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

[lentesta]

Odds are this thing never makes it to the Supreme Court. There’s really nothing novel about it except for how egregious and stupid the governor’s actions were, it’s otherwise pretty cut and dry and fits neatly into existing precedent.

Agreed. Unless the state comes up with something really novel, Disney will win at District, then the appeal. And SCOTUS will decline to hear it.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Yeah, really solid point. I mean, you’re right, this buffoon was intending all along on getting rid of that totally unjust special district. It was just pure coincidence that he finally got around to doing it at the precise moment that Disney spoke out against legislation. It just simply wasn’t a Day 1 priority.

The legislation was clearly retaliatory. The fact that it came four years after DeSantis was first elected Governor is not a relevant detail for or against that claim.

 

[seascape]

As a DVC owner it is not just the taxes we face but what this Board will do to the value of our points.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

As a DVC owner it is not just the taxes we face but what this Board will do to the value of our points.

Same difference. In order to have standing for a lawsuit, the injury you suffer has to be "concrete and particularized." A vague idea that your points might be worth less on the resale market and that this is somehow caused by the board's actions ain't gonna hold up.

 

[hopemax]

Because I don't think anyone actually cares. It's all performative. Once the primary is over, the performance is no longer necessary.

IMO, you are missing part of the human element which is why people keep getting blindsided when things continue to go as far as they do, like you said you felt about the selection of the board and I see in a whole host of non-Disney situations. There is a significant portion that *is* performative. However, even those that appreciate certain elements of the Machiavellian style, usually need to believe they are the good guys, picking the right battles, and won't take things too far. That's why actors always talk about from the Villain's perspective... they are the Hero.

Once, the primary is over the emotional need to validate one's actions remains, otherwise you are just a big, ol loser. In this case, we've got people on the same side but what they emotionally need as validation is different. For the legislature, I think the "Disney is a woke company" is the validation and every time Disney releases a project they don't approve of, they will pat themselves on the back. They know they were acting performatively about whether RCID is a sweetheart deal; that's why some of them are getting squeamish about the anti-business implications For DeSantis, I think it is the opposite. He's more performative about the "woke agenda" but I think he might actually believe that the RCID deal is a bad deal for Florida because it's a good deal for Disney. Zero-sum games and all. That's the core he can't walk away from, no matter how many times people mention the taxes Disney pays and the implications for the counties, since we know via psych studies that when presented with facts people don't change their opinion, they dig in. So then the board makeup makes more sense. You can't seat people who might have signaled, "There's not really a lot with RCID to change, everything was kosher." You have to seat people who will stand up to Disney, make large changes and in doing so validate the existence of the sweetheart deal. DeSantis strikes me more as emotional vs rational (unlike say someone like McConnell who would claim he played the cards he had, shrug, and say, "deal the next hand"). DeSantis won't be able to let this go as long as he's Governor. I think he is too vested in the idea of his own infallibility.

 

[GoofGoof]

Pick literally any issue and workshop a policy position that DeSantis could take that Trump wouldn't attack. DeSantis could say "build the wall" and Trump would find a way to attack it. DeSantis could say "the 2020 election was stolen and Trump should still be President" and Trump would find a way to attack it. Trump attacking a thing isn't evidence of anything because Trump attacks EVERYTHING.

I don’t disagree, but that doesn’t change my point. You made the argument that Nikki Haley attacking DeSantis over Disney is meaningless because she is only polling at 2% and doesn’t represent the base of the party. My only point is that if that is the metric you want to use and you actually combine everyone attacking him over it it’s 2/3 of the voters in the poll. I don’t think the percent in polling makes much difference and is mostly irrelevant, but that was your point. I don’t think there’s any way to equate a positive or negative from the Disney conflict based on anyone’s polling numbers, even DeSantis himself. Based on interviews done some large donors who previously donated to DeSantis have Sid they don’t like the conflict and are pausing donations. Are they pausing over just that issue? Unlikely. I assume it’s a combination of that and several other issues plus his plummeting polling numbers. Impossible to tell for sure how much Disney impacted it.

