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

[LittleBuford]

It's the antecedent to the RCID dissolution and subsequent actions, and a cornerstone of Disney's lawsuit against the state. But for Disney's stances on the parental rights in education law, RCID would still be around with a landowner-elected board, and DeSantis would have found some other situation to exploit for media attention.

This doesn’t really address the question I put to you, but I suspect we’re not going to get much further by continuing this exchange.

 

[scottieRoss]

This one has me thinking. Maybe some legal eagles can help out.
Senate Bill to give the state the responsibility to regulate the monorails says:

or privately owned fixed-guideway transportation systems operating in this state which are located within an independent special district created by local act which have boundaries within two contiguous counties.”

But RCID was not created by local act, but by act of the State. Does this mean that they still do not have the responsibility to regulate fixed-guideway transportation systems within Reedy Creek?

 

[LAKid53]

Not disappointed at all, I only urge caution when picking sides, especially when you have a failure to recognize your bread and butter customer that is paying the bills.

The state isn't that bread and butter "customer". And until consecutive quarterly earnings reports reflect a serious decline in profit, TWDC will be fine "picking sides". I commend a corporation for publicly standing with employees who feel they are targets of pieces of legislation.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Here's the screenshot I posted yesterday of Disney's property tax bill for 2022 JUST for the Magic Kingdom. Not the parking lot, not the TTC - JUST the park.

The relevant parts: They pay to Orange County, Orange County Schools, plus to RCID and RCID's debt service separately.

View attachment 714142


Anyway, RCID's bonds helped Disney acquire financing at below market rates - that's it. Which realistically they could do without, since Disney wouldn't have issue getting loans if needed from private lenders.

Not only that, but the financing is purely for infrastructure projects like roads and the Disney Springs parking garage - things with a verifiable public benefit (as well as a benefit to the other RCID taxpayers).

 

[LAKid53]

This one has me thinking. Maybe some legal eagles can help out.
Senate Bill to give the state the responsibility to regulate the monorails says:


But RCID was not created by local act, but by act of the State. Does this mean that they still do not have the responsibility to regulate fixed-guideway transportation systems within Reedy Creek?

Good catch. Surprised no staff member reviewing the bill caught this.

 

[Lilofan]

"Disney pays below market wages to white collar professionals" hasn't been true for at least a decade, if that's what you're implying.

You think cast members that are lawyers, finance , etc get paid similar to private practice and outside companies ? Not even close.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Good for them.
I'm not a shareholder of those companies. But I am of Disney. So when the the company makes a step that affects the stock value, it affects me. Thus I am not impressed when they commit an unforced error. Especially when they have fiduciary duty to me.

Im gonna guess the stocks are affected more by the fact that Disney+ is losing money and the latest Disney Animation and Pixar theatrical releases lost money. That’s what I would be concerned about.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Technically no, since the taxes are going to different places, but essentially (and for the purposes of this conversation) yes. They are already paying all the same taxes they would pay if RCID didn't exist, while also paying additional taxes to RCID.

Disney has funded Florida, Osceola and orange counties since day 1….And made enough money to pay for cartoonist on the little mermaid and Regis Phibin as well

All of this can easily be shown in court

 

[lazyboy97o]

This one has me thinking. Maybe some legal eagles can help out.
Senate Bill to give the state the responsibility to regulate the monorails says:


But RCID was not created by local act, but by act of the State. Does this mean that they still do not have the responsibility to regulate fixed-guideway transportation systems within Reedy Creek?

@Stripes caught this earlier. The legislature can pass three different types laws: general, local and special. Local refers to acts impacts a specific, local area, not one’s created by a local government. The District was created by special act, not local act.

 

[LAKid53]

@Stripes caught this earlier. The legislature can pass three different types laws: general, local and special. Local refers to acts impacts a specific, local area, not one’s created by a local government. The District was created by special act, not local act.

Local act refers to which governmental entity passed it.

