a financial break, and may even pay more in taxes.

Many of those same people have also said they don’t get an unusual break in terms of various approvals.

Yet their actions - the development agreement, restrictive covenant, lawsuit - suggests they really wanted to keep the status quo above and beyond the principle of defending themselves.

So what benefits did Disney enjoy through this arrangement?

"May" pay more taxes? No, they definitely do. It's a demonstrable fact and isn't debatable. The benefit is the autonomy to maintain the infrastructure so that it is up to their standards, which is why the roads in the District are so much nicer than the surrounding areas. It also helps them to avoid the urban sprawl the company encountered in Anaheim (to some extent, anyway, as the views at AKL have been downgraded in recent years by nearby attractions and the townhouses being built next door).

 

[mkt]

Is this a joke…?!
The current government has been retaliating against its citizens for a few years now…!!!!!

Which government? Federal? State? Local? Cite examples. Be specific.

 

[LAKid53]

Not at all. I’m 60 years old, and I’ve seen companies, professional sports teams, etc., get all kinds of “incentives”, tax exempt bonds, etc., to settle where they do.

And, thank you.
I’m very familiar with the whole Walt Disneyland regret-fest, and now we have more space.

I just Disney thinks their crap doesn’t stink, and they’re the only real game in Florida.

As am I, having been born and raised in LA. And much older than you.

Without WDW, Central Florida wouldn't be the economic powerhouse in the state it now is. Universal opened in Florida because Disney showed a theme park in the state would be a profitable venture.

 

[Lilofan]

Disney protected itself from a government that was clearly going to act in bad faith: that's why.

It might be something new to Americans, but as someone who spent half of their life in Latin America, this is not new at all. And DeSantis is governing like the wannabe authoritarians I left behind to return to the US.

Others would tweet like an autocrat. DeSantis acts like one, be obedient or face retaliation.

 

[mkt]

As am I, having been born and raised in LA. And much older than you.

Without WDW, Central Florida wouldn't be the economic powerhouse in the state it now is. Universal opened in Florida because Disney showed a theme park in the state would be a profitable venture.

Without Disney, Gatorland would've shut down decades ago.

 

[LAKid53]

Without Disney, Gatorland would've shut down decades ago.

Without Disney, there'd be no Universal, Sea World, Legoland, Busch Gardens or any of the other major attractions in the state.

 

[GoofGoof]

You shouldn't trust anything that guy says. It's wildly skewed political opinions; not actual legal analysis.

I think this is really good news for Disney. If someone desperate to find any fault in their case can only come up with some convoluted claim of securities fraud that‘s pretty encouraging. There is a less than 0.0001% chance that Disney is found guilty of securities fraud here

 

[Stripes]

So what benefits did Disney enjoy through this arrangement?

RCID was a mutually beneficial arrangement. It no longer is.

The only benefit Disney derived was control as majority landowner. Obviously they no longer have that control.

 

[GoofGoof]

A true Originalist doesn’t view corporations as having any political rights. Quoting from Citizens United:

Postratification practice bolsters the conclusion that the First Amendment, “as originally understood,” … did not give corporations political speech rights on a par with the rights of individuals. Well into the modern era of general incorporation statutes, “[t]he common law was generally interpreted as prohibiting corporate political participation,” First Nat. Bank of Boston v. Bellotti, 435 U. S. 765, 819 (1978) (White, J., dissenting), and this Court did not recognize any First Amendment protections for corporations until the middle part of the 20th century.​

Citizens United and Bellotti are both 5-4 decisions and both remain controversial. An Originalist might believe these were decided wrongly and overrule them.

An Originalist might examine the 1798 decision in Calder (the basis for ex post facto law restrictions) and read this:

The Legislature may enjoin, permit, forbid; and punish; they may declare new crimes; and establish rules of conduct for all its citizens in future cases; they may command what is right, and prohibit what is wrong; but they cannot change innocence into guilt or punish innocence as a crime; or violate the right of an antecedent lawful private contract; or the right of private property.​

A true Originalist might say to themselves that our Founding Fathers intended that restrictions on ex post facto laws apply to private contracts only.

There are degrees of Originalists. Like most justices, they tend to emphasize the parts of the law that get them to the ruling they want to get to.

As far as Bush or Trump appointees holding certain views on business, I agree Republicans historically were pro-business. But Democrats generally were pro-regulation. Does this mean we can count on liberal Judge Walker to rule in DeSantis' favor?

Companies have gone liberal (avoiding that other word) to a degree than no Republican would have imagined even 10 years ago. It would be misleading to assume that just because Republicans or their judicial appointees were pro-business before, they remain pro-business now.

Returning to my original point, Disney needs to be concerned about the justices it pulls on appeal.

Pro-regulation doesn’t mean supports this. There are probably many people who do not oppose what they consider is reasonable and necessary regulation of various industries and companies. That doesn’t mean they support anything any government does.

 

[lazyboy97o]

So what is Disney’s benefit here with RCID?

It’s been said by some on here they don’t get a financial break, and may even pay more in taxes.

Many of those same people have also said they don’t get an unusual break in terms of various approvals.

Yet their actions - the development agreement, restrictive covenant, lawsuit - suggests they really wanted to keep the status quo above and beyond the principle of defending themselves.

So what benefits did Disney enjoy through this arrangement?

Were you necessarily receiving some prior benefit if I start punching you and you want it to stop?

Disney’s benefits have been explained, it’s in their ability to control their development.

 

[GoofGoof]

Is there some imaginary gotcha hiding in there?
Are people just making stuff up now and saying it's so?

No and heck yeah

 

[LAKid53]

If you really want to cry, look at the crap sweetheart deal the City of Miami did to get Marlins Park.

After the stadium is paid off, the team will have gotten a Billion Dollar stadium for free.

FSU managed to get $20 million in blueprint monies to renovate Doak Campbell Stadium.