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

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
This whole thread cracks me up.
Disney got corporate welfare from Florida decades ago. I thought most were against that. I don’t care about the manner in which the revoking of that was initiated, but, Disney (a corporation) now has to “Pay its fair share”, as the current administration is so “bent” on repeating. Creepy whisper it to us again, Brandon.
Wow, what a travesty…
Hey genius…

The money generated by Disney has paid for about half of modern Florida

…Lockheed gets corporate welfare…and J.P. Morgan…

Try to keep up 👍🏻
 
Last edited:

donsullivan

Premium Member
I would agree with allowing the state and both counties to appoint members to the Board. However, I would also want to see some type of qualifications in the statute for members appointed by state and local government to the Board. Civil engineers, biologists, land use attorney, etc. People who have the expertise to make real contributions.
Yeah, you can put some guardrails around the skills appropriate for the role which I know the local counties would not have a problem with.
 

GrumpyFan

Well-Known Member
I would agree with allowing the state and both counties to appoint members to the Board. However, I would also want to see some type of qualifications in the statute for members appointed by state and local government to the Board. Civil engineers, biologists, land use attorney, etc. People who have the expertise to make real contributions.
I think something like this would have been a nice balance to both the previous RCID board that favored Disney's interests almost entirely and the newly appointed CFTOD that seems to be interested only in doing the will of the governor, which is to punish Disney.
Also, those proposals (yours, plus @donsullivan's) would actually make them more representative of the name given to them.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
I would agree with allowing the state and both counties to appoint members to the Board. However, I would also want to see some type of qualifications in the statute for members appointed by state and local government to the Board. Civil engineers, biologists, land use attorney, etc. People who have the expertise to make real contributions.
They already proved the level of dysfunction on the state level and that can’t be denied.

If I were Disney…I’d push for nothing less than status quo prior.

Why shouldn’t they?
 
Last edited:

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Not sure if this has been shared yet. I’d recommend reading the accompanying article.




The only question this makes me consider, is how much of an issue can you have regarding notice if most of a jurisdictions voting residents are present? I understand there’s supposed to be a set procedure, but is there really an issue when most of the voters are all present?

Even if the cities did not act properly and were not properly consulted, I still don’t see how that gives the District standing. They’re the allegedly aggrieved party but they also no longer have the power to disagree with the District. Barking up this tree just seems like it would threaten the District’s superior authority.
 

RamblinWreck

Well-Known Member
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?
I don’t think this is accurate.

Their options at present aren’t “status quo” (Aka too much autonomy in many peoples opinions) vs “be treated like everyone else”

It’s “status quo” vs “be under the thumb of one man who can run your local government that essentially only effects you, and doesn’t have to worry about being held accountable for it”
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
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?
Just my opinion…

The Benefit here is the control of development…whether they develop or not.

Wdw is the single unit/component of the entire Disney portfolio that holds the most value. Not even close either.

They trade on that…they can’t sling stock as effectively if they don’t have rights to the front lawn.
 

GrumpyFan

Well-Known Member
This whole ordeal has been of huge interest to me. Years ago I read with great interest Chad Denver Emerson’s Project Future which details much of what went in to buying the property, forming Reedy Creek and building WDW. I’m not an expert on the subject, but I have read a good bit about it. So it really bothers me when people pop in with their snide comments about Disney and RCID and how it’s “unfair”. This thread, plus Twitter have consumed way more of my time and mind on the subject and I probably should take a break, but the hits just keep coming making it hard for me to walk away.
Anyone else? Lol!
 

LAKid53

Official Member of the Girly Girl Fan Club
Premium Member
This whole ordeal has been of huge interest to me. Years ago I read with great interest Chad Denver Emerson’s Project Future which details much of what went in to buying the property, forming Reedy Creek and building WDW. I’m not an expert on the subject, but I have read a good bit about it. So it really bothers me when people pop in with their snide comments about Disney and RCID and how it’s “unfair”. This thread, plus Twitter have consumed way more of my time and mind on the subject and I probably should take a break, but the hits just keep coming making it hard for me to walk away.
Anyone else? Lol!

I find the legal analysis members, especially @Chi84, are providing helpful and illuminating.
 

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
This whole ordeal has been of huge interest to me. Years ago I read with great interest Chad Denver Emerson’s Project Future which details much of what went in to buying the property, forming Reedy Creek and building WDW. I’m not an expert on the subject, but I have read a good bit about it. So it really bothers me when people pop in with their snide comments about Disney and RCID and how it’s “unfair”. This thread, plus Twitter have consumed way more of my time and mind on the subject and I probably should take a break, but the hits just keep coming making it hard for me to walk away.
Anyone else? Lol!
Project future is top 3 Disney books Alltime for me…

It’s “required reading” in my class 😎

Have you read married to the mouse?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom