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

flynnibus

flynnibus

Premium Member
lazyboy97o said:
That’s exactly what the state has set up as allowed and expected for the base community development district.
Click to expand...
That's example of... something else. Not a valid concern for the district under discussion.

Again, the point all along was acknowledging the person is not really independent and faces a conflict that their enabler is also who they are regulating. Not that it's 'unknown' or 'not allowed' - but facing the reality that they are in fact conflicted.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
flynnibus said:
That's example of... something else. Not a valid concern for the district under discussion. .

Again, the point all along was acknowledging the person is not really independent and faces a conflict that their enabler is also who they are regulating. Not that it's 'unknown' or 'not allowed' - but facing the reality that they are in fact conflicted.
Click to expand...
We’re trying to point out to you that the state’s base, default independent special district offered to anyone expects a single or few landowners who place employees on the Board of Supervisors as part of their employment. State rules regarding conflicts of interest exempt such districts because it is expected, not because they were only protecting Disney. Reedy Creek was more unique in requiring ownership in the district, but not in having a Board of Supervisors that is not truly independent.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
flynnibus said:
That's example of... something else. Not a valid concern for the district under discussion.

Again, the point all along was acknowledging the person is not really independent and faces a conflict that their enabler is also who they are regulating. Not that it's 'unknown' or 'not allowed' - but facing the reality that they are in fact conflicted.
Click to expand...
The board was never independent. I also don’t think that means there’s a conflict of interest. It was by design.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
S

scottieRoss

Well-Known Member
Disone said:
Golden oak is de-annexed. It is part of Orange county not part of RCID, Orange county emergency services respond to any medical emergencies at Golden oak.
Click to expand...
They have mutual aid interlocal agreements to serve specific areas where they are closer. And Interlocal agreements with Orange and Osceola County to serve the district where the county facilities are closer.
 
mkt

mkt

When a paradise is lost go straight to Disney™
Premium Member
No new filings overnight. But for fun (and because my bonus was a little better than expected), I paid two law professors that are friends of mine and actively practicing attorneys (as well as political opposites, one a fiscally-conservative-Reagan-republican and the other a Bernie/FDR-socdem-democrat) a single hour each at their rate to explain to me how it works with the two suits, which takes precedence, etc.

Here's the gist: This is the rare case where they really can’t be consolidated into one forum. Disney’s claim is strictly under federal law and the federal court has jurisdiction because of subject matter jurisdiction. There’s no diversity as they are both Florida-based so there’s really no grounds to remove the state court question in the federal court. And of course they can’t adjudicate the federal question in state court. So DeSantis may ask a federal judge to stay in consideration of the case, pending the outcome of the state court proceeding because it’s not unusual for federal judges to be asked to not rule on a constitutional question if there’s a concurrent state law question that could resolve the case, in this case, that the agreements the previous board signed are not valid, so whatever Florida did afterwards is irrelevant.

However, federal judges are not always inclined to stay, or defer addressing constitutional questions.

If the federal judge does not want to pause their case what could happen next is whoever gets a ruling on the field first runs to the other judge, and ask them to dismiss the case under res judicata, I E arguing, the case has already been decided in a way that is determinative.

Now here’s where I get a little cloudy. In theory, when the federal and state law are in conflict, federal law is supreme. That’s the supremacy clause.

In this particular case, there is a timing issue. I think that favors Disney ultimately because what prompted the board’s new deal was the actions DeSantis took. So in theory, if we stated the whole thing is unconstitutional, then everything that came after you could argue doesn’t matter. I have a question about the remedy, and whether a full win in federal court leaves them at a complete status quo ante.

In theory, also I would rather have the Disney side of the argument. DeSantis, the politician may have really hurt DeSantis, the governor, because all that chatter about getting back at woke corporations lays a neat groundwork for Disney to at the very least show retaliation over speech and this win the first amendment claim.
Click to expand...

And this:
1683887992565.png
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
Goofyernmost

Goofyernmost

Well-Known Member
flynnibus said:
I didn't say it was - but the manipulation of who the landowners actually are and the ability to redact someone's ownership unilaterally IS different. The point being that the eligibility (which is what the state defined) was in effect able to be revokable by Disney due to their "temporary" arrangement they would setup people up with instead of them truly being land owners. It's not just a situation of picking people and electing them, but you also get to arbitrarily control their continued eligibility. Ultimately it doesn't matter much because Disney can just not elect them again... but the scheme does not enable objectivity when your legal eligibility is also at stake.

