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

Stripes

Stripes

Premium Member
news.bloombergtax.com

Disney Spat Leaves DeSantis Few Options for Reedy Creek District

Disney’s Reedy Creek district—or something like it—will almost certainly be in place for the foreseeable future in Florida, either by court intervention or legislation. The question now is how much oversight the state will enjoy over this uniquely powerful and corporate-controlled district, says...
news.bloombergtax.com news.bloombergtax.com

“If Florida attempts to place Reedy Creek under state control, Disney will have a much stronger court case than if the state simply dissolved the district. Depending on who you ask, Disney already had a claim that dissolving the district was unconstitutional retaliation for protected speech in violation of the First Amendment. However, that claim was not entirely clear, as it would be unusual for a court to step in to say a state cannot dissolve one of its own subdivisions based on an alleged improper motive.

Disney’s right to elect its representatives is much stronger than its right to have Reedy Creek exist at all. Disney, as property owner, was granted the statutory right to elect the district’s board of supervisors. If Florida tried to replace it with state political appointees, the situation would go from the state managing its own subdivisions to the state taking away a landowner’s right to vote for its local representatives—an action courts are much more accustomed to stepping in to prevent. Florida cannot avoid this control issue by simply creating a new district with a different governing body, as the state Constitution would require Disney to approve any special district with taxing powers like Reedy Creek.”
 
peter11435

peter11435

Well-Known Member
Baloo62 said:
If the Disney company only depended on robust theme park revenue to stay afloat, I would agree with you.
Click to expand...
Where do you think the company is failing? There are some areas they are struggling but politics has nothing to do with it.

There’s certainly a large demographic that disagrees with Disneys political stance but it largely does not affect their spending habits. Heck even the politician that sponsored the bill to dissolve reedy creek has went on two Disney Cruises since passing the legislation.
 
Sirwalterraleigh

Sirwalterraleigh

Premium Member
monothingie said:
They can certainly try, but the only consensus I gathered from that was that it is very difficult to prove intent.
Click to expand...
Here’s what’s not difficult:

Trying to get a 6-3 court to rule that a 60 year agreement that has enriched millions of men at this point and has less public regulation that almost anywhere is now going to be “More Merican” with transient politicians having a say on the fly…as opposed to “private enterprise”

Good luck with THAT 👍🏻
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Stripes said:
news.bloombergtax.com

Disney Spat Leaves DeSantis Few Options for Reedy Creek District

Disney’s Reedy Creek district—or something like it—will almost certainly be in place for the foreseeable future in Florida, either by court intervention or legislation. The question now is how much oversight the state will enjoy over this uniquely powerful and corporate-controlled district, says...
news.bloombergtax.com news.bloombergtax.com

“If Florida attempts to place Reedy Creek under state control, Disney will have a much stronger court case than if the state simply dissolved the district. Depending on who you ask, Disney already had a claim that dissolving the district was unconstitutional retaliation for protected speech in violation of the First Amendment. However, that claim was not entirely clear, as it would be unusual for a court to step in to say a state cannot dissolve one of its own subdivisions based on an alleged improper motive.

Disney’s right to elect its representatives is much stronger than its right to have Reedy Creek exist at all. Disney, as property owner, was granted the statutory right to elect the district’s board of supervisors. If Florida tried to replace it with state political appointees, the situation would go from the state managing its own subdivisions to the state taking away a landowner’s right to vote for its local representatives—an action courts are much more accustomed to stepping in to prevent. Florida cannot avoid this control issue by simply creating a new district with a different governing body, as the state Constitution would require Disney to approve any special district with taxing powers like Reedy Creek.”
Click to expand...
The bold part is the whole ballgame. Only way around that is an amendment to the state constitution to eliminate Disney’s right to representation while continuing to tax them. Seems like a horribly slippery slope to go down. I can’t imagine any corporation even considering moving any jobs to FL if that’s the law of the land. That could have extreme negative long term impacts on the state and local economies.
 
