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

[CaptainAmerica]

They do.

They have time to kill to assert that.

If they use that to wipe out all that Gov and Cronies have done, then Gov and Cronies will find another avenue of attack, such as attempting to pass another vengeful bill, but next time, to stop saying it's all about vengeance.

Litigation isn't that fast. If you're really sure that your case is ironclad, you file for temporary injunctive relief now, before any potentially irreversible damage is done.

DeSantis would be long gone before any litigation here made its way through the courts.

 

[MisterPenguin]

So Disney says the development agreement is good. CFTOD says it is not. Then what happens What action does the board take that you think will end up in court? Denying a building permit? Raising taxes? Affordable housing?

What makes it more advantageous to Disney to fight the multitude of singular actions from the board, rather than fight the take over in the first place?

Litigation isn't that fast. If you're really sure that your case is ironclad, you file for temporary injunctive relief now, before any potentially irreversible damage is done.

DeSantis would be long gone before any litigation here made its way through the courts.

You asked, I answered. We obviously have different takes. Now we all know where we stand.

Good day to both of you.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Litigation isn't that fast. If you're really sure that your case is ironclad, you file for temporary injunctive relief now, before any potentially irreversible damage is done.

DeSantis would be long gone before any litigation here made its way through the courts.

Injunctions are somewhat neutralized because the courts are now outwardly political.

And you’re reading the tea leaves wrong on “long gone”

It’s looking more like “never leaving” and Disney I’m sure is weighing that

 

[Brian]

DeSantis is going to have to take a day off from his Disney crusade to address the 4:45am emergency alert virtually everyone in Florida got overnight.

 

[Chi84]

You asked, I answered. We obviously have different takes. Now we all know where we stand.

Good day to both of you.

People act like Disney retained Dewey, Cheatem and Howe. I guarantee you the Disney legal team isn't going to get sucked in by histrionics or people's feelings on what should be done.

If notices weren't sent to certain people, it was done on purpose. It may have been a calculated gamble, but it wasn't because Disney didn't read the statute or forgot to put the notices in the mail.

They're playing the long game here and there really is no way to predict what's going to happen. We're just having fun on a discussion board!

 

[CaptainAmerica]

And you’re reading the tea leaves wrong on “long gone”

No, I'm saying even if he runs for POTUS and loses, or never runs for POTUS in the first place, his term would be over before there would be any resolution to litigation here.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I'd love to see how a state employee would get experience on how exactly to determine if something like RotR is safe.

The same way Disney does. There is already state criteria that Disney has to meet with its inspections. A lot of the information does come from the ride system manufacturer. All of this is tied back to things like ASTM standards

 

[lazyboy97o]

But yes, it's ludicrous to think a state inspector from DACS is more qualified to inspect rides at either WDW or Uni than the Imagineers who designed and installed them.

Walt Disney Imagineering and Universal Creative don’t do ride maintenance and inspections, that’s done by the park operations teams. They also generally don’t manufacture the ride systems.

 

[MandaM]

Wait wait wait.

I was assured that they had an ironclad First Amendment claim because these actions were INDSISPUTABLY retaliatory for their speech?

Well, the Lt Governor said that if Disney were to disregard their woke agenda, the state wouldn’t take action against them, so the retaliatory aspect is pretty assured, wouldn’t you agree?

 

[danlb_2000]

DeSantis is going to have to take a day off from his Disney crusade to address the 4:45am emergency alert virtually everyone in Florida got overnight.

4:45AM! I guess Florida isn't where woke goes to die.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

Well, the Lt Governor said that if Disney were to disregard their woke agenda, the state wouldn’t take action against them, so the retaliatory aspect is pretty assured, wouldn’t you agree?

Yeah it's very clear from a "normal person observing the situation with common sense" perspective.

I don't know what the legal standard entails when it comes to proving it in court.

 

[mkt]

Wait wait wait.

I was assured that they had an ironclad First Amendment claim because these actions were INDSISPUTABLY retaliatory for their speech?

There absolutely is a possible first amendment claim.

But why only have one constitutional violation in a lawsuit when you can multiple, plus actual monetary damages while waiting a bit, but still remaining completely within the statute of limitations.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Disney has not acted because they are risk averse cowards. That’s it. Plenty of actual harms have occurred. They thought appeasement would work. They wrongly assumed that if they just sulked away then that would be enough and it would go away. The assessment wasn’t one of right or wrong, it was about what assumed to be the easiest.

Even now, with clear attempts to impair contracts, Disney might not act. They might again convince themselves that “this time they’ll actually stop.”

 

[lazyboy97o]

Well, the Lt Governor said that if Disney were to disregard their woke agenda, the state wouldn’t take action against them, so the retaliatory aspect is pretty assured, wouldn’t you agree?

That might be the one person whose comments would be less legally relevant since she was not actually part of the process.

 

[flynnibus]

The difference is the Disney contract itself was not illegal. If there’s something in the contract that a court rules is illegal (like the fraud you describe) then the contract could be ruled void. Maybe in this case the fraud would be the self dealing approach the state is floating out there. A judge would have to decide that.

Which is exactly what the board is claiming - it's voidable because it wasn't done legally. The arguments here I was responding to was the one that says the board can't possibly go after the deal because they are the ones that made it. That alone is not sufficient to keep the board from going back against the deal as the hypothetical highlights.

The keystone here is the debate around the argument made to determine the deal being invalid from the start... they can undo a deal if it was never valid to start. The big debate is.. if their conclusion on it being valid or not is correct. Not 'what are the correct avenues for reconciliation' (to paraphrase)

The failure to provide notice is a procedural violation on the government’s part (RCID being the government in this case).

Again you all are already moving onto point #2 (terms of a developer agreement) while the board and it's lawyers are saying "Do not pass go, do not collect $200" and not even respecting the contract as in force.

You're talking past each other as you debate something different from the terms they are working from. I don't know if their interpretation is correct, but you're not even debating the same things as them.

So in this case if there was not proper notice given to landowners who could be impacted and if one of the landowners comes forward with a valid objection then a judge would most likely rule the current board would need to hear that objection and then re-vote on the contract which we all know will result in a no.

Yes, we all know in that sequence of events how that woud go

 

[LAKid53]

4:45AM! I guess Florida isn't where woke goes to die.

I missed it.

 

[GoofGoof]

Wait wait wait.

I was assured that they had an ironclad First Amendment claim because these actions were INDSISPUTABLY retaliatory for their speech?

That isn’t what was being discussed. We are talking about the development agreement

 

[sedati]

I'd love to see how a state employee would get experience on how exactly to determine if something like RotR is safe.

You’re thinking in terms of physically safe where they are looking to see that it is ideologically safe. I’m sure there’s a whole field of engineering that deals with such concerns.

 

[el_super]

That isn’t what was being discussed. We are talking about the development agreement

Yes it was.

Disney hasn't acted because they are still seeking compromise and settlement. They haven't acted because morality isn't dictating their actions, but PR and optics are. Shareholder value is dictating their actions. Anyone who thinks Disney will act as some form of woke crusader is setting themselves up for disappointment.

 

[Patcheslee]

Can you expand on this? The county health departments handle food inspections and any ride inspections would be conducted by employees working for the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (DACS).

The DFOT complained they were required to get RDIC approval prior to work.