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

[JusticeDisney]

Politicians are laughing all right. They are laughing at the people who keep reelecting them (both parties). The incumbent reelection rate is some insanely high percentage (80%+ IIRC) even though government bodies always have high disapproval ratings.

As far as #2, if this will not hurt Disney and could be of some benefit to Disney, why have they not previously dissolved RCID on their own. I don't know enough to know what it is but there must be some significant benefit to Disney for RCID to continue to exist.

Getting re-elected and being a laughingstock are not mutually exclusive.

I didn't say anything about this being a benefit to Disney. I simply said it will not hurt them. Disney will be just fine without RCID.

 

[lordsigma]

Another thing: if Disney hits back by canceling it's planned Lake Nona campus (Which many employees are already calling for the company to do) that would hurt Florida far more than losing RCID is going to hurt Disney.

 

[Disstevefan1]

yeah, if #2 were correct, it's counter to this fiasco:
View attachment 634616

Go baby Go!!!!!

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

With a price increase of course. Just like every other year.

Impact to the employees in Orange/Osceola counties would be more important on property

 

[danlb_2000]

Everyone remember that they made this bill broad enough to apply to a number of special districts so that they can't be blamed for targeting Disney specifically. Also keep in mind that Disney has been benefitting from similar legislative carve outs forever that are broad enough to not target Disney specifically, but are created specifically for Disney. For example, you are allowed to keep firearms locked in your car in Florida, but not at Disney because they store "explosives" (fireworks). This exemption was created specifically for Disney but used the explosives carve out as a loophole. If Disney argues that they are being targeted, they will be vulnerable to losing other beneficial carve outs as well.

But Florida lawmakers are on record for saying that the purpose of this bill is to punish Disney for speaking out against HB1557.

 

[the_rich]

I think it is well known which way I lean and I don't support this legislation either. It's basically the same thing as the cities that wouldn't allow Chik-fil-a due to political disagreements with the owners.

I am in the same boat as you. To me, the less legislation the better. One of the biggest problems to me is that every congress and every state legislative session they are always passing new laws or amending old laws. There isn't a requirement to always be "doing something" in a legislative body.

I dont go to chick fil a because I don't agree with their politics. But they shouldn't be barred from opening locations because of that. Its my personal choice not to give them money.

 

[peter11435]

Again, I’m not a lawyer but I’ve got to think it’s a legal question to determine if the legislature can simply say that a provision that states a dissolution must be put to a vote locally simply does not apply in this situation. While this is being put through the legal system, RCID will continue.

Certainly when the statute was put in place to prevent the legislature from unilaterally dissolving a district they didn’t intend for that same legislature to simply ignore that statute.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I dont go to chick fil a because I don't agree with their politics. But they shouldn't be barred from opening locations because of that. Its my personal choice not to give them money.

Yeah…I’m not going to hobby lobby…but I’m not tossing thumbtacks in their parking lots either.

 

[Brian]

Thank you. Someone's gotta. The 2 Billion is a real number.
You are free to report me to the moderator. Maybe you can get me kicked off the thread.
In the end, it does not matter what you or I say.
Disney will always win and everyone else will lose, some more than others.

Disney has taken losses at the hands of the government before. A notable instance is when, thanks to the governor of California, Disneyland couldn't open for over a year due to onerous COVID guidelines, despite an enormous lobbying effort by the company and allies.

Whether Disney comes out a winner or loser on this matter remains to be seen. There are too many variables, not the least of which is if it can withstand Constitutional muster.

 

[Dranth]

Yeah, governments punishing speech is no big deal.

People seem to be okay with suppression when it doesn’t agree with them. It is one of those things I find truly odd about anything political. People just turn their brains off and become myopic, drone like versions of themselves that can’t help but spitting out whatever talking point they have heard that fits their personal narrative. Talk about any other subject and that same person will be articulate, thoughtful, reasonable, etc.

As for RCID, if anyone stopped for even a SECOND to think about what it means to punish a company because they didn’t agree with a law, they should be properly horrified. However, for too many, they get their kicks out of someone else getting “owned” instead of thinking about how this can be turned on them and their interests down the line (and it will one day).

I’ve said it before and I will say it again, this isn’t great for Disney but it also isn’t going to hurt them all that much. Meanwhile I fully expect Disney to take action(s) to punish Florida in return. Board members and CEO egos are almost as fragile as politicians.

While I wish politics didn’t devolve into petty retribution, it does have a tendency to do exactly that and I think we can all agree that Bob C. did a TERRIBLE job handling this from the get go. With that in mind, if it ends up with him getting tossed, at least there will be a nice silver lining to this whole thing.

 

[Thelazer]

Another thing: if Disney hits back by canceling it's planned Lake Nona campus (Which many employees are already calling for the company to do) that would hurt Florida far more than losing RCID is going to hurt Disney.

That area is doing JUST FINE without that campus.. it's not going to miss Disney.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Is there a chance the reasoning behind this move is because of the affordable housing Disney plans to build on site?

It’s not. It’s a retaliation because Chapek spoke out against the Don’t Say Gay Bill.

This actually was my original reason for jumping in to this thread, I am very curious how this might impact the WDW experience?

In the long-term it can certainly have an impact. For 1, I believe less LGBT people will want to move to Florida and work for the theme parks. Some that are currently there may choose to move when the opportunity presents itself.

2 - infrastructure projects could take longer to plan, construct, and complete. This includes roads, parking garages, etc.

3 - infrastructure funding could change that could result in changes to park operations. Will the fire department still be able to send multiple fire watch for all the shows that run pyro? Little things like that can add up.

 

[lordsigma]

I dont go to chick fil a because I don't agree with their politics. But they shouldn't be barred from opening locations because of that. Its my personal choice not to give them money.

This.

 

[Kamikaze]

Another thing: if Disney hits back by canceling it's planned Lake Nona campus (Which many employees are already calling for the company to do) that would hurt Florida far more than losing RCID is going to hurt Disney.

I can't see how Chapek doesn't cancel Lake Nona after this. It would build him a little bit of CM support as well as stick it back at DeSantis, making him look a little stronger than what he's looked since, well, always.

 

[Tamandua]

Another thing: if Disney hits back by canceling it's planned Lake Nona campus (Which many employees are already calling for the company to do) that would hurt Florida far more than losing RCID is going to hurt Disney.

That's pretty unlikely though. Even as antagonistic as Florida is right now, it's still more business friendly than California. And Republicans aren't trying to exempt Disney from any business benefits that apply to everyone. They're most removing Disney's unfair advantage with RDIC.

 

[peter11435]

They most certainly can. All they'd have to do is tie the regulation to companies with more than X employees in the county (Disney only) or tie it specifically to theme parks or resorts with more than X customers per year (Disney only).

and then they would face a lawsuit and lose in court

 

[Disstevefan1]

Everyone remember that they made this bill broad enough to apply to a number of special districts so that they can't be blamed for targeting Disney specifically. Also keep in mind that Disney has been benefitting from similar legislative carve outs forever that are broad enough to not target Disney specifically, but are created specifically for Disney. For example, you are allowed to keep firearms locked in your car in Florida, but not at Disney because they store "explosives" (fireworks). This exemption was created specifically for Disney but used the explosives carve out as a loophole. If Disney argues that they are being targeted, they will be vulnerable to losing other beneficial carve outs as well.

Ha, they made it broad to make it appear Disney was targeted.
It does not matter. I think Disney will benefit from this; both financially and optically.
This was a bad move from the governor.

 

[flynnibus]

Yes the one being treated. In my family areas in other states an ambulance ride to the hospital is several hundred dollars billed to the one being transported. If the patient is being charged would that make some change their mind in calling 911, remains to be seen.

No, it would make the situation like it is everywhere else and they are back to normal expectations.

No one would be looking to call 911 because they know a paramedic visit is 'free' here. 911 is not your health clinic.

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

I dont go to chick fil a because I don't agree with their politics. But they shouldn't be barred from opening locations because of that. Its my personal choice not to give them money.

Which is how it should be, at the personal level, unfortunately somewhere along the way politicians started using their power as a way to punish businesses they disagree with and we’ve allowed it.

I don’t go to Jimmy Johns because the owner’s a trophy hunter, I’d never ask or expect the government to ban his restaurants because I disagree with his stance on animals though.

 

[the_rich]

This.

I'm a liberal and I support everyone's right to say whatever they want. But if public opinion turns on them or there is a boycott then they reap what they sow. But I couldn't be more against the government enacting consequences.