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

Wendy Pleakley

Wendy Pleakley

Well-Known Member
This probably won't impact the vacation choices of the vast majority of people, but if it does it's interesting that DeSantis seems to be turning conservatives against Disney in general, and liberals against Florida in general.

A bold choice given Disney's importance to Florida.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
HM Spectre said:
If it's unconstitutional, we'll find out well before it's actually enacted (and that's a good thing). DeSantis was JAG lawyer. You'd assume he'd know whether this is unconstitutional or not before pursuing it. But I'm fine sitting back and waiting for the process to play out as people much smarter than me and more informed of the law make that determination.
Click to expand...
He claimed the District as it exists is already unconstitutional. Why did he waste taxpayer money and distract a special session to deal with something he could handle himself?
 
peter11435

peter11435

Well-Known Member
mmascari said:
Are they completely unaffected?

Let's imagine Orange County taxes do go up by 10%. That would mean Disney and Universal Studios, both in Orange County, have increased property taxes to Orange County by 10%. Universal Studios get's nothing for the extra money. Disney gets to stop paying the RCID extra taxes. As long as the Orange County increase is less, and since it's spread out over more groups it should be, it'll be a net reduction for Disney.

Disney also loses all the influence and control, but that has an unknown worth as of now.
Click to expand...
True. They could likely see higher taxes for their property.
 
Disney Analyst

Disney Analyst

Well-Known Member
Wendy Pleakley said:
This probably won't impact the vacation choices of the vast majority of people, but if it does it's interesting that DeSantis seems to be turning conservatives against Disney in general, and liberals against Florida in general.

A bold choice given Disney's importance to Florida.
Click to expand...

I am boycotting Florida 100% under the current regime. They will not see a cent of my tourist dollars.
 
Virtual Toad

Virtual Toad

Well-Known Member
HM Spectre said:
Executives using their corporation's economic power to attack a person or entity who has an opposing view is inherently wrong in a democracy. Their power only exists because the board and shareholders elected them. Their job is to serve.

This is not me arguing against the point you're making, I'm simply showing that your words work both ways. It's not just the politicians flexing power in a potentially inappropriate manner here. Individuals within a corporation using the power of a corporation to influence legislation unrelated to their business is also incredibly dangerous.

This behavior in general is gross for all parties involved. But since this is a Disney forum, Disney should be focused on running their company and providing wonderful entertainment for EVERYONE... the company should not be weaponized to fight the political battles of a select few.
Click to expand...
It seems there are a number of media corporations who use their economic power to speak out on various issues (or "attack those with opposing views" as you put it). Some in fact have made it their entire business model. That kind of irks me when people argue that Disney should remain quiet on social issues and simply "entertain." They are as entitled to express their opinions as any other corporation, including those on all sides of a given issue.

The difference between what the corporations are doing and what the governor did is that the corporations' actions are clearly and unarguably protected by our Constitution. The bill passed by the legislature against RCID was a deliberate act against a company for exercising its constitutional right to free speech. So no, the words do not work both ways. One act is constitutionally protected, the other is a direct assault on constitutional freedoms.
 
DisneyDebRob

DisneyDebRob

Well-Known Member
GimpYancIent said:
There was a time, yes, when journalists / reporters truly presented the story. Sadly, though there are some serious up and coming students of true journalism / reporting, there are just as many if not more that taint the story. Now more than ever it is vital to corroborate a story from / through multiple sources to get a semblance of what is true.
Click to expand...
Exactly the reason i go to Facebook first.. then double checking those stories on twitter.😃
 
donaldtoo

donaldtoo

Well-Known Member
Chip Chipperson said:
So the quote from a FL legislator when announcing the plan to (and reason for) dissolving the RCID wasn't telling Disney not to voice their opinions? "If Disney wants to embrace woke ideology then it's only fitting they should be regulated by Orange County," sure sounds like someone who took a political donation from Disney telling Disney not to discuss politics. Butbyoubseem to be okay with that much higher level of hypocrisy, so I don't see why you'd have a problem with it here (especially since some amount of political discussion has been allowed;in this thread so long as it remains on topic - and the mods have explained why they don't want to expand it beyond that (and the reason isn't "someone might say something that opposes what I think."
Click to expand...

