If Florida repeals "The Reedy Creek Improvement Charter", how does that change Disney going forward?

[HopperFan]

I think it would help if people understood Improvement Districts better. First off Disney having one is nothing new, unique or rare - they are all over the state of Florida as they are other places. They are called XXX Community Improvement District, with Disney being Reedy Creek Improvement District.

Many areas do this because they want more infrastructure investment and are willing to pay for it themselves. Some in Florida are called Community Development District. One of the largest is the area called The Villages.

In this instance Disney even pays for it's own emergency services which if Orange County had to take over might actually improve because they would likely be held to higher standards. I guarantee the last thing Orange County wants is to have to take on public services for Disney property.

A CID does not impact a County's financial standing or rating. A CID pays not just normal taxes to the County but also pays for many of it's own services saving money for the County. So to terminate the CID would mean the County loses money. Orange County has 47 CIDs, Reedy Creek being just one of them, as is Bonnet Creek. So what if the decision is made to terminate Reedy, then Disney could challenge legally that all 47 be terminated forcing a huge financial burden on Orange County. Orange County does not want Reedy Creek gone. It is win/win for them.

Over 50+ years, Disney has done a lot of development with very little oversight from Florida. If Florida decides to repeal the charter, I wonder if all the road changes and other small infrastructure changes will continue?

If Disney ever decides to build a 5th gate, not having the charter in their pocket makes things a lot more difficult and expensive.

Disney has plenty of oversight from Florida, especially if they want to build another park. Disney must file massive amounts of testing and paperwork to the South Florida Water Management District every time they wish to do anything that disturbs land. There is a delicate balance of water and land in Florida, and if Disney wishes to build they must provide alternate land where water management is handled. This is one reason Disney owns the Disney Wilderness Preserve of 12,000 acres and actively adds to it. These applications for permits will often take a year plus to go through before they can even apply for permits to Orange Co. All of these are public information.

Disney also applies to Orange County, mostly, for all of it's projects to get approvals. Even if they are just changing signage they need a permit and approval from the County. Honestly nothing will change with their construction process if they are no longer their own "Improvement District". Some services will change, some services may improve and some will get worse, it may lead to Disney slowing development of Flamingo Crossing as they might have to hold on to more of that land to avoid development they don't want.

So I’m far from an expert, but I know reedy creek has its own building codes as well as the ability to levy taxes. I think Disney gets away from paying property tax to the counties it resides in, but I’m not 100% sure. I don’t think the average guest would notice a huge difference to be honest

Actually Disney pays plenty of taxes, it is public information. Usually there is small news each year there is usually one property that Disney has filed an appeal on valuation.

 

[LYSE]

I don't think it'll happen, it's just a reminder that they should probably walk on egg shells.

Personally I miss when companies tried to remain neutral as long as possible unless something directly affected their industry, instead as others have pointed out they do what they think some want them to do.

 

[jsbowl16]

There is an easy solution. As Pete says, vote with your dollars. If you don't like what they are doing then why are you here, paying to see their movies, going to the parks, etc. Vote with your dollars and stop giving Disney your money if you don't agree with them. If it hits their pocket book hard enough then a politician doesn't need to get involved in a private business. I thought this was the basic principle of capitalism. I won't miss waiting behind you in line.

 

[TLSnell1981]

I think a majority of people don’t want to discuss sexuality with children, shhh.

Well…depends on WHO is discussing this with the kiddos. Otherwise, the conversation could be quite creepy and inappropriate.

 

[RamblinWreck]

Disney shouldn’t be in politics, period. Keep all the mental gymnastics you have going in this thread if the Florida legislature wants to repeal RCID, they will.

They have been very active in politics since forever. As most corporations are.


I very much doubt that Florida has any interest in repealing RCID. And the Florida representatives who have been unintelligent enough to specifically put out statements about aiming to repeal RCID as a consequence of Disney disagreeing with them politically on a completely unrelated matter… well, they should probably be more worried about whether or not they are going to prison.

 

[Jrb1979]

Like I said, a mess. Micro to macro.
Look at this board...look at Disney...look at social media...look at our country...look at the world.
Regardless of political beliefs, are people really enjoying this and by this I mean the times we live in? I know people can be and are happy in their own lives but I'm talking about society and the way things are spiraling out of control with the divisiveness. (Which if you don't think is their grand plan then you just don't see it).

Sorry for the dramatic rhetoricals but to me it's a sad state of affairs with no way to turn this ship around. And when something as "safe place" as Disney falls into the cesspool of toxicity too, it's just disheartening.

I agree with a lot of what you said. As far as Disney goes they brought this onto themselves by chasing the almighty dollar Add in that they let the copyright to Mickey Mouse expire Disney is not the same.

 

[starlite_]

I think a majority of people don’t want to discuss sexuality with children, shhhhh.

I don't know how to tell you that this thread is about Reedy Creek and Orange County. No children or sexuality in sight. Bit obsessed with the subject aren't you, bringing it up it completely unrelated conversations? Totally not weird or sus at all. But uh, you do you buddy.