GoofGoof

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Elijah Abrams said:
I’m worried DeSantis is going to win this feud and RCID is going to die, ending Disney World.
Click to expand...
To put your mind at ease:
  1. The jury is still out on this whole situation so DeSantis may not ultimately win unless like me you believe this was all a political stunt done to drum up support and gain donations…..then he’s already won
  2. It‘s possible that RCID stays, it’s also possible it’s replaced with something very similar with maybe a few exceptions or a new name so even if RCID dies, RCID part 2 may be seamless to most of us so not a death….a rebirth or maybe a rebranding
  3. Even if DeSantis wins and RCID does die completely it won’t end Disney World. Some of the major benefits of RCID from the early years are largely irrelevant today. For example when Disney was a smaller company and less credit worthy being able to borrow money off balance sheet was a bigger deal. Now after the Fox acquisition TWDC has billions in debt anyway so hiding a billion is no big deal. Comcast has had no issues developing Universal (and getting the local county to foot some of the bill for infrastructure). Disney will spend more money lobbying local politicians and will still do new infrastructure projects. There may be less road work projects and they may take longer but it won’t force WDW to close.
 
Skibum1970

Skibum1970

Well-Known Member
GoofGoof said:
To put your mind at ease:
  1. The jury is still out on this whole situation so DeSantis may not ultimately win unless like me you believe this was all a political stunt done to drum up support and gain donations…..then he’s already won
  2. It‘s possible that RCID stays, it’s also possible it’s replaced with something very similar with maybe a few exceptions or a new name so even if RCID dies, RCID part 2 may be seamless to most of us so not a death….a rebirth or maybe a rebranding
  3. Even if DeSantis wins and RCID does die completely it won’t end Disney World. Some of the major benefits of RCID from the early years are largely irrelevant today. For example when Disney was a smaller company and less credit worthy being able to borrow money off balance sheet was a bigger deal. Now after the Fox acquisition TWDC has billions in debt anyway so hiding a billion is no big deal. Comcast has had no issues developing Universal (and getting the local county to foot some of the bill for infrastructure). Disney will spend more money lobbying local politicians and will still do new infrastructure projects. There may be less road work projects and they may take longer but it won’t force WDW to close.
Click to expand...

Agree completely. No way WDW closes and no one can force them to close. They close only if the parks start losing money or if TWDC goes under or is in danger of going under. Reedy Creek ruling won't really impact anything, if I had to guess. DeSantis painted himself into a corner and, like most politicians, will not back down or quietly let this go away. At the end of the day, I'd say that it will be business as usual, fans will notice nothing different, and Disney and Florida will find a way to get along.

I think that your points are all spot-on, particularly #2.

I did want to add. When the dust has settled, the parks will still be packed, Genie+ will remain a disaster, and Disney will still take 5 years to construct a minimally themed indoor coaster.
 
Last edited:
Stripes

Stripes

Premium Member
GoofGoof said:
The bold part is the whole ballgame. Only way around that is an amendment to the state constitution to eliminate Disney’s right to representation while continuing to tax them. Seems like a horribly slippery slope to go down. I can’t imagine any corporation even considering moving any jobs to FL if that’s the law of the land. That could have extreme negative long term impacts on the state and local economies.
Click to expand...
Does Florida need approval from RCID/Disney to amend the Reedy Creek Improvement Act to replace the landowner elected Board with a Governor appointed Board? I would think and hope so. Is there something in the Florida Constitution that would pertain to such a scenario?

It would be odd if the Florida legislature could make such a change to the district’s control without the landowners’ permission. But if they were creating a new district with said taxing authority they would need permission.
 
H

Heath

Active Member
Of course there is something wrong with their statement. It’s one of many reasons for Disney’s necessary audibles, and why this thread topic exists.
 
NotCalledBob

NotCalledBob

Well-Known Member
I can see one huge upside for Disney in a RCID dissolution.

It can take over from Covid as something to blame all project delays on from hereon in.

Silver linings and all that.

I still think there will be an agreement of sorts with a face saving solution all round. It suits DeSantis right now to sabre rattle a bit.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom