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

[Chi84]

Again, you clearly do not understand how the law works. You cant not file for an injunction on an anticipatory basis.

At a minimum there has to be something to enjoin.

 

[JusticeDisney]

At a minimum there has to be something to enjoin.

That is correct.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I meant to respond to this earlier but got distracted. Back on topic.

This is just a wild theory with no actual facts to support it and assumes no notices were sent which we don’t know to be true but hear me out. Someone mentioned pages ago that FDOT technically owns some land adjacent to the district. If the lawyers determined that FDOT would qualify as an impacted landowner that would be problematic. If RCID sent notice to multiple other land owners but skipped FDOT that may seem really suspect too. Is it possible that’s the reason they didn’t send notices out? FDOT would obviously inform the Governor and they could accelerate passing the bill to seize control of the district before the agreement was officially done. I would assume if they did that they would have looked at precedent in past cases and looked at the risks associated with the contract being voided over failure to notice. Just a wild theory but as you say, if that step wasn’t taken it was most likely skipped on purpose.

I find the idea that FDOT needs to be notified a bit specious. By that standard they need to be notified for all sorts of decisions because they own roads and slivers of roads all over the place. It’s also not really their business to be for or against whatever is happening next to a road.

 

[Vacationeer]

I just had a comment deleted from this thread, and I swear to whomever's diety of choice that I have no idea why it merited that action. I've been trying really hard to behave myself!

It could be as simple as off topic, or in response to something off topic. Don’t take it personally.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

At a minimum there has to be something to enjoin.

Standing could be very interesting here.

Typically, the courts have rejected the argument that a plaintiff has standing based on their status as a taxpayer who doesn't like how their tax dollars are being spent. But how does that work if you're 85% of the tax base?

 

[Vegas Disney Fan]

Part of me thinks this is a bump in the road in the 50 plus history of WDW.

Another part of me says it's a turning point.

The ultimate loser in all of this in my opinion are the people of central Florida, maybe people of the whole state.

I’m still optimistic any impact is going to happen behind the scenes, bureaucratic red tape, more hoops to jump through, more fees, etc.

Nothing has gone the way I expected so far though, if they actually did something as petty as allow a dive motel to build on RCiD land I wouldn’t be surprised at this point.

 

[lentesta]

I gotta imagine though if you are leveraging something defined in another statute (the developer agreement one) that those standards apply to. This action wasn't in the normal course of the district's granted activities (covered by the RCID act), it's a concept pulled from the other law.

The whole section is about exemption from county and state zoning and development statutes.

ETA: Section 18 seems to say the same thing for services. I’m not sure notice was required for anything the board did in February.

 

[Ripken10]

Curious question - with the announcement today of the new cabins, could this be the "trigger point" for the dispute in courts (I guess potentially something else could come before it, or is it even simpler then that?). Disney announces new project. Likely they feel it is in the developmental plan they can do this without Board's approval. Board feels they can't based on them voiding the contract...so when disney does build...let the real fun begin?

 

[el_super]

So it’s difficult for them to go scorched earth and look like the aggressor in the eyes of the general public.

I agree with this, but this is also why I think some from of compromise or settlement will be reached. Disney may be willing to fight/sue, in order to stop a prison from being built near them, but are they going to sue to stop ride safety inspections? Or affordable housing? Or pay raises for first responders? Those headlines write themselves.

 

[RobbinsDad]

In


I’m still optimistic any impact is going to happen behind the scenes, bureaucratic red tape, more hoops to jump through, more fees, etc.

Nothing has gone the way I expected so far though, if they actually did something as petty as allow a dive motel to build on RCiD land I wouldn’t be surprised at this point.

I just can't see any of his building threats actually coming to fruition. Tough rhetoric to muster the far right is one thing, but to actually build something that could devalue the land that the CFTOD maintains would be political suicide for DeSantis and his lackeys. Florida is a red state now, no doubt about it, but there are plenty of other red politicians within the state who would be ready to pounce on this political faux pas. DeSantis is popular, but he's not indomitable.