I don’t care about the politicians, as ALL politicians are hypocrites. Our crazy-a$$ mayor told us to all stay hunkered down and wear our masks while he pretended to be here when he was actually in Cabo for his daughters wedding, while in the middle of the damndemic…off the chain hypocrisy…!!!! 🤪:hilarious:
I was simply talking about the stated rules of this site.
Again, don’t tell us politics is not allowed, and then allow politics. Politics at the discretion of the folks that run this site would be more honest. Don’t hide…be up front.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
HM Spectre said:
Executives using their corporation's economic power to attack a person or entity who has an opposing view is inherently wrong in a democracy. Their power only exists because the board and shareholders elected them. Their job is to serve.

This is not me arguing against the point you're making, I'm simply showing that your words work both ways. It's not just the politicians flexing power in a potentially inappropriate manner here. Individuals within a corporation using the power of a corporation to influence legislation unrelated to their business is also incredibly dangerous.

This behavior in general is gross for all parties involved. But since this is a Disney forum, Disney should be focused on running their company and providing wonderful entertainment for EVERYONE... the company should not be weaponized to fight the political battles of a select few.
Click to expand...
I fundamentally disagree with that point of view, it’s not both ways. A government entity is held to a different standard due to actual powers granted to them by the people. An individual or a corporation has every right to a political point of view and free speech is protected by the constitution. The constitution specifically protects citizens against the government attempting to stop that free speech. It’s very disturbing to see a government entity attacking and attempting to punish someone for exercising free speech. For me that’s not acceptable.

An executive’s job isn’t to serve anyone. They run a for profit company. If Chapek made the statements he made and the TWDC board thought it was inappropriate or a big enough mistake they should discipline him up to or including firing him. It’s not the place of me or you or the Governor of FL to decide if Chapek’s actions were in the best interest of the DIS shareholders. That’s the board’s job.

For me this has nothing to do with the actual original bill being discussed. The elected government officials in the state of FL passed a bill and the governor signed it. Unless the courts had a reason to overturn it (which seems unlikely) it’s a part of FL law now. There’s nothing Disney can do to stop it. That doesn’t stop people and corporations from opposing that law and saying so. It doesn’t prevent Disney from stopping making political contributions in the state if they choose.
 
HM Spectre

HM Spectre

Well-Known Member
Virtual Toad said:
It seems there are a number of media corporations who use their economic power to speak out on various issues (or "attack those with opposing views" as you put it). Some in fact have made it their entire business model. That kind of irks me when people argue that Disney should remain quiet on social issues and simply "entertain." They are as entitled to express their opinions as any other corporation, including those on all sides of a given issue.

The difference between what the corporations are doing and what the governor did is that the corporations' actions are clearly and unarguably protected by our Constitution. The bill passed by the legislature against RCID was a deliberate act against a company for exercising its constitutional right to free speech. So no, the words do not work both ways. One act is constitutionally protected, the other is a direct assault on constitutional freedoms.
Click to expand...
Again, we will find out if dissolving RCID in this manner is constitutional or not. By dissolving it, they're removing a privilege, they're not infringing on a right available to others. And it's within their power to do so as of today. If it holds up in court then yes, it works both ways. I'm not a lawyer and I'm not going to pretend to be one here so I'm fine waiting to see how this plays out.
 
M

MandaM

Well-Known Member
Grumpy4196 said:
I keep hearing about Disney's right to free speech and I agree its their right to disagree with the law. I think Chapeks big mistake was vowing to support any and all groups in getting the law overturned. This goes beyond freedom of speech IMO.
Click to expand...
It’s still protected speech under the 1st Amendment. Just like if you said you world work to overturn a law, the government can’t punish you for it.
 
B

BWV2013

Member
I keep hearing about Disney's right to free speech and I agree its their right to disagree with the law. I think Chapeks big mistake was vowing to support any and all groups in getting the law overturned. This goes beyond freedom of speech IMO.

Chapeks' supporters wish you would forget what he actually said. He went beyond disagreeing with the law and challenged the govt.
 
C

Chip Chipperson

Well-Known Member
Grumpy4196 said:
I keep hearing about Disney's right to free speech and I agree its their right to disagree with the law. I think Chapeks big mistake was vowing to support any and all groups in getting the law overturned. This goes beyond freedom of speech IMO.
Click to expand...

How is it not freedom of speech to support people opposing a law? If people believe a law is unjust and have legal standing to challenge it then that is their right - and it's Disney's right to donate to their cause if that's how they want to play it. If the law is just, it will withstand the challenge in court. DeSantis should welcome that opportunity to prove that he's right if he truly believes in it. The correct response is not to try to use the legislature to punish his critics, no matter how good it might feel to do so.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom