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

[Brian]

But what does the first statement have to do with the topic of this thread? It’s the conflation of the two issues that smacks of victim blaming.

It's the antecedent to the RCID dissolution and subsequent actions, and a cornerstone of Disney's lawsuit against the state. But for Disney's stances on the parental rights in education law, RCID would still be around with a landowner-elected board, and DeSantis would have found some other situation to exploit for media attention.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I don’t understand how someone can simultaneously criticise Disney for speaking out and acknowledge that DeSantis’s reaction is unacceptable.

It's a pretty simple example of "two wrongs don't make a right."

Driving 110 miles per hour is bad. Jailing someone for 30 years without a trial for speeding is also bad.

 

[mkt]

Driving 110 miles per hour is bad. Jailing someone for 30 years without a trial for speeding is also bad.

But is someone expressing speech you disagree with bad?

 

[GoofGoof]

Really? Mutually exclusive? Seems like a partisan take.
I believe Disney and the board should be focused on their fiduciary duty to the shareholders, and I don't believe that weighing in on political matters falls within that duty. Especially when it could be perceived to alienate parents of young children, their target audience for the parks, thus negatively hitting the bottom line.
I believe retaliatory behavior from those in government is inappropriate.

The company taking a political position has nothing to do with the fiduciary duties of the shareholders. You don’t like the position they took so you are implying it hurt business. Someone else who likes the position they took may have felt that not speaking out would have hurt business. Management of the company has to decide how to run the company. You may not like their decisions but that doesn’t mean they breached their fiduciary duties. People act like the company stopped doing business to focus on this situation but that’s the furthest thing from the truth.

 

[Fordlover]

You'll be highly disappointed, then, to learn that many corporations "weigh in" on political matters. That's the very purpose of lobbyists who get paid millions to do so.

Not disappointed at all, I only urge caution when picking sides, especially when you have a failure to recognize your bread and butter customer that is paying the bills.

As a long time shareholder of TWDC, I disagree.

I want to feel represented by the company that I am not only a consumer of, but am a shareholder of.

I get that. But companies should use caution. If you need recent reference, Anheuser-Busch is a good example. The buyers of Bud Light want to feel represented by the company they consume the product of, and there has been a noticeable impact. Who knows if it will last.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

But is someone expressing speech you disagree with bad?

Define bad.

Morally wrong? Bad for business? Imprudent? Unwise? Evil?

 

[LittleBuford]

It's the antecedent to the RCID dissolution and subsequent actions, and a cornerstone of Disney's lawsuit against the state. But for Disney's stances on the parental rights in education law, RCID would still be around with a landowner-elected board, and DeSantis would have found some other situation to exploit for media attention.

This doesn’t really address the question I put to you, but I suspect we’re not going to get much further by continuing this exchange.

 

[scottieRoss]

This one has me thinking. Maybe some legal eagles can help out.
Senate Bill to give the state the responsibility to regulate the monorails says:

or privately owned fixed-guideway transportation systems operating in this state which are located within an independent special district created by local act which have boundaries within two contiguous counties.”

But RCID was not created by local act, but by act of the State. Does this mean that they still do not have the responsibility to regulate fixed-guideway transportation systems within Reedy Creek?

 

[LAKid53]

Not disappointed at all, I only urge caution when picking sides, especially when you have a failure to recognize your bread and butter customer that is paying the bills.

The state isn't that bread and butter "customer". And until consecutive quarterly earnings reports reflect a serious decline in profit, TWDC will be fine "picking sides". I commend a corporation for publicly standing with employees who feel they are targets of pieces of legislation.

 

[Chip Chipperson]

Here's the screenshot I posted yesterday of Disney's property tax bill for 2022 JUST for the Magic Kingdom. Not the parking lot, not the TTC - JUST the park.

The relevant parts: They pay to Orange County, Orange County Schools, plus to RCID and RCID's debt service separately.

View attachment 714142


Anyway, RCID's bonds helped Disney acquire financing at below market rates - that's it. Which realistically they could do without, since Disney wouldn't have issue getting loans if needed from private lenders.

Not only that, but the financing is purely for infrastructure projects like roads and the Disney Springs parking garage - things with a verifiable public benefit (as well as a benefit to the other RCID taxpayers).

 

[LAKid53]

This one has me thinking. Maybe some legal eagles can help out.
Senate Bill to give the state the responsibility to regulate the monorails says:


But RCID was not created by local act, but by act of the State. Does this mean that they still do not have the responsibility to regulate fixed-guideway transportation systems within Reedy Creek?

Good catch. Surprised no staff member reviewing the bill caught this.

 

[Lilofan]

"Disney pays below market wages to white collar professionals" hasn't been true for at least a decade, if that's what you're implying.

You think cast members that are lawyers, finance , etc get paid similar to private practice and outside companies ? Not even close.

 

[TrainsOfDisney]

Good for them.
I'm not a shareholder of those companies. But I am of Disney. So when the the company makes a step that affects the stock value, it affects me. Thus I am not impressed when they commit an unforced error. Especially when they have fiduciary duty to me.

Im gonna guess the stocks are affected more by the fact that Disney+ is losing money and the latest Disney Animation and Pixar theatrical releases lost money. That’s what I would be concerned about.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Technically no, since the taxes are going to different places, but essentially (and for the purposes of this conversation) yes. They are already paying all the same taxes they would pay if RCID didn't exist, while also paying additional taxes to RCID.

Disney has funded Florida, Osceola and orange counties since day 1….And made enough money to pay for cartoonist on the little mermaid and Regis Phibin as well

All of this can easily be shown in court

 

[lazyboy97o]

This one has me thinking. Maybe some legal eagles can help out.
Senate Bill to give the state the responsibility to regulate the monorails says:


But RCID was not created by local act, but by act of the State. Does this mean that they still do not have the responsibility to regulate fixed-guideway transportation systems within Reedy Creek?

@Stripes caught this earlier. The legislature can pass three different types laws: general, local and special. Local refers to acts impacts a specific, local area, not one’s created by a local government. The District was created by special act, not local act.

 

[LAKid53]

@Stripes caught this earlier. The legislature can pass three different types laws: general, local and special. Local refers to acts impacts a specific, local area, not one’s created by a local government. The District was created by special act, not local act.

Local act refers to which governmental entity passed it.

 

[Notypeo]

Florida law contains a provision to remove an elected official - it's called a RECALL election. She holds the office because the voters in the Ninth Judicial District of the state put her there. Let THEM decide if she should be removed and who to replace her with.

Aside from disagreeing with DeSantis’s actions with respect to these elected officials, I note this development because I don’t think it’s entirely disconnected from RCID/CFTOD.

I’m not an expert on Florida’s sunshine laws. But we know that DeSantis (or his people more broadly) have ordered an investigation into the Development Deal process that I believe touches on sunshine compliance. And it’s not unheard of for this law to be weaponized — google “The Villages Vendetta,” which I believe might have been discussed earlier in this thread. So DeSantis would likely feel himself to hold another card if he had an ally in the Orange/Osceola prosecutor. (And, yes, I realize how insane that sounds as I write it. But he’s already “gone there” with the first investigation.)

But by the same token, I suspect that the current board probably has violated the sunshine laws. The meetings are at times stage managed to the point of rehearsed. DeSantis would surely very much like to avoid having a Democratic prosecutor with jurisdiction over the situation. I’m not saying that Worrell should or would do anything politically motivated. But given everything so far, it’s really hard not to think that the Governor is thinking in these terms.

 

[CaptainAmerica]

I don’t think I’m successfully conveying what it is I’m getting at. I totally get what you’re saying and see no contradiction between disapproving of what somewhat says and decrying the suppression of that very same speech. Some of the posts here, however, seem to be saying something else, something tinged with an undertone of “Well, Disney asked for this.” That’s what I’m responding to.

I think it's just schadenfreude. It's a head-versus-heart thing.

Somone might know in their heads that what DeSantis is doing is illegal, but emotionally their reaction still might be "lol get rekt Disney, I don't feel bad for you."

 

[LAKid53]

Aside from disagreeing with DeSantis’s actions with respect to these elected officials, I note this development because I don’t think it’s entirely disconnected from RCID/CFTOD.

I’m not an expert on Florida’s sunshine laws. But we know that DeSantis (or his people more broadly) have ordered an investigation into the Development Deal process that I believe touches on sunshine compliance. And it’s not unheard of for this law to be weaponized — google “The Villages Vendetta,” which I believe might have been discussed earlier in this thread. So DeSantis would likely feel himself to hold another card if he had an ally in the Orange/Osceola prosecutor. (And, yes, I realize how insane that sounds as I write it. But he’s already “gone there” with the first investigation.)

But by the same token, I suspect that the current board probably has violated the sunshine laws. The meetings are at times stage managed to the point of rehearsed. DeSantis would surely very much like to avoid having a Democratic prosecutor with jurisdiction over the situation. I’m not saying that Worrell should or would do anything politically motivated. But given everything so far, it’s really hard not to think that the Governor is thinking in these terms.

Florida's Sunshine law prohibits 2 or more elected officials (legislators, board members, etc.) discussing matters privately that would become issues acted upon by the entire body in subsequent public meetings.

 

[TheMaxRebo]

In my mind, TWDC sincerely thinks the Parental rights law is harmful. Instead of actually doing something quietly behind the scenes, they chose to just talk about it.

I could be wrong, maybe they ARE IN FACT RIGHT NOW working behind the scenes to reverse the law?

What is happening now is the perfect distraction while they get it done.

But they did (or at least told shareholders they did) try to work behind the scenes before Chapek made the public comment

Disney CEO Bob Chapek says company worked 'behind the scenes' to oppose Florida's 'Don't Say Gay' bill

During a recent shareholder meeting, Disney CEO Bob Chapek said that his company worked "behind the scenes" to oppose Florida's recently passed "Don't Say Gay"...

www.orlandoweekly.com