The model continued to function not because of state's design, but by Disney's manipulation of land ownership. They never had to give up additional land to bring in more candidates or deal with landowners who wouldn't give up their votes.
Click to expand...
My thought is that the uniqueness of the district stems from the fact that it has the directive to be in control of one property owned by TWDC or WDW, however it is set up. It doesn't have to take any other stand nor does it negatively affect any other property owner in the surrounding counties or areas. All the infrastructure that RCID was responsible for is and by association, even the district is on what technically is still WDW property. The amount of "taxes" that WDW pays to RCID does not affect anyone outside of the single property. It is correct that it is a unique situation but it actually established to enable Disney to control actions on their property being done to improve company profits while automatically improving tourism and good will for Florida. Those two items are the very lucrative side effects of the district to the entire state of Florida. For the state to put that in jeopardy for the reasons it is doing it, is both unconstitutional and short sightedly ignorant.
 
Last edited:
Disone

Disone

Well-Known Member
scottieRoss said:
They have mutual aid interlocal agreements to serve specific areas where they are closer. And Interlocal agreements with Orange and Osceola County to serve the district where the county facilities are closer.
Click to expand...
That is also true but Golden oak, like Celebration, truly is not part of the Reedy Creek improvement district.
 
GrumpyFan

GrumpyFan

Well-Known Member
The responses to this are shocking and sad.

1683905450309.png

FWIW: Politically, I lean to the right/conservative, but I agree with Disney's right to speak out against the governor, even if I disagree with their position. I strongly disagree with the governor's actions in retaliation to Disney, but I may be biased since I am a "Disney Adult".
I really hope Disney wins the suit and slaps back Desantis and the FL legislature.

Full story: https://news.yahoo.com/new-poll-is-...htMZ4Q0gAFBPaERgKqorS52Q9jLv7RniTnepm00EMeix2
 
Last edited:
tissandtully

tissandtully

Well-Known Member
GrumpyFan said:
The responses to this are shocking and sad.

View attachment 715852
FWIW: Politically, I lean to the right/conservative, but I agree with Disney's right to speak out against the governor, even if I disagree with their position. I strongly disagree with the governor's actions in retaliation to Disney, but I may be biased since I am a "Disney Adult".
I really hope Disney wins the suit and slaps back Desantis and the FL legislature.

Full story: https://news.yahoo.com/new-poll-is-...htMZ4Q0gAFBPaERgKqorS52Q9jLv7RniTnepm00EMeix2
Click to expand...
I wonder if we took all the names out of the polls what result we would get. And add words like government retaliation.
 
J

jinx8402

Well-Known Member
GrumpyFan said:
The responses to this are shocking and sad.

View attachment 715852
FWIW: Politically, I lean to the right/conservative, but I agree with Disney's right to speak out against the governor, even if I disagree with their position. I strongly disagree with the governor's actions in retaliation to Disney, but I may be biased since I am a "Disney Adult".
I really hope Disney wins the suit and slaps back Desantis and the FL legislature.

Full story: https://news.yahoo.com/new-poll-is-...htMZ4Q0gAFBPaERgKqorS52Q9jLv7RniTnepm00EMeix2
Click to expand...
You know, the one thing that is absent in all these polls, is mentioning that the special tax district allows for additional taxes on top of state and county taxes. It allows for what people hear from filtered sources to take "special tax district" as getting away with paying less AND controlling their own government.
 
Brian

Brian

Well-Known Member
MisterPenguin said:
thehill.com

Majority of Americans not invested in feud between Disney, DeSantis: poll

A majority of Americans in a new poll say they’re not invested in the feud between Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis (R) and entertainment giant Disney. DeSantis has been feuding with the company since it …
thehill.com thehill.com
Click to expand...
This is something I've been thinking about as well. We're all fairly interested in this fight, but we also regularly spend time on a Disney message board. The average American either hasn't heard about it, or doesn't care, because they don't really care about Disney and have bigger fish to fry, for example, economic concerns.
 
Prince-1

Prince-1

Well-Known Member
Brian said:
This is something I've been thinking about as well. We're all fairly interested in this fight, but we also regularly spend time on a Disney message board. The average American either hasn't heard about it, or doesn't care, because they don't really care about Disney and have bigger fish to fry, namely economic concerns.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but I would say that most people who watch/read any type of news knows exactly what's going on in Florida.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom