Where did you find this?At least one CFTOD official has been deposed (according to Disney’s lawsuit under the Public Records legislation)
View attachment 760630
(apologies if someone already posted this)
Where did you find this?At least one CFTOD official has been deposed (according to Disney’s lawsuit under the Public Records legislation)
View attachment 760630
(apologies if someone already posted this)
Where did you find this?
Pretty much everything a government agency does in Florida is public record. You can write a sticky note as a state/local worker and it could, in some cases, be considered public record.So help a novice, not a lawyer, understand. CFTOD has been around for what, less than a year? Is Disney looking for public records from that time? Or are they looking for records from back when RCID was in place? I mean, if it's from the past year, it cannot be that much to gather them all. Though the filing from 12/22 says CFTOD turned over 888 documents, apparently they want 889+? Those cannot be all from just 2023, could they?
So then CFTOD turned over 888 pages of paperclip requisition forms but nothing of substance in all likelihood? I'm still curious over the time period requested.Pretty much everything a government agency does in Florida is public record. You can write a sticky note as a state/local worker and it could, in some cases, be considered public record.
I'm not sure but it only makes sense that Disney is looking for what that band of idiots have done since taking over. They've had plenty of time to do a lot of questionable things. What little I read of it, it seems to be looking for what money is going to specific political friends and allies.So help a novice, not a lawyer, understand. CFTOD has been around for what, less than a year? Is Disney looking for public records from that time? Or are they looking for records from back when RCID was in place? I mean, if it's from the past year, it cannot be that much to gather them all. Though the filing from 12/22 says CFTOD turned over 888 documents, apparently they want 889+? Those cannot be all from just 2023, could they?
So then CFTOD turned over 888 pages of paperclip requisition forms but nothing of substance in all likelihood? I'm still curious over the time period requested.
According to Disney’s complaint, the chair of the new board, Martin Garcia, has outsourced the district’s public records department to the same lawyers that are suing Disney, at least in the case of his emails and communications.So help a novice, not a lawyer, understand. CFTOD has been around for what, less than a year? Is Disney looking for public records from that time? Or are they looking for records from back when RCID was in place? I mean, if it's from the past year, it cannot be that much to gather them all. Though the filing from 12/22 says CFTOD turned over 888 documents, apparently they want 889+? Those cannot be all from just 2023, could they?
Quoted for pure schadenfreude.The district’s employees and board members are also using personal devices and private e-mail servers for discussing and communicating about government business.
The district’s employees and board members are also using personal devices and private e-mail servers for discussing and communicating about government business.
The district’s employees and board members are also using personal devices and private e-mail servers for discussing and communicating about government business.
I wonder if we’ll hear the same excuses as last time.
I'm going to guess that members of a Ron appointed board also had a problem with that situation and surprise! Here they are allowing the same thing to happen. Either they are letting it happen through negligence, bad management, or doing it on purpose which is a lack of any personal morals. What a joke. I wouldn't be surprised if one of them ended up in a leaked sex tape doing the very thing they claim is evil... oh... wait.
Highly UnUsHoOaLAccording to Disney’s complaint, the chair of the new board, Martin Garcia, has outsourced the district’s public records department to the same lawyers that are suing Disney, at least in the case of his emails and communications.
The district’s lawyers also asserted “attorney client privilege” as an exemption to the disclosure of certain documents despite the fact that Florida law doesn’t recognize attorney client privilege as a valid exemption, and instead recognizes a far more limited exemption. The district later claimed that this asserted exemption was simply a generalized way of referring to the Florida statute, but I don’t buy it. In the district lawyer’s communication they cited the statute in question just 2 bullets above the “attorney client privilege”exemption.
The district’s employees and board members are also using personal devices and private e-mail servers for discussing and communicating about government business. The district has not been imaging those devices and is relying on the honor system when it comes to board members and employees handing over documents subject to the public records requests.
I'm not a legal expert, but looking at the Florida statue on discovery, failure to produce discovery is one possible remedy a judge has under the law. Contempt citations and jail time is another.Does anyone know if the District could face default judgement on any of the issues in the state case due to their failure to comply with discovery? Or are they sufficiently tied to larger questions that offer some shield?
Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.