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

[Isamar]

So many thoughts that I haven't properly organized yet, but my take:

I get that on paper this looks like Disney folded on everything, but IMHO the things that Disney lost here had already been lost. Even assuming some eventual version of a win in court, the DA has been void (or at best on pause) and would continue to be so until all court proceedings, including appeals, were complete. How many years was that going to take? How many more lawsuits was Disney going to be forced to bring, and pay for, along the way? Plus all the collateral damage in the interim. And that's if you win.

We'll have to see how this plays out, but it seems clear that the state wants to move on to normalcy (or whatever currently passes for normalcy). Garcia's exit, which I suspect was not his choice, Gilzean moving on, even the shift in the usual religious messaging at the meeting and the absence of Board-puppet "public comments"... they've pivoted. I think this is probably the best result Disney could reasonably hope for, based on their current situation and the reality that they're seeking the corporate "good", not what we think is the right result. Yup, the state may go back on the offensive at some point, but court wins wouldn't have reduced that risk (and may well have increased it) because the guardrails are gone.

I'm not minimizing what's happened here. After the better part of 2 years watching this play out, I'm still horrified at all of it. But Disney was never going to be made whole. There was never going to be a settlement that didn't give DeS a win on paper. So while I hate this result*, I'm struggling to see some alternate course of action they could pursue with some reasonable level of certainty that they'd end up better off in the end.

* My only solace is my hope that Garcia is livid about having his toy taken away. He'll have to find something else to torture for sport.

 

[SoFloMagic]

Sorry, but I have to gloat. Go back about 800 pages and I stated The State of Florida always had the right to take over the District. My quote was "that ship has sailed" as far as Disney ever getting it back. The bigger thing here is I stated it is in both the State and Disney best interest to work together. Disney is at it's heart a corporation that wants to make money, and WDW is the biggest moneymaker for Disney. The State's best interest is to have a healthy WDW as it is the biggest employer in the State and is one of the highest tax payers in the State (if not The highest tax payer). I am just happy that cooler heads prevailed to stop these law suits. My Opinion is the new agreements will be satisfactory to both parties as again it is in both parties best interest. As someone who has visited WDW at least 2 times a year for the last 25 years, I look forward to clearing the decks for some exciting new developements thru out the property.

Would have been a lot easier if that state listened to you several years ago and took more reasonable, measured steps at the time. Probably could have saved the taxpayers a lot of money

 

[MR.Dis]

Listen, I am not pro Florida in this. Just thought they had the stronger case. I know people will want to post who won--I do not care. I just want to see capital improvement happening at WDW. There are other topics on this forum discussing when and what Disney's plans are going to be. Again my Opinion, but I have felt that Disney has been hesitant to commit to anything with this issue hanging over their heads. Now maybe they can get some quick new develp plans so actual plans and shovels in the ground.

 

[Chi84]

That’s exactly what makes this odd. The settlement doesn’t actually settle the areas of concern. In fact it does the opposite and now opens them up.

If a company and a union were engaged in a collective bargaining contract dispute, would you not find it odd of the union if they announced that they’ve agreed to just let the previous contract expire, will be giving up recently won benefits and will negotiate a new contract in the future? Under what circumstances would you advise someone to completely drop an existing contract in favor of a potential future contract? Even in a truly honest situation where both parties are acting in good faith that seems unwise.

All I’ve seen so far are summaries of what has been agreed to. Is there an actual document that has been submitted to the court for approval?

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

Listen, I am not pro Florida in this. Just thought they had the stronger case. I know people will want to post who won--I do not care. I just want to see capital improvement happening at WDW. There are other topics on this forum discussing when and what Disney's plans are going to be. Again my Opinion, but I have felt that Disney has been hesitant to commit to anything with this issue hanging over their heads. Now maybe they can get some quick new develp plans so actual plans and shovels in the ground.