 

[Notypeo]

Florida law contains a provision to remove an elected official - it's called a RECALL election. She holds the office because the voters in the Ninth Judicial District of the state put her there. Let THEM decide if she should be removed and who to replace her with.

Aside from disagreeing with DeSantis’s actions with respect to these elected officials, I note this development because I don’t think it’s entirely disconnected from RCID/CFTOD.

I’m not an expert on Florida’s sunshine laws. But we know that DeSantis (or his people more broadly) have ordered an investigation into the Development Deal process that I believe touches on sunshine compliance. And it’s not unheard of for this law to be weaponized — google “The Villages Vendetta,” which I believe might have been discussed earlier in this thread. So DeSantis would likely feel himself to hold another card if he had an ally in the Orange/Osceola prosecutor. (And, yes, I realize how insane that sounds as I write it. But he’s already “gone there” with the first investigation.)

But by the same token, I suspect that the current board probably has violated the sunshine laws. The meetings are at times stage managed to the point of rehearsed. DeSantis would surely very much like to avoid having a Democratic prosecutor with jurisdiction over the situation. I’m not saying that Worrell should or would do anything politically motivated. But given everything so far, it’s really hard not to think that the Governor is thinking in these terms.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I don’t think I’m successfully conveying what it is I’m getting at. I totally get what you’re saying and see no contradiction between disapproving of what somewhat says and decrying the suppression of that very same speech. Some of the posts here, however, seem to be saying something else, something tinged with an undertone of “Well, Disney asked for this.” That’s what I’m responding to.

I think it's just schadenfreude. It's a head-versus-heart thing.

Somone might know in their heads that what DeSantis is doing is illegal, but emotionally their reaction still might be "lol get rekt Disney, I don't feel bad for you."

 

[LAKid53]

Aside from disagreeing with DeSantis’s actions with respect to these elected officials, I note this development because I don’t think it’s entirely disconnected from RCID/CFTOD.

I’m not an expert on Florida’s sunshine laws. But we know that DeSantis (or his people more broadly) have ordered an investigation into the Development Deal process that I believe touches on sunshine compliance. And it’s not unheard of for this law to be weaponized — google “The Villages Vendetta,” which I believe might have been discussed earlier in this thread. So DeSantis would likely feel himself to hold another card if he had an ally in the Orange/Osceola prosecutor. (And, yes, I realize how insane that sounds as I write it. But he’s already “gone there” with the first investigation.)

But by the same token, I suspect that the current board probably has violated the sunshine laws. The meetings are at times stage managed to the point of rehearsed. DeSantis would surely very much like to avoid having a Democratic prosecutor with jurisdiction over the situation. I’m not saying that Worrell should or would do anything politically motivated. But given everything so far, it’s really hard not to think that the Governor is thinking in these terms.

Florida's Sunshine law prohibits 2 or more elected officials (legislators, board members, etc.) discussing matters privately that would become issues acted upon by the entire body in subsequent public meetings.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

In my mind, TWDC sincerely thinks the Parental rights law is harmful. Instead of actually doing something quietly behind the scenes, they chose to just talk about it.

I could be wrong, maybe they ARE IN FACT RIGHT NOW working behind the scenes to reverse the law?

What is happening now is the perfect distraction while they get it done.

But they did (or at least told shareholders they did) try to work behind the scenes before Chapek made the public comment

Disney CEO Bob Chapek says company worked 'behind the scenes' to oppose Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill

During a recent shareholder meeting, Disney CEO Bob Chapek said that his company worked "behind the scenes" to oppose Florida's recently passed "Don't Say Gay"...

www.orlandoweekly.com

 

[GoofGoof]

I don’t think I’m successfully conveying what it is I’m getting at. I totally get what you’re saying and see no contradiction between disapproving of what somewhat says and decrying the suppression of that very same speech. Some of the posts here, however, seem to be saying something else, something tinged with an undertone of “Well, Disney asked for this.” That’s what I’m responding to.

See below

I think it's just schadenfreude. It's a head-versus-heart thing.

