Nah there’s already a thousand pages on all of this I’ve got better things to do
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News Reedy Creek Improvement District and the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District
- Thread starter castlecake2.0
- Start date
The other thing is the dismissal is without prejudice. The judge said Disney can refile if they are actually harmed and have actual injury. Disney has been asked what actual damages, other then loss of control of the governmental board, they have, and they have come up with absolutely nothing.
Disney's entire argument is that this board was put into place to harm Disney for exercising its first amendment rights, but they cannot come up with an ACTUAL, concrete harm, other then loss of control of a governmental body. But at this point, nothing has been done, so Disney is now having to argue that in 10 or 20 years or so, we might get harmed. The judge is saying come back then, but they really can't, because at this point, it seems by the time Disney is "harmed", DeSantis will be long gone so it clearly wasn't done to directly punish Disney and cause direct economic harm, but rather to just take some control away that nobody else in the state has.
Even today, Disney is still free to create new special districts under current Florida Statute, just as Universal has done, its only the old ones without regulation that have been eliminated.
Disney's entire argument is that this board was put into place to harm Disney for exercising its first amendment rights, but they cannot come up with an ACTUAL, concrete harm, other then loss of control of a governmental body. But at this point, nothing has been done, so Disney is now having to argue that in 10 or 20 years or so, we might get harmed. The judge is saying come back then, but they really can't, because at this point, it seems by the time Disney is "harmed", DeSantis will be long gone so it clearly wasn't done to directly punish Disney and cause direct economic harm, but rather to just take some control away that nobody else in the state has.
Even today, Disney is still free to create new special districts under current Florida Statute, just as Universal has done, its only the old ones without regulation that have been eliminated.
It's a classic sunk cost and future risk question.
Clearly, Disney has a huge sunk cost in WDW. That cost is gone, nothing they can do about it anymore. Its money already spent.
Going forward, Disney can invest more in WDW or not, to keep it competitive with Universal along with just maintaining it as-is. They're either spending less (which would likely reduce revenue too), spending the same or some just enough to avoid revenue loss but not add revenue, or spending more to stay competitive and increase revenue for a better return.
That decision is going to be weighed against the additional cost drag and expenses created by CFTOD. If they think they can manage to minimize that risk and impact, then largely nothing changes. However, if they think that risk and extra expenses is to much to overcome, they'll spend less. Since, there's no sense throwing bad money after good to increase the sunk cost at risk.
Imagine CFTOD adds 5% to costs.
If they were going to spend $100 to maintain as-is and continue to bring in $105 in revenue. Now they're spending $105 to bring in the same $105. An as-is stalemate, just holding ground not improving.
If they were going to spend $100 extra new to bring in $102 of new revenue. Now they would need to spend $105 to bring in $102, a losing proposition.
Now, they might do the second one anyway. If not doing it was going to reduce current revenue by $5. Then, not doing it is a -$5 and doing it is -$3 which might be better. It's not long term sustainable though. It depends on how permanent they think the risk is, and how risk adverse they are.
mikejs78
Premium Member
The parking garages benefit the tenants at Disney Springs. It was the tenants that advocated for a Disney Springs expansion and they benefit as much as Disney from the increased traffic.
They did have a normal permitting process. Reedy Creek was known for its rigorous process before the new law came in, and they did deny or delay permits when there were issues.
The audit is political propaganda. As far as the vendors, yes that is true but is a result of land covenants Disney made with other landowners, not anything to do with the district.
Suspect?
Yes, they were, and yes, they did.
Those bonds do what the district was founded for - to promote infrastructure for tourism. That is exactly what the parking garages were for. It came mostly out of Disney's pockets (through their taxes) and benefited all of the tenants of Disney springs.
Of course not. Disney owns 99% of the land. That's not changing with the new district.
Chip Chipperson
Well-Known Member
1. Losing the ability to have a say in who sets your tax levy and determines the District budget IS a harm in and of itself. It is going from taxation with representation to taxation without representation.
2.RCID was never "without regulation." Regardless of how the Board was determined, the District still had to follow the laws of the state. It wasn't some uncontrolled, Wild West situation.
You don't think the fishing expedition of the audit wouldn't have brought that to light? I'm sure they would have loved to nail that one to Disney/RCID.
This one feels particularly questionable. Like, if the lawsuit had been filed in the time after the law passed and before the board was appointed, then the appointment would have been a possible imminent harm. But, somehow since it already happened it's not something that can be fixed.
The boards appointment by the governor was an injury to Disney, but since he's not about to do it again (with this law) there's nothing we can do to resolve that he did it.
It feels like a circular justification.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
Wow, Disney got clobbered in the lawsuit. Who could have predicted this?
Disney should try to end all this litigation ASAP. Disney should just call it quits and come to the negotiating table. Admit they let their emotions get the better of them. This whole process has been characterized by too much emoting and not enough thinking. It seems like the longer this is going on the worse it's getting.
But they're doubling down.
On a separate but related note, the District presented reasonable arguments to void the development plans in their audit. I honestly didn't think the District would find anything in their audit. And in a way they didn't. There wasn't widespread intentional corruption as far as I could see. I never believed and still don't believe that Disney was intentionally corrupt. But what the District did find were enormous irregularities and just basic incompetence. And unintentionally it became corruption. Disney needs to avoid further fallout and end this before it gets out of hand.
Iger could have stopped this. But he's too stubborn.
Disney was fighting an uphill battle with this case. One that revolved around limiting the state legislature's innate constitutional powers. There's a good chance this proceeds to the Supreme Court. But make no mistake, this is not looking good for Disney.
Disney should try to end all this litigation ASAP. Disney should just call it quits and come to the negotiating table. Admit they let their emotions get the better of them. This whole process has been characterized by too much emoting and not enough thinking. It seems like the longer this is going on the worse it's getting.
But they're doubling down.
On a separate but related note, the District presented reasonable arguments to void the development plans in their audit. I honestly didn't think the District would find anything in their audit. And in a way they didn't. There wasn't widespread intentional corruption as far as I could see. I never believed and still don't believe that Disney was intentionally corrupt. But what the District did find were enormous irregularities and just basic incompetence. And unintentionally it became corruption. Disney needs to avoid further fallout and end this before it gets out of hand.
Iger could have stopped this. But he's too stubborn.
mikejs78
Premium Member
There are many limits on state legislator's constitutional powers. In fact, there are many examples, cited by Disney and agreed with by the judge, where state legislative motives are looked at - for example, in cases involving race discrimination. The judge just applied Hubbard (which is a very different case) and determined that free speech is not a reason to question legislative intent. It's not a foregone conclusion that the appeals court will agree wtih him.
No, they shouldn't. There are numerous other issues at stake in this and the state case - including the abridgment of contracts. And they tried to sit at the negotiating table - DeSantis refused to even talk to them. He has no interest in negotiating.
There is no reasonable argument to dissolve a contract whole cloth.
Not backed up by evidence, and with a political spin. Many of the things they pointed to were basd on "conversations" which aren't credited. It's a one-sided argument without context and without the opportunity for cross-examination. It's highly suspect and incocnsistencies in the report have already been poitned out.
Brian
Well-Known Member
If the reporting is to be believed, Iger had reached out to DeSantis to talk about the situation, but DeSantis declined.
Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor
Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor
Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor
www.wdwmagic.com
Drdcm
Well-Known Member
I know nothing about this, but my BIL is an attorney in a state AG office first amendment and human rights division. He told me it would be very very difficult for Disney to win this case for the exact reasons the judge dismissed it.
He just said that first amendment law isn’t as straightforward as most people think because the current precedents are convoluted and contradictory. Unfortunately my knowledge is limited so can’t really provide any other explanation. Just figured I’d pipe up because he knows more about this stuff than most people.
FWIW, my BIL is very liberal.
He just said that first amendment law isn’t as straightforward as most people think because the current precedents are convoluted and contradictory. Unfortunately my knowledge is limited so can’t really provide any other explanation. Just figured I’d pipe up because he knows more about this stuff than most people.
FWIW, my BIL is very liberal.
Chi84
Premium Member
It wouldn’t have stopped because it wasn’t about RCID.Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor
Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor
Ron DeSantis shunned Bob Iger's attempts at opening talks amid Disney's ongoing legal battle with the Florida Governor
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
Iger needs to get his backside on his private jet and fly to Tallahassee with his legal team and beg to stop this. If DeSantis still refused to work after Iger physically coming to bring an olive branch, I'd feel differently. But last I heard Iger sent the DeSantis camp a message using one of his underlings about potentially having a meet. Nothing happened. He needs to camp out at the statehouse until he's seen. Would it be humiliating? Yeah. But he needs to end this for the good of the Walt Disney Company. This should be one of his top priorities.
He needs to play ball and take the humiliation. He famously suffered a grueling and humiliating ordeal with the Chinese Government (reported by @WDW1974). His patience with that ordeal saw the successful launch of Shanghai Disney. We need that Iger back. What happened to Iger the diplomat who could handle difficult relationships with people like Steve Jobs and President Xi? Now Iger can't even handle the Florida governor. This is pathetic.
Or maybe the Disney board should get a CEO who knows how to fix this. Floridians are not evil. They have tremendous amount of goodwill towards Disney. They will forgive and forget if given the chance. But that process can only stop by putting this process behind them. Moreover, shareholders deserve to have solid and level governance. Playing fast and loose with one of the company's most prized assets is insane.
Disstevefan1
Well-Known Member
For over 50 years and including the folks running the state now, KNEW that RCID was not run by the book and was controlled by TWDC.
All previous leadership for the past over 50 years, LET IT BE, because they all knew, although irregular, and that the state could legally pull the plug on RCID at any time, knew it was the best for the state to let it be.
You know who did this to (try) to help himself politically, knowing he could legally do it all along. Obviously if he was smart, he would have let it be like all the past administrations.
In my opinion, TWDC should have SHUT UP and quietly used their POWER behind the scenes to get the law they disagreed with changed. I know they have the power. They didn’t, they took the, “talk is cheap” route.
Drdcm
Well-Known Member
What’s crazy about this whole thing is that I doubt Disney would have said anything at all if they didn’t get caught donating to supporters of the bill. They were put on the defensive and called out publicly by their own employees. It was a lose lose no matter which way they went.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
it’s amazing how nobody actually states what Disney can offer. Just something.
WoundedDreamer
Well-Known Member
They could start by dropping their DOA lawsuits that are wasting the State and Disney's time and resources. Then they could collaborate on a longterm development plan for Walt Disney World.
They might also want to express their gratitude for Florida and Floridians publicly for having been generous over nearly 60 years in allowing them to operate in their home state with little interference.