 

[bcla]

I think it would help if people understood Improvement Districts better. First off Disney having one is nothing new, unique or rare - they are all over the state of Florida as they are other places. They are called XXX Community Improvement District, with Disney being Reedy Creek Improvement District.

It's a bit more than just the Reedy Creek Improvement District, other than it specifically covers Disney property only by design. But another really oddball thing is that WDW isn't simply in unincorporated Orange County, Florida, but that that they established two incorporated cities (Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista) that are completely within Disney property and where Disney pretty much controls the voting population by determining who gets to live there.

However, I don't really see the status quo changing.

 

[Nabas]

I think it would help if people understood Improvement Districts better. First off Disney having one is nothing new, unique or rare - they are all over the state of Florida as they are other places. They are called XXX Community Improvement District, with Disney being Reedy Creek Improvement District.

Many areas do this because they want more infrastructure investment and are willing to pay for it themselves. Some in Florida are called Community Development District. One of the largest is the area called The Villages.

Disney's Reddy Creek Improvement District (RCID) has powers beyond the typical Community Development District (CDD).

A CDD typically is a special-purpose extension of a local government with a focus on financing, constructing, and operating a local community. A CDD is effectively a "super" homeowner's association.

A typical CDD is setup so that its board is controlled by the people who move into the community. You and I get to vote on board members when we move into the neighborhood.

The Village's CDD was setup so that it was permanently controlled by its original developers. As such, the IRS gave The Villages CDD a lot of grief about its tax-exempt status.

RCID is, in effect, completely controlled by The Walt Disney Company, with Disney getting to decide who lives in the community. These almost always are long-time Disney employees. (Note that the lands occupied by Celebration and Golden Oak were intentionally removed from RCID so that people living there could not influence RCID.)

Really, RCID should not be a tax-exempt entity as Disney completely controls it.

In addition, RCID is authorized to operate its own police (contracted through Orange County) and fire departments.

Suggesting RCID is just another CDD is misleading.

 

[Suger Mag]

I agree with a lot of what you said. As far as Disney goes they brought this onto themselves by chasing the almighty dollar Add in that they let the copyright to Mickey Mouse expire Disney is not the same.

To be clear, this is not all Mickey 'Mice'.. the expiring copyright is only the Steamboat Willie... and the Trademarks are all still in place and are not expiring.

 

[LYSE]

There is an easy solution. As Pete says, vote with your dollars. If you don't like what they are doing then why are you here, paying to see their movies, going to the parks, etc. Vote with your dollars and stop giving Disney your money if you don't agree with them. If it hits their pocket book hard enough then a politician doesn't need to get involved in a private business. I thought this was the basic principle of capitalism. I won't miss waiting behind you in line.

Voting with dollars is always an option of course...and it goes both ways, don't like what FL is doing? Don't go there and add to the economy..I guess people have DLR

 

[Nabas]

Voting with dollars is always an option of course...and it goes both ways, don't like what FL is doing? Don't go there and add to the economy..I guess people have DLR

The government of Florida (who represent the people of Florida, who polls show support the Parental Rights in Education bill) is fighting back with dollars.

I suspect what most worries Disney about potentially losing RCID is RCID's tax-exempt status (along with the financial impact of having to go through Orange County's bureaucracy for project approvals).

Let's face it, RCID is not a CDD. RCID is an extension of corporate Disney whose sole purpose is to help corporate Disney.

There's a reason Disney intentionally de-annexed Celebration and Golden Oak when it created those communities. Disney didn't want those residents interfering in Disney's business, and RCID is effectively a business run by Disney.

 

[LYSE]

The government of Florida (who represent the people of Florida, who polls show support the Parental Rights in Education bill) is fighting back with dollars.

I suspect what most worries Disney about potentially losing RCID is RCID's tax-exempt status.

Let's face it, RCID is not a CDD. It's an extension of corporate Disney who sole purpose is to help corporate Disney.

There's a reason Disney intentionally de-annexed Celebration and Golden Oak when it created those communities. Disney didn't want those residents interring in Disney's business, and RCID is effectively a business run by Disney.

Oh I agree and I never really thought it was appropriate for them to have so much power particularly with police fire and ems...and recently they were poorly staffed and created a safety issue that probably lead to at least one cardiac death (due to extremely poor response time)

But they were on the good side of legislators and these threats are basically "you don't want to get on our bad side"

 

[sowmaster]

Hate to say it but it's looking last 2 years has killed the golden goose. Not saying Disney will close or go bankrupt but IMO the days of them being number 1 may be over.

Discussing politics and religion is never a good business decision. Now where am I going to escape to? I knew DIS leaned but didn't know there was such an agenda going on. :-(

 

[sowmaster]

Yeah, I really don't know what the impact will be. I doubt it will actually happen though. This is a little tiff for sure, but in the end Disney will figure out a way to keep it in place. It's all a lot of bluster right now to whip up the voters.

I don't know. Disney keeps the 'behind the scenes' stuff hidden for a good reason. Destroys the fantasy. They revealed too much too quickly this time, I'm afraid.

 

[Jrb1979]

Discussing politics and religion is never a good business decision. Now where am I going to escape to? I knew DIS leaned but didn't know there was such an agenda going on. :-(

There is so many amazing parks out there to escape to.

 

[Suger Mag]

When the positions are such polar opposites LGBQT supporters vs 'Don't Say Gay", there is no choice without alienating one or the other. Disney chose which side it preferred alienating, personally I agree with Igor, this is not about politics, it is about right vs wrong.

“A lot of these issues are not necessarily political. It’s about right and wrong,” Iger told CNN’s Chris Wallace in an interview that was taped last month.
“I had to contend with this a lot, and the filter that I used to determine whether we should or should not weigh in considered a few factors,” Iger said. “What would its impact have on our employees, on our shareholders and our customers? And if any one of those three constituencies had a deep interest in or would be affected by whatever was the matter at hand, then it was something I thought we should consider weighing in on.”

Disney is committed to inclusion, if you are against that, then feel free to stay home and not be included.

I agree, that the calls to repeal Reedy Creek is a lot of bluster and attention getting, I dont believe it will happen.

 

[Pyotr]

When the positions are such polar opposites LGBQT supporters vs 'Don't Say Gay", there is no choice without alienating one or the other. Disney chose which side it preferred alienating, personally I agree with Igor, this is not about politics, it is about right vs wrong.

“A lot of these issues are not necessarily political. It’s about right and wrong,” Iger told CNN’s Chris Wallace in an interview that was taped last month.
“I had to contend with this a lot, and the filter that I used to determine whether we should or should not weigh in considered a few factors,” Iger said. “What would its impact have on our employees, on our shareholders and our customers? And if any one of those three constituencies had a deep interest in or would be affected by whatever was the matter at hand, then it was something I thought we should consider weighing in on.”

Disney is committed to inclusion, if you are against that, then feel free to stay home and not be included.

I agree, that the calls to repeal Reedy Creek is a lot of bluster and attention getting, I dont believe it will happen.

That’s simply not the case. There are many of us who support LBGQT and don’t want sex being taught to our young children. Chapek’s original stance, to stay out of politics, was the correct one. Instead he allowed himself to be bullied by the most toxic of all groups, DisTwitter, into making an ill advised statement. Now he upset all sides and will have to deal with the repercussions ,which may ultimately lead to his termination.

Iger has made it known that he wishes to enter into politics. He no longer leads Disney and his opinion is no longer relevant.

 

[Suger Mag]

That’s simply not the case. There are many of us who support LBGQT and don’t want sex being taught to our young children. Chapek’s original stance, to stay out of politics, was the correct one. Instead he allowed himself to be bullied by the most toxic of all groups, DisTwitter, into making an ill advised statement. Now he upset all sides and will have to deal with the repercussions ,which may ultimately lead to his termination.

Iger has made it known that he wishes to enter into politics. He no longer leads Disney and his opinion is no longer relevant.

Oh please no one is teaching "sex" to children, or at least not how the pearl clutching folks think it is.... but you say that like it is a bad thing, LOL as a college level anatomy professor who teaches to pre medical students... many people have an appalling lack of education not only about the human body, but also about healthy and safe sexual practices so perhaps they should be teaching more sex... I firmly support (and benefitted from) age appropriate sex education taught throughout all education levels.

But like all things, first will come the court challenges, and if it stands, the law must be applied equally... heterosexuality is also a sexuality and binary gender norms are also gender.

 

[Duckbug.Ducktales]

That’s simply not the case. There are many of us who support LBGQT and don’t want sex being taught to our young children. Chapek’s original stance, to stay out of politics, was the correct one. Instead he allowed himself to be bullied by the most toxic of all groups, DisTwitter, into making an ill advised statement. Now he upset all sides and will have to deal with the repercussions ,which may ultimately lead to his termination.

Iger has made it known that he wishes to enter into politics. He no longer leads Disney and his opinion is no longer relevant.

The bill isn't really about sex being taught to young children. Sex Ed isn't part of the curriculum. It's about letting parents sue and recoup attorneys fees whenever they find what their children are taught questionable.

The language is very vague, so the fear is that a parent would be empowered to sue for anything that they perceive is an exposure to non-heterosexuality. The math teacher who gets lunch brought over to her by her wife because she forgot it. Or has a picture of her wife on the desk. The student who is bullied because she has two dads and a teacher steps in to advocate for tolerance and respect. A parent who witnesses or hears about any such scenario and finds it reprehensible can sue and would feel as though they have nothing to lose. And let's be honest, while you may be supportive of LGBTQ folks, there are still many people who aren't and erroneously believe that knowing about gay people will turn their children gay.

I think there's a middle ground here, a version of this law that is specific to curriculum and would not strike fear that in teachers that they can be sued simply for being who they are.

Having said all that, I've come to think that Chaepek's first instincts were the better course of action. Inspire with creative endeavors but avoid damaging political battles. He didn't get a chance to pitch this to the company before being embroiled in this controversy. But there's enough dividing us in these times of constant outrage matches, Disney needn't get involved.