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

[Disstevefan1]

100% their little announcement about the Parental Rights bill was for show. It was all to try to put out the flames with their employees who were upset and nothing more.

They should have handled their people better internally, telling them they are working behind the scenes to change the law.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Florida and Disney used to be magical for me. Now I don't care to do either.

What if they bought you dinner?

 

[Figgy1]

They should have handled their people better internally, telling them they are working behind the scenes to change the law.

Why? They had every right to speak out. They should not be facing any retaliation if they spoke out or not.

 

[LAKid53]

Why? They had every right to speak out. They should not be facing any retaliation if they spoke out or not.
View attachment 714085

The 1st amendment doesn't apply to acts of private companies. However, the STATE cannot punish Disney's employees for speaking out. There probably was some internal communications with CMs after the bill was signed, in addition to the public statement.

 

[mkt]

Yep!

Expect 4 replies. This one plus 3 more.

 

[mkt]

Expect 4 replies. This one plus 3 more.

Two more after this

 

[mkt]

Two more after this

One more after this

 

[mkt]

One more after this

And done

 

[flynnibus]

Hey @wdwmagic, do you have any server space? I've got pacer access and will cover the cost of downloads.

Please use the RECAP extension - which basically pumps your PACER downloads into a public shared archive at courtlistener.com

CourtListener

Create alerts, search for and browse the latest court opinions, PACER documents, judges, and oral arguments. Updated automatically with the latest court documents. An initiative of Free Law Project.

www.courtlistener.com

From there anyone can get all the docs and relevant cites for a case that have been collected an aggregated. Much better than duplicating storage alone outside of Pacer. It will have a case history page that people can follow, etc

 

[afterabme]

And done

Thanks for posting this!

 

[Brian]

I think that at this point there's about 200 pages worth of retorts about how the first amendment is sacrosanct, DeSantis was wrong to do what he did, and retaliation for the exercise of free speech is illegal. For what it's worth, I don't think there's a single person here who would disagree. But it shouldn't have to be added as a disclaimer each and every time someone says something even remotely critical of Disney.

It's really just a bad faith retort.

 

[Notypeo]

Just look at Andrew Warren, who has a case against the Gov coming up soon. These people don't believe in democracy or free speech.

Andrew Warren is the elected prosecutor that DeSantis removed from office.

The next one on his list looks to be the Orange-Osceola prosecutor Monique Worrell. There seems to be a long backstory here. But, unless I’m wrong, replacing her with a DeSantis crony could protect the current CFTOD board from prosecutorial scrutiny over any sunshine law violations.

 

[Disstevefan1]

Why? They had every right to speak out. They should not be facing any retaliation if they spoke out or not.
View attachment 714085

Of course, they have 1A rights.

Just my opinion, if they thought their free speech would have triggered the gov. they would not have done it.

They would have worked behind the scenes to reverse the Parental rights law. They had the power to do it.

After the fact, there where smarter ways to handle this.

Disney can't work to change the Parental rights law now!

They are now fighting (in public) over the special district.

Thats very bad, it will uncover the sweet deal they had for 50 years.

 

[mkt]

Just my opinion, if they thought their free speech would have triggered the gov. they would not have done it.

In the United States, it doesn't matter what those in power think or how their feelings might get hurt: your free speech goes above that.

Thats very bad, it will uncover the sweet deal they had for 50 years.

Coincidentally, a better deal for Disney would have just been to get rid of RCID altogether and let Orange County regulate them, since Disney's tax bill would've gone down then.

So really, the sweetness of their deal was control. Control that they paid for.

 

[LittleBuford]

I think that at this point there's about 200 pages worth of retorts about how the first amendment is sacrosanct, DeSantis was wrong to do what he did, and retaliation for the exercise of free speech is illegal. For what it's worth, I don't think there's a single person here who would disagree. But it shouldn't have to be added as a disclaimer each and every time someone says something even remotely critical of Disney.

It's really just a bad faith retort.

But if we all agree on that point, what exactly are people criticising Disney for?

 

[GoofGoof]

I think what would be interesting to find in discovery is emails or communication between DeSantis and the legislature on this topic.

Yes for sure. One of the arguments the state may try to make is the legislature passed the bill and not DeSantis. Technically true but where that argument gets flimsy is that he asked for and got a special session called to approve the original bill. It can’t be legislative business as usual and a special session. If the state uses this argument they may say that the Governor’s speech and will is not in question but the legislature still acted in good faith. You don’t have each member who voted yes for the bill writing a book and bragging about it. If there is evidence of the Governor’s team calling or texting or e-mailing members of the legislature and discussion of the real motive for the bill that’s good evidence to introduce. We know from reporting the Governor doesn’t take calls from anyone (even big donors) so it’s likely the communication would be between a staffer and the members of the legislature. That could come out from discovery.

 

[Disstevefan1]

In the United States, it doesn't matter what those in power think or how their feelings might get hurt: your free speech goes above that.


Coincidentally, a better deal for Disney would have just been to get rid of RCID altogether and let Orange County regulate them, since Disney's tax bill would've gone down then.

So really, the sweetness of their deal was control. Control that they paid for.

That is interesting if true. (no saying its not, I just don't know). Disney paid MORE taxes with RCID. Interesting.

What about the RCID bonds? that didn't help TWDC?

I am just asking. I have no idea.

DeSantis is stupider than I thought.

Is his staff stupid too?

Actually, the knee jerk reaction of dissolving RCID left no time for real thought or evaluation by anyone in his circle, I guess.

 

[LittleBuford]

They are now fighting (in public) over the special district.

Thats very bad, it will uncover the sweet deal they had for 50 years.

There was nothing secret about it.

 

[mmascari]

I’d argue the bills passed so far are all show too

A passed bill that changes the legal structure is by definition not just for show. A just for show bill is one proclaiming something like "today is state neener neener day".

....it could impact operations but likely won’t (imho)...

The Gov wants to look like he‘s in control but nothing has given him any real power over Disney (yet), influence but not power.

Impacting, or even the threat to impact operations is what creates the control.

The board in their statements and actions so far has shown that they clearly want to use that threat as leverage to control Disney content. They have specifically said they have a problem with some Disney content and that the company should adjust and stop producing that content.

That the board hasn't found an impact where the mere threat is enough leverage is only because of the moves Disney has made to head them off. The board so far has shown they are likely to keep escalating items and possible threats until they find one that gives them that control. If that requires actual impacts to operations instead of just a threat is yet to be seen.

In a contest to see who blinks first, the Board by stopping escalation or Disney by adjusting content. My bet is neither. Either Disney has the board removed or the board escalates until actual operations impacts occur. It's possible a directive for operations impact occurs and the person who has to actually do it balks. I think their plan is to put a political appointee in that position instead of a career RCID employee to avoid that outcome.

 

[Brian]

But if we all agree on that point, what exactly are people criticising Disney for?

I can't speak for others, but I have criticized Disney's statement against the parental rights legislation. Just because Disney has the right to speak without fear of retaliation doesn't mean they should.