Somone might know in their heads that what DeSantis is doing is illegal, but emotionally their reaction still might be "lol get rekt Disney, I don't feel bad for you."

i think some people probably do feel Disney is wrong and so getting what they deserve but they know they will get killed for saying it. That’s also why there’s an almost desperate attempt to vilify RCID and claim it needed to go all along to somehow justify the actions.

 

[Dranth]

In my mind, TWDC sincerely thinks the Parental rights law is harmful. Instead of actually doing something quietly behind the scenes, they chose to just talk about it.

I could be wrong, maybe they ARE IN FACT RIGHT NOW working behind the scenes to reverse the law?

What is happening now is the perfect distraction while they get it done.

Agree or disagree but in their mind, removing donations and supporting groups that want to overturn it was doing something.

 

[mmascari]

I don't think they are mutually opposing positions. If someone doesn't agree with what Disney said, they can simultaneously disagree with the speech/make personal choices based on that speech, and recognize that the government has no role in punishing the speech they disagree with.

In the abstract, and in isolation, I would agree with this. However, context matters.

If this thread was titled something like:
"Reasons to boycott Disney!"
"Dangers to Disney stock price."
"Has Disney gone to woke?"
"Is Disney management competent?"

All very possible threads you could run into on this site. Discussion that Disney should or should not have made the comments it did would all fit in very nicely. Was it a good business choice, should they have made a different statement, should it have been private employee communication instead of public. Should consumers change Disney spending. Lots of discussion points about what actions Disney should or should not have taken.

However, none of that is the context of this thread.

This thread is clearly about changes to RCID. What is being changed. How, why, by whom, the impacts, reasons for the change, if it is legal, Disney's response to the changes. Everything in this thread is in the context of what is happening to RCID.

Within that context, as related to the changes to RCID, saying Disney shouldn't have said anything isn't in isolation. It is read by everyone as "Disney shouldn't have said anything and then nothing would have happened to RCID".

The context matters and that context is victim blaming and that if only they had kept their mouth shut nothing would have happened to RCID. There's going to be pushback against this opinion every time. No amount of "but I don't agree with the governor" is going to change that. As, in the context of what is going on with RCID, no amount of extra text is going to change how people read it, in this context. This thread, as has been pointed out many times, is supposed to be about what is going on related to RCID not about general political thoughts.

 

[flynnibus]

I will admit I do not understand. Are you saying TWDC is getting taxed twice?

For property tax, yes it's as simple as that.

Property is assessed at a certain value by the county assessor. Then each taxing authority gets to apply a tax rate to that value. The total of those components is your property tax bill. They literally are paying two property taxes on the same property. The county gets to set their tax rate, and RCID gets to set their own tax rate... both get collected.

That's just property tax... the power of the improvement district is it has authority to collect it's own taxes and other fees IN ADDITION to taxes the residents already own to the cities, counties, state, and fed.

Literally, that is what empowers it... the ability to collect taxes to fund it's activities and needs. The purpose of it is to create that authority that normally does not allow government to tax people differently.


How do you think RCID is funded for both it's administration and activities? It doesn't get money from the other governments, it's funded by it's own revenue generation by charging taxes and fees to it's constituents.

If RCID didn't exist, those taxes and fees would not exist. The work done by RCID would be handled by other agencies which have far greater populations under them.

If you have $100million bill that needs to be paid... who pays more? Situation 1 where you have 10 people to split the bill over? Or Situation 2 where you have 1 million people to split the bill over?

 

[Notypeo]

Florida's Sunshine law prohibits 2 or more elected officials (legislators, board members, etc.) discussing matters privately that would become issues acted upon by the entire body in subsequent public meetings.

Yes, and if I’m correct there is also a prohibition on circumventing this restriction through a “conduit.”

 

[JusticeDisney]

How many years of experience do you have working inside the Walt Disney Company, and at what level?

I'd reeeeeeally love to know.

Nothing I just said had a single thing to do with working inside the Walt Disney Company. Perhaps you might want to brush up on your reading comprehension skills.