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

Parker in NYC

Well-Known Member
I was thinking about that...how there are so many lawyers in this thread...but then it occurred to me. The lawyer profession is a very large percentage of the small subset of people that can now afford a disney vacation (according to most on this site at least). So it should surprise no one that so many lawyers could be on a disney fan page.
And epidemiologists and economists and financial advisors and respiratory specialists.
 

GoofGoof

Premium Member
Should Disney get away with this - probably not. It sets a bad example for the future.

It's like Hyatt getting bought out by Marriott and at the last minute Hyatt coming up with something through their lawyers saying your can't fired anyone for five years.
That actually happens all the time with hostile takeovers. In corporate world it’s called a poison pill and the intent is to either avoid the unwanted takeover or at least protect existing workers.

As far as getting away with things…..should a Governor get away with punishing a corporations for speaking out against one of his policies? I think we are long past caring about setting bad precedent.
 

Tha Realest

Well-Known Member
These weren't posted immediately, I did see somewhere that they were on the Orange County Register website the whole time though. I'm not sure about that. The contracts have some info about public record and that RCID wasn't going to post them or something like that, I can't remember exactly what it said.
Time stamps show not posted until March 6.
CFC06F70-11D9-42A2-9B39-B7A49FACAA71.jpeg
 

el_super

Well-Known Member
It's really not like that at all. I can see why it would seem that way to a layman, though.

There is a a closer analogy with the DisneylandForward initiative. That's a case where Disney is asking the city government to basically abdicate their responsibility toward zoning and planning to allow Disney to build whatever they want.

I understand there is a difference between a duely elected city government and the board appt by the governor, but it still sets this precedent that a corporation can work to elect a friendly government with the purpose of setting up the corporation to act without the input of the electorate. I do not care for that idea at all.
 

Parker in NYC

Well-Known Member
Unless someone is claiming expertise they don't have, I don't see how this applies. Are laymen not allowed to discuss these issues?
Oh, by all means. I just assumed since many folks here bring up accreditations in certain arguments. Also, we can now add dishwasher to the roster of job experience.
 

UNCgolf

Well-Known Member
There is a a closer analogy with the DisneylandForward initiative. That's a case where Disney is asking the city government to basically abdicate their responsibility toward zoning and planning to allow Disney to build whatever they want.

I understand there is a difference between a duely elected city government and the board appt by the governor, but it still sets this precedent that a corporation can work to elect a friendly government with the purpose of setting up the corporation to act without the input of the electorate. I do not care for that idea at all.

That's not dissimilar to how things already work. That's the biggest reason corporations spend so much money lobbying -- so that elected officials will do what they want.

The big difference, though (and you alluded to this), is that in this specific scenario Disney essentially is the electorate. That makes it hard to apply to basically anywhere else.
 

BaconPancakes

Well-Known Member
There is a a closer analogy with the DisneylandForward initiative. That's a case where Disney is asking the city government to basically abdicate their responsibility toward zoning and planning to allow Disney to build whatever they want.

I understand there is a difference between a duely elected city government and the board appt by the governor, but it still sets this precedent that a corporation can work to elect a friendly government with the purpose of setting up the corporation to act without the input of the electorate. I do not care for that idea at all.
And I don't like the precedent of a state going after a corporation for enacting their 1st amendment rights but here we are.
 

kong1802

Well-Known Member

Riviera Rita

Well-Known Member

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

Back
Top Bottom