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

[GoofGoof]

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)


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.


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

I am moving on to #2. I‘m assuming if the contract was illegal anyway there would be no need to bring up the notice issue. I guess it’s a throw a bunch of poo at the wall and see what sticks scenario. The only evidence the presented that the contract could be illegal was that e-mail screen shot which IMHO proves nothing legally. Again more of a PR stunt as they new the images would get tweeted out in an attempt to put doubt in people’s minds.

 

[Heppenheimer]

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.”

Risk averse? Have you seen the incredible list of sequels and franchise-milking films they have in development?

 

[Po'Rich]

North Carolina appears to want to lure Disney to their state:

https://www.wfmynews2.com/article/n...olina/83-d80a3bc3-f3b2-4325-bf11-ac91b2ed82d6

I imagine it is only a matter of time before we start seeing similar proposals in other states. Of course, it's not really practical for Walt Disney World to move, but it does make for good theater.

 

[LAKid53]

So what happens if the board isn’t confirmed by the senate before May 2nd? The Federal govt does allow the President to make Recess Apointments, does FL law allow the Governor to? If that’s a no, who runs the board of the district fka Reedy Creek

Section 114.05 addresses that situation

Statute in full.

Statutes & Constitution :View Statutes : Online Sunshine

 

[Patcheslee]

Finally figured out the whole Disney "woke" aspect. We get up for 7am Genie+!!! Now back to regular programming....

 

[V.i.n.c.e.n.t.]

Thanks for joining the board to let us know you're offended by those who are conscious of, and working to reduce, racial discrimination in society and other forms of oppression and injustice.

The first thing I always ask when I here someone say woke is asking them to define it... I usually get a deer in the headlights look

 

[Surferboy567]

Because they want this out of the news as soon as possible.

Disney does not like going to court. If the other news of this week wasn't a tip off: no matter how right you are morally, or what kind of rock-hard solid legal case you might have, you always try to settle to avoid going to court.

I still think we are way past the point of “settling” they are clearly not in a position to keep hoping it will go away. They are going to keep accusing Disney of various things and destroy the structure of WDW piece by piece if they don’t start playing hardball.

They need to wake up that this is something that needs to be fought as quickly as possible.

 

[Touchdown]

It’s because being woke means you believe all people are equal and don’t discriminate. No one likes to say they are exclusionary.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

There absolutely is a possible first amendment claim.

Of course there is. But if it were as much of a slam dunk as people were making it out to be, something would have been filed by now.

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.

You don't sit back and let someone damage you on the premise that you might be able to sue them to recover those damages years from now.

 

[GoofGoof]

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.

It has nothing to do with being a woke crusader. They want to run their business, entertain guests and make a boat load of money in FL (like the last 50+ years). They signed a development agreement to prevent the Governor from using the board he seized control of from stopping them from achieving that goal. They believe the agreement covers them. They will likely go to court at some point if the district violates that contract.

A first amendment case isn’t their preferred legal avenue. Why would it be if they feel they can continue doing business in FL? The fact that they haven’t sued already doesn’t mean they won’t, but this is really a one sided fight. The Governor is attacking Disney repeatedly for personal gain but Disney isn’t attacking the state back. They aren’t pulling back investment, they aren’t pausing development, they aren’t stopping adding jobs there. Instead they expanded their affordable housing project near WDW, announced a decade of billions of investment and 13K jobs to be added. They have also not reversed course on their “woke” ideals. They still don’t support the bill that started all this. They still require diversity, equity and inclusion training and practices in FL, they still welcome all people (with enough cash) to visit their parks. As far as I know they haven’t changed their content as a result of this action.

 

[lazyboy97o]

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)

No, they cannot. There have been cases where one’s own failures, even illegal ones, have not been sufficient to void a contract if the terms of the contract are themselves not illegal. You can’t just say “I think I was supposed to do X instead of Y so it no longer counts.”

The statute doesn’t define the standard for affected. That’s further muddied by provisions in the original charter. It’s entirely possible that a standard that applies to the District today did not apply to it three months ago.

There’s a reason the Sunshine Law requires a body discovering their own improper action is to have it validated by a court. Just letting bodies self decide they previously acted inappropriately would be chaos. Every time power changed it could just be declared that a bunch of decisions were illegal and void.

 

[BuzzedPotatoHead89]

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.”