Actually they made no case…they just control the mechanisms to decide the case …along with an assist from the federal judiciary

They were engaging in political retribution.

That was clear 800 pages ago and it’s no less clear now.

The outcome doesn’t alter the facts

 

[GoneViral]

So many thoughts that I haven't properly organized yet, but my take:

I get that on paper this looks like Disney folded on everything, but IMHO the things that Disney lost here had already been lost.

* My only solace is my hope that Garcia is livid about having his toy taken away. He'll have to find something else to torture for sport.

My thoughts on these two aspects of your well-considered post.

1) Remember when the CFTOD took over, and it looked one way. Then, the world learned of King Charles III? It's like that. Disney had no need to settle this case unless it got everything it wanted. The timing isn't coincidental.

And it ties into your second point. They settled on Wednesday. Garcia would have testified on Thursday. Whatever Garcia did, he's now on the bad side of the DeSantis cronies now.

 

[JoeCamel]

My thoughts on these two aspects of your well-considered post.

1) Remember when the CFTOD took over, and it looked one way. Then, the world learned of King Charles III? It's like that. Disney had no need to settle this case unless it got everything it wanted. The timing isn't coincidental.

And it ties into your second point. They settled on Wednesday. Garcia would have testified on Thursday. Whatever Garcia did, he's now on the bad side of the DeSantis cronies now.

I want to know what is on Garcia's phone.....

 

[Isamar]

I want to know what is on Garcia's phone.....

To start with? Lots on conniving with a bunch of people who don’t want to find themselves and their phones added to the discovery list.

 

[lazyboy97o]

I get that on paper this looks like Disney folded on everything, but IMHO the things that Disney lost here had already been lost. Even assuming some eventual version of a win in court, the DA has been void (or at best on pause) and would continue to be so until all court proceedings, including appeals, were complete. How many years was that going to take? How many more lawsuits was Disney going to be forced to bring, and pay for, along the way? Plus all the collateral damage in the interim. And that's if you win.

Disney had not already lost on the development agreement. The district was holding off on changing the comprehensive plan and development regulations until after they received a court ruling. So even if it did take years, that would be years of operating under the rules Disney wanted.

 

[GoneViral]

I want to know what is on Garcia's phone.....

I said the same thing a page or two ago. I hope Florida reporters keep digging. This time might be dangerous though.

 

[MR.Dis]

Disney has a very strong argument for why that precedent does not apply to this situation. The judge that dismissed the case was never going to rule in Disney‘s favor. But he’s been overturned before. And I predict that if CFTOD doesn’t give Disney everything they want then Judge Windsor will be overturned again.

Well we can agree to disagree

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I want to know what is on Garcia's phone.....

Bridget and a couple of dudes on only fans?

…I’ll see myself out now

 

[Isamar]

Disney had not already lost on the development agreement. The district was holding off on changing the comprehensive plan and development regulations until after they received a court ruling. So even if it did take years, that would be years of operating under the rules Disney wanted.

Did they commit to that? (I'm honestly asking, because I don't know.)

They did make some changes to the regs a while back, but I think those basically amounted to declaring themselves supreme rulers of all they surveyed. IIRC they amended an outdated version that didn't include the last RCID updates, maybe on purpose but possibly because they're morons.

And I think the CFTOD legislation required them to review and revise everything, including the comprehensive plan & the land development regulations, by July 2026?

 

[JoeCamel]

I said the same thing a page or two ago. I hope Florida reporters keep digging. This time might be dangerous though.

IT would be the court that would have to sign off on it and we know how that went.

 

[lazyboy97o]

Did they commit to that? (I'm honestly asking, because I don't know.)

They did make some changes to the regs a while back, but I think those basically amounted to declaring themselves supreme rulers of all they surveyed.

And I think the CFTOD legislation required them to review and revise everything, including the comprehensive plan & the land development regulations, by July 2026?

