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

[RamblinWreck]

I know, that's why I hate it. Unless you're super rural, counties are way too big to effectively manage schools. I strongly favor municipal control of education so that administrators are directly accountable to parents.

Counterpoint:

When it comes to US institutions that were set up to be discriminatory to poor people and minorities, our public school systems are the most stark remaining example. And the smaller the school system is, the easier it is to stick it to the poors.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Wisconsin - https://docs.legis.wisconsin.gov/mi...n/ib_school_district_governance_eh_2021_02_15

"Wisconsin public school districts are classified as one of the following: common school districts, union high school districts, unified school districts, or first-class city districts. Wisconsin has a total of 421 public school districts: 365 common school districts (of which 322 serve grades K-12 and 43 serve grades K-8), 45 unified school districts, 10 union high school districts, and one first-class city school district, Milwaukee Public Schools (MPS)."

Your school districts are not controlled at the municipal level (city, town,township) - they are independent elected bodies with their own taxing authority.

Connecticut has regional school districts too, in areas where the population isn't dense enough to support a dedicated high school for each municipality.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The jury isn't going to be participating in message boards and reading every article that CNN puts out about this case. They're going to see the evidence presented at trial, and that's it.

This wouldn’t be going to a jury and we know which facts will be presented because they have already been presented. If they are deemed irrelevant it will very much be a matter of law and precedent, because it’ll almost certain to be a decision that the motive doesn’t matter.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

When it comes to US institutions that were set up to be discriminatory to poor people and minorities, our public school systems are the most stark remaining example. And the smaller the school system is, the easier it is to stick it to the poors.

You haven't spent much time in New England have you? There aren't many minorities in rural New Hampshire no matter how you draw the lines.

 

[peter11435]

I’d love to see a source for that interpretation.

Regardless, let’s put it another way. If the court finds that Disney’s allegations of retaliation, given the extensive amount of evidence to support them, are not sufficiently substantiated, such a finding would be very harmful to the future of this country.

That’s just it. While it wouldn’t be a legal precedent for future judges to follow… it would be a precedent for future legislators to follow. It establishes a playbook for future legislators to use to chill speech and retaliate for speech they don’t like while skirting legal repercussions and responsibility.

 

[LAKid53]

Is that certain? What's the process in Florida, would both parties have to waive?

It's a federal civil trial. State court rules don't apply. Either side can ask for a jury, if entitled to one based on the nature of the claim.

 

[mikejs78]

There's an extremely important distinction that I think people are missing.

There are questions of fact and there are questions of law, and Disney could theoretically lose on either one.

Questions of fact are decided by juries in jury trials and by the judge in "bench trials." Questions of law are decided by the judge. Questions of law are what get appealed and decided by the appellate courts and SCOTUS. Appellate courts generally do not weigh in on the facts.

With regard to the First Amendment claims:

• The question of fact is whether DeSantis and the Florida legislature did pass this legislation to retaliate against Disney for their speech.
• The question of law is whether passing this law in retaliation against Disney for their speech is unconstitutional.

If Disney loses on the facts, this case will be entirely inconsequential for any other future cases. If they lose on the law (which they won't), then it would indeed be consequential.

Losing on the facts has nothing to do with "precedent."

Given the judge that is going to be hearing this case at the circuit level, I find it highly probable that Disney will win on both facts and law. Soni would expect a ruling fully in Disney's favor.

Where it is less certain is how it will be decided as a matter of law at the appellate level, and at the Supreme Court level, if it gets there. Personally I think it's a slam dunk on contract claims. I am less certain about the 1A claims, primarily because of the case law surrounding legislative intent. I still think there's a pretty good chance Disney prevails here, as it's been repeatedly stated to be retaliation by both the governor as well as numerous legislators.

Which I think is dumb no matter who's in charge or what the issue is.

Ted Cruz got raked over the coals for going on vacation when Texas had their power crisis a couple of years ago.

A politician's physical presence in a disaster area does nothing to make the disaster any better. If anything, it's a distraction and an unnecessary drain on resources to accommodate the media, security, logistics, etc.

I disagree when it comes to the governor of a state. The governor has a defined role when it comes to emergency management in almost every state (if not all). In FL in particular, the FL statues say "The Governor is responsible for meeting the dangers presented to this state and its people by emergencies."

 

[lazyboy97o]

Is that certain? What's the process in Florida, would both parties have to waive?

This isn’t a Florida case. When was the last time you heard of a federal court empaneling a jury to decide if a law is constitutional? The whole reason people have been talking about the judge that the case was assigned to is because the judge is who decides the outcome.

 

[Chi84]

It's not an interpretation, you're just not understanding what "precedent" means. Factual findings have NOTHING almost nothing to do with any other case besides the one being decided. OJ Simpson being acquitted did not establish precedent for future murder trials, it was confined to THAT jury and THAT trial and THAT fact pattern. It had no applicability elsewhere.


The jury isn't going to be participating in message boards and reading every article that CNN puts out about this case. They're going to see the evidence presented at trial, and that's it.

Criminal trials are different because the state can't appeal them (double jeopardy). There is no OJ Simpson criminal case that can be cited as precedent.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Criminal trials are different because the state can't appeal them (double jeopardy). There is no OJ Simpson criminal case that can be cited as precedent.

You guys are being extremely pedantic.

The point is... if this case ends up getting appealed (which I think is unlikely in the first place, I think Florida loses and then gives up), the appellate decisions are not going to revisit the facts. Yes, they COULD revisit the facts if the facts were "clearly erroneous." But they're not going to.

 

[Patcheslee]

The Board is still pending confirmation, how much could the just filed lawsuit influence the decision there? It's sort of an opening for some to jump off the DeSantis ship and say they don't agree with the direction the board has gone already.

 

[Heath]

When the case is settled?

RCID isn’t exactly unique in Florida. And the issue isn’t just taking it away. They have went beyond just dissolving RCID but instead taking over RCID and using it and other arms of the state government as weapons against Disney.

I don’t think that’s his point at all. This is a lengthy thread with tons of information and links to sources about what RCID is, why it was created, etc.

If you come in now and ask questions that show little understanding of what was discussed and hashed out earlier in the thread, it leads to starting all over again in terms of providing that information and the discussion ends up going in circles.

There’s no barrier to joining a thread late without reading all the previous posts, but the consequence is that someone may tell you that you’re missing information or misunderstanding something that’s been clarified earlier.

Yes you are right, that’s very true and fair point. However there’s a few ombudsman on here with a pattern of unnecessary snarky remarks if anyone brings a different perspective.

 

[lazyboy97o]

The Board is still pending confirmation, how much could the just filed lawsuit influence the decision there? It's sort of an opening for some to jump off the DeSantis ship and say they don't agree with the direction the board has gone already.

Influence what decision? Confirmation? Anyone who decides to resign is just replaced by another appointee. It doesn’t really change anything unless DeSantis decides to appoint someone more reasonable.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

unless DeSantis decides to appoint someone more reasonable.

Heck I'd settle for someone less embarrassing.

That has been the most surprising "wow, he really botched the optics" of this thing to me. He could have picked some reasonable pro-business Republicans, one or two moderate Democrats, one or two pro-Disney people. People who would still be on "his side," broadly defined, but didn't embarrass themselves. He could have gone the Merrick Garland route. Instead he went with culture war flamethrowers.

 

[flynnibus]

And organized by cities essentially. I went to an Appleton Area School District, we had kids from one city and nearby towns too small to have their own schools. We didn’t organize them by county, that would be far too much.

not 'cities' - by population centers. Wisconsin only has 190 incorporated cities. We're talking about form of government here, not just slang.

Besides, arguments can be made both ways of which is better... like what's the point of an administrative unit so small that your overhead becomes such a greater percentage of your expenses. Picked a random Wisconsin unified school district and looked at their stats... https://nces.ed.gov/ccd/districtsearch/district_detail.asp?ID2=5500360

73 high school teachers.. my kid's high school had 130 in one school... and I have 5 such schools less than 5 miles away from me. Would I have a school district for every neighborhood? And I live in completely unincorporated areas (VA only has 39 cities, and 190 towns).

But we're way off topic... municipal boundaries aren't always what people think.

 

[LAKid53]

The Board is still pending confirmation, how much could the just filed lawsuit influence the decision there? It's sort of an opening for some to jump off the DeSantis ship and say they don't agree with the direction the board has gone already.

The Senate hasn't confirmed board members yet? Are they waiting for the 72 hour cooling off period?

 

[scottieRoss]

Just to point out, I live in Texas, the home of 142,000,000 ISDs. And they are horrible. Besides the funding inequities, we have districts that 2 or 3 loud parents can affect the board and their decisions. Here in San Antonio, we have 8 ISDs so just going across the block changes your taxation and quality of education. There is no excuse.
As for parental input, I don't think parents should have input. It is the Board's role to make the decisions on what is best for the community. I would much prefer Federal standards and funding to provide the best education. There should not matter if you live in Louisiana, Texas or Massachusetts. Every child should have the best tools to succeed.

 

[GoofGoof]

There's an extremely important distinction that I think people are missing.

There are questions of fact and there are questions of law, and Disney could theoretically lose on either one.

Questions of fact are decided by juries in jury trials and by the judge in "bench trials." Questions of law are decided by the judge. Questions of law are what get appealed and decided by the appellate courts and SCOTUS. Appellate courts generally do not weigh in on the facts.

With regard to the First Amendment claims:

• The question of fact is whether DeSantis and the Florida legislature did pass this legislation to retaliate against Disney for their speech.
• The question of law is whether passing this law in retaliation against Disney for their speech is unconstitutional.

If Disney loses on the facts, this case will be entirely inconsequential for any other future cases. If they lose on the law (which they won't), then it would indeed be consequential.

Losing on the facts has nothing to do with "precedent."

I would agree with this to an extent. It’s almost inconceivable to me they could lose on facts. How could any reasonable person think this was done for any reason other than retaliation? If they lose on facts the court would have to basically say that the public statements made in speeches, interviews and even in a published book claiming this was being done to punish woke Disney cannot be used to prove intent. If that’s the ruling then I think that maybe does set a precedent for future cases.

I don’t know all the nuances of the law. Based on limited examples presented here there seems to be some legal precedent that removing a perk that isn’t constitutionally guaranteed can still be retaliation if it’s done to punish speech. I suppose there could be a ruling in which the Supreme Court ultimately rules that corporations do not have the same rights to free speech, I think that may require reversing citizens United or at least part of it. The other thing that might be argued is that even though the Governor and multiple members of the legislature openly admitted this was retaliation not every member of the legislation that voted yes did so. The problem with that argument is they would have to show a valid reason why this was done and that it wasn’t done to single out Disney. Both hard to prove given the nature of the bills and also that they were done in special session.

 

[mikejs78]

The problem with that argument is they would have to show a valid reason why this was done and that it wasn’t done to single out Disney.

And also why the legislature chose to do this without following the long established procedure as defined in law to dissolve special districts....

 

[GoofGoof]

The jury isn't going to be participating in message boards and reading every article that CNN puts out about this case. They're going to see the evidence presented at trial, and that's it.

They could just give them a copy of the Governor’s book. No need to read message boards or watch CNN. The filing references the book numerous times.