So the new board hired lawyers?

[Beezle2]

I read that 3 law firms have been hired to address special district concerns. Do Florida tax payers get to shell out for that? It doesn't seem very smart but the lawyers must be giddy.

 

[BrianL]

I read that 3 law firms have been hired to address special district concerns. Do Florida tax payers get to shell out for that? It doesn't seem very smart but the lawyers must be giddy.

Well, what happened is that Disney had RCID cede a ton of power to the company directly before the new board took over. It was all public and noticed and evrything, but now the new board is mad because they don't get oversight over much aside from roads and infrastructure. Of course, I'm not really sure what else they expected to control, but still. Anyway, there is some debate over the move and there will likely be years worth of legal wrangling now. And yes, the state, and thus the taxpayers, are going to be paying these lawyers. The whole thing has just been nonsense.

 

[_19disnA]

I agree, the whole plan has backfired. It will probably end up in years of lawsuits and when the dust finally settles, nothing will have been accomplished other then wasting a LOT of taxpayer $$$.

 

[thanxfornoticin]

It seems it's almost always the lawyers who benefit the most from disputed situations like this.....

 

[daisy2013]

Any other lawyers in the group giggle at the rule against perpetuities clause in the resolution...

 

[Minnesota!]

Any other lawyers in the group giggle at the rule against perpetuities clause in the resolution...

Not a lawyer, but giggled none-the-less.

Checkmate.

 

[thanxfornoticin]

Not a lawyer, but giggled none-the-less.

Checkmate.

I expect this is nothing more than 'check'. The first of many checks - both literally and as a chess reference!

 

[heresabe]

I am glad to hear that WDW did not simply accept the Governor's purely retaliatory decision without taking action.

 

[goofyernmost]

Well, that is somewhat correct except that any lawsuits will not be the state against Disney it will be the "new RCID" (CFTOD) vs. Disney. Since the new board is financed via taxing Disney it is primarily Disney vs Disney.

Disney would be forced to pay to sue itself and defend itself. It's kinda funny when you think about it. The board can pay for it by not doing some infrastructure, etc. or pay it out of the budget and increase Disney's taxes to the district which would end up with the reason that we had a revolution in 1776 (taxation without representation). It is a sticky mess but one that Disney can stubbornly sue about with a whole lot of history behind it.

It is being generally looked at by Disney Fans as a Checkmate in the game that the State of Florida tried to play to wreak vengeance on Woke. It seems to stem from a massive lack of knowledge about the actual reason for RCID's existence and not taking the time to find out either about the real purpose for the district or even the highly public meeting when the transition was made. A little to much smugness on the part of the State. It should be interesting to see how it ends up.

Hint: it might take longer than most of will live.

 

[georgina]

I haven't read a lot, but so far some of the provisions made sense to me - such as the new board can't sell Disney themed merchandise or change building exteriors.

"Under the measure, any changes are “subject to [Disney’s] prior review and comment,” so as to “ensure consistency with the overall design and theming” of the park."

For those who haven't seen the perpetuity clause -

until the “death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration.”

 

[Beezle2]

ok..the King Charles thing is funny!

 

[TwoMisfits]

I haven't read a lot, but so far some of the provisions made sense to me - such as the new board can't sell Disney themed merchandise or change building exteriors.

"Under the measure, any changes are “subject to [Disney’s] prior review and comment,” so as to “ensure consistency with the overall design and theming” of the park."

For those who haven't seen the perpetuity clause -

until the “death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, King of England living as of the date of this Declaration.”

It may be what kills the bill, b/c perpetuity clauses have almost never been upheld legally anywhere in US law...

 

[goofyernmost]

It may be what kills the bill, b/c perpetuity clauses have almost never been upheld legally anywhere in US law...

I don't think that is true, perpetuity clauses have been around for years and from what I understand are pretty solid. But as I said, we will have to wait and see and in the meantime watch the fireworks.

 

[GoingSince1990]

ok..the King Charles thing is funny!

Apparently the "last descendants of King Charles" thing is a fairly standard legal clause to avoid "in perpetuity"! Who knew? Not me!

 

[BroadwayHermione5]

Apparently the "last descendants of King Charles" thing is a fairly standard legal clause to avoid "in perpetuity"! Who knew? Not me!

I said it earlier in the thread but I read a fascinating article yesterday after all this dropped and it explained how some places have to redo contracts because they used the queen!

 

[TwoMisfits]

I don't think that is true, perpetuity clauses have been around for years and from what I understand are pretty solid. But as I said, we will have to wait and see and in the meantime watch the fireworks.

But not placed on governments...it's one of those "can't legislate the powers of a future government by the current government"...

 

[longboard55]

I do not see much happening at the parks, but the new proposed housing would be a big deal. Can they still approve the Ron Desantis monument

 

[Praying Colonel]

Any other lawyers in the group giggle at the rule against perpetuities clause in the resolution...

Lawyer here--my brain when someone mentions RAP:

Not sure I ever really understood it.

 

[Praying Colonel]

BTW, here's FL's RAP statute, for your reading pleasure:

http://www.leg.state.fl.us/Statutes...ute&URL=0600-0699/0689/Sections/0689.225.html

 

[thanxfornoticin]

I might be missing something, but it seems odd/sad (incompetent?) that the incoming board, with all this new found responsibility given to them by the Gov, took more than 5 weeks to even understand this happened in a public forum??