This might not help him catch Trump. Most likely, nothing will help him catch Trump. But issues like this one are why he's not in the basement with Asa Hutchinson and Tim Scott. DeSantis has a national name ID for two reasons: 1) COVID and 2) anti-woke stuff.

He was polling in the mid to upper 30s a few months ago. I don’t think the drop is related directly to this dispute, but it may be related indirectly. DeSantis was seen as an alternative to Trump that could be more electable. There are many in the party who don’t want Trump as the candidate again because they don’t think he can win in the general. DeSantis was supposed to be the adult in the room who attracted moderates and independents. The further right he veers to hope to beat Trump in the primary the more those people drop him. If DeSantis becomes just as unelectable as Trump then why back him? Roll the dice and go with the original instead of the cover band.

 

[MagicHappens1971]

It’s been speculated that he’ll have some freethinker introduce and pass an amendment to that…quietly…in short order

The amendment was already introduced

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Not sure why that matters. If I buy a $10 happy meal at McDonalds and then someone starts a class action lawsuit alleging that there are no actual potatoes in the French fries I’m still able to join even though the $10 isn’t a big deal for me. I’m not saying that increasing the RCID tax portion of the membership dues will make or break anyone but that doesn’t mean it can’t happen.

…I’m not disputing that…

I just don’t want this “specter” of gigantic tax “burden” to be a thing.

Florida won’t tax - to their own detriment.

Which is why fighting the biggest single source of out of state tax revenue is so STUPID!!!!

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

The amendment was already introduced

…I couldn’t be more shocked if I woke up with my head sewn to the carpet

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I don’t disagree, but that doesn’t change my point. You made the argument that Nikki Haley attacking DeSantis over Disney is meaningless because she is only polling at 2% and doesn’t represent the base of the party. My only point is that if that is the metric you want to use and you actually combine everyone attacking him over it it’s 2/3 of the voters in the poll. I don’t think the percent in polling makes much difference and is mostly irrelevant, but that was your point. I don’t think there’s any way to equate a positive or negative from the Disney conflict based on anyone’s polling numbers, even DeSantis himself. Based on interviews done some large donors who previously donated to DeSantis have Sid they don’t like the conflict and are pausing donations. Are they pausing over just that issue? Unlikely. I assume it’s a combination of that and several other issues plus his plummeting polling numbers. Impossible to tell for sure how much Disney impacted it.

He was polling in the mid to upper 30s a few months ago. I don’t think the drop is related directly to this dispute, but it may be related indirectly. DeSantis was seen as an alternative to Trump that could be more electable. There are many in the party who don’t want Trump as the candidate again because they don’t think he can win in the general. DeSantis was supposed to be the adult in the room who attracted moderates and independents. The further right he veers to hope to beat Trump in the primary the more those people drop him. If DeSantis becomes just as unelectable as Trump then why back him? Roll the dice and go with the original instead of the cover band.

He hasn't lost support to other normieCons, he's lost support to Trump, which I attribute in large part to a reactionary "stick it to the libs" effect of the indictment.

 

[Smiley/OCD]

That's factually untrue. Villages are informal divisions that exist within incorporated municipalities, they're not the incorporated municipalities themselves.


New Jersey is structured similarly. And depending on the ranking system, the top 5 states for public K-12 education in the country almost always include Connecticut, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, and New Jersey. So maybe we're doing something right.

But no you're right, we should go with massive school districts with superintendents who make $400,000 so we can save a few dollars by negotiating a unified contract with the bus company.

The AVERAGE superintendent salary in NJ is 150k/year x 599 districts…and to your other comment about villages, in NJ, there are towns, townships, boroughs, cities AND villages ALL independent municipalities…

 

[GoofGoof]

Let's look more closely at the case referenced by David French in his New York Times article, "Disney v. DeSantis, How Strong Is the Company's Lawsuit?"

In O'Hare Truck Service v the City of Northlake, Associate Justice Kennedy wrote the 7-2 majority opinion. The majority included historically liberal Justices Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, and Breyer. Kennedy himself was a swing vote. For example, Kennedy was the deciding vote in Obergefell v. Hodges, which ruled in favor of same-sex marriages. O'Connor also joined the majority, and she is largely viewed as having shifted from more conservative at the start of her term to more liberal by the end.

However, the Court's two most conservative justices, Scalia and Thomas, dissented. In their dissent, Scalia wrote:

The First Amendment guarantees that you and I can say and believe whatever we like (subject to a few tradition based exceptions, such as obscenity and "fighting words") without going to jail or being fined. What it ought [original emphasis] to guarantee beyond that is not at all the simple question the Court assumes. The ability to discourage eccentric views through the mild means that have historically been employed, and that the Court has now set its face against, may well be important to social cohesion. To take an uncomfortable example from real life: An organization (I shall call it the White Aryan Supremacist Party, though that was not the organization involved in the actual incident I have in mind) is undoubtedly entitled, under the Constitution, to maintain and propagate racist and antisemitic views. But when the Department of Housing and Urban Development lets out contracts to private security forces to maintain law and order in units of public housing, must it really treat this bidder the same as all others? Or may it determine that the views of this organization are not political views that it wishes to "subsidize" with public funds, nor political views that it wishes to hold up as an exemplar of the law to the residents of public housing?​

The question then becomes, is the Supreme Court of 2023 more like Scalia and Thomas, or is it more like Stevens, Souter, Ginsburg, Breyer, Kennedy, and O'Connor?

David French, the NYT author, has been attacking DeSantis since the fight with Disney began. (For example, see this Washington Post article.) This doesn't make French wrong, but I respectfully suggest looking more closely at articles to understand where the author is coming from and what they are not telling you.

In this post, I provided a more detailed analysis of this case from a First Amendment perspective, focusing on the current makeup of the Supreme Court and their propensity to overturn liberal precedent. IMO, Disney has a strong contract case, but any First Amendment decision will require winning over two conservative justices.

If that logic can be applied in this case then there is no free speech anymore. They are basically saying is if the Government decides that the political views are so unacceptable as to somehow cause public harm then it’s ok to ignore free speech and punish or retaliate. If the Supreme Court took this Disney case and then argued that line of thinking I think it would be devastating to the country. It would basically be there’s only free speech if you agree with whoever is in charge.

 

[GoofGoof]

He hasn't lost support to other normieCons, he's lost support to Trump, which I attribute in large part to a reactionary "stick it to the libs" effect of the indictment.

I attribute it to people who want the party to win….period. They think Trump now has a better shot than DeSantis. I think most would prefer someone else with a better shot in the general than Trump (that was supposed to be DeSantis) but since there’s nobody else right now they are backing Trump. Remember that the MAGA base isn’t even half the Republican Party (last poll I saw was 42% of party). The other 58% are still window shopping.

 

[GoofGoof]

I think we took the election politics talk too far. It’s the last I’ll say in the topic for now. Let’s get back to the RCID case

 

[Smiley/OCD]

More expensive, higher quality.

That's the tradeoff.

Not for me…

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

NO, that’s what we have in NJ there are 599 districts, each with its own superintendent, BOE, separate purchasing (books,etc)…THATS the main reason we have the highest property taxes in the state…EVERY town in the state is its own little fiefdom…I’ll take county SD ANYTIME

Yeah…home rule is an expensive problem…we are aware

More expensive, higher quality.

That's the tradeoff.

And he’s trying to act like it doesn’t result in top 5 public school rankings at all times…which it does.

You get what you pay for 99% of the time

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Not for me…

…you might want to get a uhaul then

 

[LAKid53]

As a DVC owner it is not just the taxes we face but what this Board will do to the value of our points.

If the Board does anything that would negatively impact the terms of the contracts with owners, we'd potentially have cause.

 

[LAKid53]

Disney pays nothing in Florida taxes.

You and I pay these taxes each time we visit WDW!

Disney just collects them from us.

You know that's not true.

 

[Smiley/OCD]

…you might want to get a uhaul then

Soon to be reserved…