Devil’s advocate: could you argue that the more time they’ve given for Gov. DeSantis and his cronies to bury themselves with both public statements and in the court of public opinion the more this is favorable for TWDC in the long term? If nothing else the land use contract with the outgoing RCID has bought them more time and further shown the motivation Governor and his appointees.

Ultimately I just feel TWDC at least historically is a large public company that despite all the “woke” criticism that gets thrown around tries desperately to appeal to the broadest audience possible in a mostly apolitical fashion. So it’s difficult for them to go scorched earth and look like the aggressor in the eyes of the general public. They don’t have the benefit of appealing to a narrow part of a partisan base like the governor and unlike DeSantis - who gets political mileage out of this from folks that see “wokeness” as the gravest national threat since bubonic plague - from a business perspective keeping this going is not advantageous to TWDC writ large, this is also broadly embarrassing to the state of Florida as a tourist destination or any companies residing there and probably the Florida Chamber/AFLCIO/etc. Disney doesn’t want to be blamed for fanning the flames of a temper tantrum.

That said I agree that this risk averse strategy (appeasement, as you call it) hasn’t obviously cooled tensions.

 

[Kamikaze]

They need to wake up that this is something that needs to be fought as quickly as possible.

It actually isn't at all.

 

[mkt]

You don't sit back and let someone damage you on the premise that you might be able to sue them to recover those damages years from now.

It's something I've been chatting with attorneys in Florida about, including two former Disney ones, as well as my usual lot of communications professionals.

The overall gist: It's not ideal, but they also recognize that if they're going to sue DeSantis and the State of Florida, they need a monster of a lawsuit with plenty of damages and violations to overcome the public relations nightmare that could potentially follow behind.

DeSantis may be a liar and a bully, but a large part of the population still believes his lies. So you don't go with one thing. You go with everything, and that includes actual financial damages, which are easier to prove in court and provide a stronger case both in court and in the subsequent marcom campaigns.

 

[tissandtully]

I am bothered by the fact that a government official feels he has a right to strip the rights of a huge company because of a difference of opinion. I do NOT like all of this wokeness $&it that is going in everywhere, not just Disney. What I feel is that Disney has always been a family oriented cooperation. When you start attacking age old films and attractions because they some how offend you, we have some major problems. Take away splash mountain and song of the south because it doesn’t fit anymore— well when do we get rid of violent video games and lyrics to songs that promote violence. So much of this woke attitude offends me but my opinion does not count. So many minor issues when China and Russia are planning their attacks. God help us all

Wow

 

[tissandtully]

Thanks for joining the board to let us know you're offended by those who are conscious of, and working to reduce, racial discrimination in society and other forms of oppression and injustice.

She had me at the first sentence then it went kinda crazy. I'm confused at how to feel lol

 

[LAKid53]

It's something I've been chatting with attorneys in Florida about, including two former Disney ones, as well as my usual lot of communications professionals.

The overall gist: It's not ideal, but they also recognize that if they're going to sue DeSantis and the State of Florida, they need a monster of a lawsuit with plenty of damages and violations to overcome the public relations nightmare that could potentially follow behind.

DeSantis may be a liar and a bully, but a large part of the population still believes his lies. So you don't go with one thing. You go with everything, and that includes actual financial damages, which are easier to prove in court and provide a stronger case both in court and in the subsequent marcom campaigns.

Bingo

 

[Angeni11]

I feel like Disney has time on their side. They are not going to be impulsive like the Desantis is. They are going to look at all the options they have and will be ready when they need to be.

As others have said the board can say the grass is purple it won't change anything until it is acted upon. Also can they even make all these decisions seeing as I think they have yet to be approved by the Senate?

 

[TalkingHead]

You go with everything, and that includes actual financial damages, which are easier to prove in court and provide a stronger case both in court and in the subsequent marcom campaigns.

Would be curious to know how Disney’s thinking has been affected by stock price and investor concerns over the last twelve months. Chapek was seemingly ousted for that reason, so taking a litigious path might call more attention to the vulnerability of the company’s long-term financial plan.

If they did use financial damages as part of their lawsuit, that could either upset investors (why didn’t you act sooner and how much have we been impacted?) or reassure them (WDW’s numbers have been solid even with the state’s meddling so they only stand to get better).

 

[LittleBuford]

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

Would you dispute that these actions were retaliatory when those behind them have repeatedly and proudly acknowledged them as such?