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

peter11435

peter11435

Well-Known Member
Epcot-Rules said:
I hear what your saying but the state's stance is they have given Disney what no other company in the state of Florida has been given. That hardly falls under the first amendment. I think the timing is very suspicious of course but Uni or Sea World don't have that power. I don't think Disney has much of a chance in court. Times have changed since Reedy Creek Act.
Click to expand...
Except for starters the states stance is false.

Additionally Disney was not given powers; an area of land was designated as a district and granted powers. Disney has no power anywhere else in the state and if Disney sold all land to Pepsi tomorrow then Disney would have nothing.

Also it doesn’t really matter if they were the only ones because if the law was passed intentionally to harm Disney as punishment for them executing a protected action then it absolutely does fall under the first amendment.
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
wdwmagic said:
Well bringing this very much back to WDW, this gives Disney yet another reason to make significant cut backs to WDW going forward. I am hearing this is already concern about the future.
Click to expand...
It gives them another excuse - for sure. This one semi-believable…

But did you see any legitimate chance that the plan under chapek was to spend a dime past tron?

I saw none beyond more DVC
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
castlecake2.0 said:
Do they plan to fight or just accept it?
Click to expand...
How can they really fight it head on? If they really did announce a pull back on investing in FL it’s really just hurting the local CMs who aren’t likely to be in favor of this and the local communities who depend on Disney for jobs and economic activity. There’s a lot of collateral damage from a public fight with DeSantis.

What’s most likely is they follow what Chapek said was the original plan: fight things from behind the scenes. In the past the majority of TWDC political spending in FL went to Republican lawmakers including DeSantis. Flipping that to support others less hostile towards the company is smart business. DeSantis doesn’t care as much now since he has deep pockets, but over time that’s a major problem for local politicians with shoe string budgets.
 
lazyboy97o

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
How can they really fight it head on? If they really did announce a pull back on investing in FL it’s really just hurting the local CMs who aren’t likely to be in favor of this and the local communities who depend on Disney for jobs and economic activity. There’s a lot of collateral damage from a public fight with DeSantis.

What’s most likely is they follow what Chapek said was the original plan: fight things from behind the scenes. In the past the majority of TWDC political spending in FL went to Republican lawmakers including DeSantis. Flipping that to support others less hostile towards the company is smart business. DeSantis doesn’t care as much now since he has deep pockets, but over time that’s a major problem for local politicians with shoe string budgets.
Click to expand...
The next legislative session is not until March, leaving three months to get a behind the scenes deal in place. The only way to fight is in court.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
castlecake2.0 said:
But they haven’t, there’s 1,844 special districts in the state, not just Disney. The reason other theme parks don’t have a special district is because they don’t also maintain a city’s worth of infrastructure. UOR is 500 acres, Seaworld is 200, WDW is 28,000 acres.
Click to expand...
That’s the part the media is distorting. RCID is a benefit to Disney but it’s also a benefit to the local governments. It’s a win/win scenario where Disney gets what they want and the local county is burdened with footing the bill for infrastructure improvements and services at a private business. The media (and Governor) want to paint this as some special benefit given to Disney but it’s more nuanced than that.
 
O

OceanBlue

Active Member
EPCOT-O.G. said:
The Disney defenders want it both ways: they want the state to have complete autonomy over how, what, and when to introduce complex (and debated) gender and sexual issues to your children, but then take a hands off approach towards the basic governance affecting huge, multi billion dollar corporations.
Click to expand...
Disney is being retaliated against, by the state government of Florida, for protected free speech/redress of grievances. This is a constitutional issue. It's not about the size of business, if the government retaliates against a business of any size for protected speech that's a problem. The GOP didn't voice or have any scheduled reason to upset the economy of central Florida until they passed a controversial law that faced national protest and personal lobbying from the CEO of Disney on behalf of the grievances of his employees. It also sounds like DeSantis had no idea what the Reedy Creek District was, unlike most of us Disney fans until someone let him know in the fallout. He used his power to retaliate. It's not tit for tat, because one side expressed free speech, and the other is using governmental power to enact damages on a business (bond rating of Reedy Creek lowered yesterday to start).

Many states offer counseling and "sex" education in public schools K and up due to child abuse that takes place in the home and the school needing to provide a safe environment for protected classes of people. Also, one can discriminate in their home but they can't do that in a public school. In our state you are given notification about any training, all age-appropriate by professional social workers, and have the option to opt out and also review the lesson. So I don't think I want it both ways. I'm fine with things being offered in a public school that serves all classes of people and having the option to opt my child out, (I didn't after review). I'm also ok with FL reviewing and studying the reasons for, and implications of changing the status of the state's largest and premier tourist attraction/employer, but not because the Gov and GOP are angry over getting pushback in a shared society. There was no thoughtful or public review, this was pushed through for effect in a "special" session for maximum political drama and to cause immediate distress to the Disney company.
 
TimeTrip

TimeTrip

Well-Known Member
I'm looking for some clarification on things wrt real estate taxes.

Disney is paying taxes to both orange and Osceola counties, depending on what property we're talking about, right? They also pay an extra tax to the RCID correct?

I've read that those taxes typically cover schools (none on Disney property), safety (rcid has its own FD and Disney pays for county police?), Streets (again RCID?), Sanitation (Disney run?), Spaces (everything is Disney parks and hotels etc), services (I don't think there is anything here beyond what Disney provides).

If that's the case, are the counties just taking those taxes and using them on streets, schools, sanitation, parks, public spaces, police etc for everyone outside of RCID?
 

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

Back
Top Bottom