 

[DCBaker]

Here's the agenda for the next Board of Supervisors meeting, which will be held April 26 at 9:30am.

https://www.rcid.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/04/04-26-23-BOS-Agenda-FINAL.pdf

 

[lazyboy97o]

You know, going back and reading the original RCID charter, Section 23(3)(d) , which deals with zoning laws and comprehensive plans, might say the Board isn’t required to give notice.

View attachment 711438

There’s also a clause that says they don’t need to give notice if they have prior written consent of landowners.

 

[danlb_2000]

Curious question - with the announcement today of the new cabins, could this be the "trigger point" for the dispute in courts (I guess potentially something else could come before it, or is it even simpler then that?). Disney announces new project. Likely they feel it is in the developmental plan they can do this without Board's approval. Board feels they can't based on them voiding the contract...so when disney does build...let the real fun begin?

It is saying the new cabins will be the same footprint as the old so it really wouldn't run into any land use issues. It's basically the equivalent of a room refresh.

 

[Riviera Rita]

I referred to the sit-down interviews with newspapers. He had a lengthy Q&A with a few editors at the NYT, e.g.

My bad.

 

[Chi84]

There’s also a clause that says they don’t need to give notice if they have prior written consent of landowners.

That’s what I’ve been wondering from the start. Waivers of statutory notice are common.

 

[BuzzedPotatoHead89]

I agree with this, but this is also why I think some from of compromise or settlement will be reached. Disney may be willing to fight/sue, in order to stop a prison from being built near them, but are they going to sue to stop ride safety inspections? Or affordable housing? Or pay raises for first responders? Those headlines write themselves.

I agree even if a lot of this feels like a lot of “throwing spaghetti at a wall” proposals right now. I still think there will be additional grounds to bring a suit but optics will certainly matter once the new oversight board seemingly overturns/overrules the existing RCID land use agreement by fiat next week (as opposed to getting the agreement overturned in the courts) if that indeed occurs as anticipated, but I suppose but we’ll see.

 

[GoofGoof]

I find the idea that FDOT needs to be notified a bit specious. By that standard they need to be notified for all sorts of decisions because they own roads and slivers of roads all over the place. It’s also not really their business to be for or against whatever is happening next to a road.

I agree. It’s a stretch. I said it was a wild idea

I agree with this, but this is also why I think some from of compromise or settlement will be reached. Disney may be willing to fight/sue, in order to stop a prison from being built near them, but are they going to sue to stop ride safety inspections? Or affordable housing? Or pay raises for first responders? Those headlines write themselves.

The prison, yes, they would sue over that for sure. Ride safety is a grey area. In the court of public opinion they can certainly make a compelling argument that their safety inspections are actually superior to a state run one (see recent accident and tragic death). They have no standing on pay raises. That is within the district’s control and is not really disputable. Disney is already building affordable housing on 80 acres of their own land. I don’t see them losing a PR fight of the district attempts to require them to build more. How many acres of their own land has Universal dedicated to affordable housing? Other large corporations in the state? Outside of home builders it’s not all that common.

The lawsuit would likely be over something less headline grabbing. As suggested already the company plans to convert Cabins at the campground to new DVC cabins. If the board blocks that development then Disney sues.

 

[GoofGoof]

The whole section is about exemption from county and state zoning and development statutes.

ETA: Section 18 seems to say the same thing for services. I’m not sure notice was required for anything the board did in February.

That may be the answer to the question of why notice was not mailed. It may also be why the new board didn’t present any evidence related to the failed notice. Both sides know it’s not required.

 

[wdwmagic]

That may be the answer to the question of why notice was not mailed. It may also be why the new board didn’t present any evidence related to the failed notice. Both sides know it’s not required.

Then what was the reason for the big name lawyers making that their main point? Its a fascinating situation.

 

[The Mom]

Many posts were deleted because they were off topic.