It is generally not a good idea to tell a court you are being prevented from doing something and then doing that very thing. Not being able to make changes was a major argument in their case against Disney.

The big change they made in regards to zoning and development was giving the boot to the planning commission and appointing themselves. They did also codify their supremacy over the municipalities, but that was part of the new charter.

And since I’ve now mentioned the planning commission, that’s another area where Disney could have been given a concession but was not. If this is all about switching over to just no nonsense business, why not go back to a planning commission with planning professionals?

 

[JoeCamel]

It is generally not a good idea to tell a court you are being prevented from doing something and then doing that very thing. Not being able to make changes was a major argument in their case against Disney.

The big change they made in regards to zoning and development was giving the boot to the planning commission and appointing themselves. They did also codify their supremacy over the municipalities, but that was part of the new charter.

And since I’ve now mentioned the planning commission, that’s another area where Disney could have been given a concession but was not. If this is all about switching over to just no nonsense business, why not go back to a planning commission with planning professionals?

Planning pros are scary. Southshore Tampa Bay was trying to steer development and one side paid the "pros" that designed Seaside to present a plan to their liking. It was expensive and a total non-starter as they failed to understand what the existing community was. I met with them three times and each time they were deaf to any criticism or input as "they designed Seaside" therefore they knew best.

 

[Sirwalterraleigh]

I have read a lot of the recent posts on this thread, but not all of them, so apologies if I'm covering ground that was already covered.

Look, I am a conservative Republican. I like DeSantis and generally approve of his time as governor of Florida. But he was going to end up losing this battle and he knows it. He openly stated that he was punishing Disney for their political speech. And thanks to the questionable actions of some on "my side" of the aisle, the Supreme Court has long ago established that corporations are people too for the purpose of the law. So he was clearly running afoul of the First Amendment. He would have eventually been smacked down by one court or another.

But he was running for president. And he know that he could make political hay from this and that it wouldn't wend its way through the courts in time to negatively affect his campaign. That campaign is over now, so he's safe to kiss and make up with Disney, which was always going to happen.

For Disney's part, even though they're well within their rights to express whatever opinions they want, I think Chapek handled the situation horribly from beginning to end, which was part of why he ended up being shown the door. Disney has the right to express their opinions, but many people are tired of being smacked over the head with in-your-face messaging as part of their entertainment. And Iger came in wanting to clean this mess up from the beginning and this was his opportunity to do so.

So, bottom line, Disney did some dumb things, DeSantis did some dumber (and unconstitutional) things, and just as everybody knew would happen, in time the two sides are going to come back together and continue to do business in Florida.

For my part, I'm going to keep going to Walt Disney World and enjoying it. If I boycotted every company that said or did something I disagreed with, I'd have to move to a cabin in the mountains and grow my own food.

Yeah I agree on the court Interpretation

I said about 1000 pages back that I couldn’t see the Supreme Court ruling for a state against a private business…especially this private Business.

So why do we suppose they settled on this? The timing is key

 

[Figgy1]

Bridget and a couple of dudes on only fans?

…I’ll see myself out now

 

[Isamar]

It is generally not a good idea to tell a court you are being prevented from doing something and then doing that very thing. Not being able to make changes was a major argument in their case against Disney.

The big change they made in regards to zoning and development was giving the boot to the planning commission and appointing themselves. They did also codify their supremacy over the municipalities, but that was part of the new charter.

And since I’ve now mentioned the planning commission, that’s another area where Disney could have been given a concession but was not. If this is all about switching over to just no nonsense business, why not go back to a planning commission with planning professionals?

Probably because there was no possible deal to be had that didn’t give DeS the ability to claim victory on paper. The rest will come later in the negotiated agreements that will get little to no press.

 

[flynnibus]

All I’ve seen so far are summaries of what has been agreed to. Is there an actual document that has been submitted to the court for approval?

https://forums.wdwmagic.com/threads...urism-oversight-district.976968/post-10877600