Florida Passes Bills to Dissolve Disney World’s Reedy Creek Improvement District
Florida’s state legislature passed a bill to dissolve the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which gives Walt Disney World its own government within Osceola and Orange County. This post takes a look at what’s happened, what’s next, and what this means for the parks & resorts.
The Walt Disney Company has been embroiled in a bitter standoff with Florida state leadership since the company took a public stance on Florida HB 1557. The actions and statements by each side in that high profile controversy are well documented; the Reedy Creek Creek bills are essentially the legislature’s retaliation for that after Disney “chose to kick the hornet’s nest,” according to State Rep. Randy Fine, who filed the bill in the Florida House.
The latest chapter in the ongoing saga started this Tuesday, when Governor Ron DeSantis announced that Florida’s special legislative session would take up the dissolution of six special districts enacted before 1968, including Walt Disney World’s own government. The Florida Senate moved forward with SB 4C, and a companion bill, HB 3C, was filed in the Florida House.
The latter bill passed the Florida Senate on Wednesday by a vote of 23-16. The former passed the state’s House of Representatives with a 70-38 vote. The bill now heads to DeSantis to be signed into law.
With that, Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID) and 5 other special districts will be dissolved on June 1, 2023, but given a chance to be reestablished. Just as certain that DeSantis will sign the bill is that it’ll be challenged in court.
For those who are unfamiliar with it, Reedy Creek Improvement District is a special district that allows the company to act as its own government with regard to Walt Disney World. The Florida legislature created the Reedy Creek Improvement District in 1967 during the planning stages of the company’s Florida Project.
This governmental district, controls approximately 25,000 acres and services 19 landowners, including the Walt Disney Company and its wholly-owned affiliates. The powers executed by the Reedy Creek Improvement District are granted to two cities, Bay Lake and Lake Buena Vista. The two towns have low combined populations, all of whom are loyal Disney employees.
RCID’s day-to-day operations are conducted separately from the Walt Disney Company, but as Reedy Creek’s largest landowner, Disney effectively controls the RCID Board of Supervisors. This means Disney is not subject to asking (outside) local planning commissions for approval to build new structures or pay governmental impact fees for construction.
RCID allows Walt Disney World to build parks, attractions, hotels, and other projects within Reedy Creek with little-to-no (outside) governmental oversight. That means Walt Disney World can avoid the logistical hurdles of local government that often come with requesting residents to pay taxes to fund infrastructure. That’s a double-edged sword, as it also means Florida taxpayers are not footing the bill for infrastructure at Walt Disney World.
Among other things, Reedy Creek Improvement District oversees land use and environmental protections within its boundaries, and provides essential public services (e.g. fire protection, emergency medical services, potable water production, treatment, storage, pumping & distribution, reclaimed water distribution, chilled and hot water systems, wastewater services, drainage and flood control, electric power generation & distribution, and solid waste and recyclables collection & disposal).
The District also regulates construction pursuant to the EPCOT Building Code, and is responsible for all public roadways and bridges. RCID is self-sufficient, funding its operations, services, and capital improvements by assessing taxes and fees to the District’s landowners and lessees.
This last point is significant when it comes to dissolving RCID. Through its ability to collect taxes and issue bonds, Reedy Creek Improvement District has an annual budget of more than $169 million. Over 90% of that comes from the collection of property taxes on Walt Disney World real estate. RCID also has $1 billion to $2 billion in bond debt.
In addition to those payments to RCID, Walt Disney World also collects and remits sales taxes to both Orange and Osceola Counties, Tourist Development Taxes from on-site hotel guests, and pays property taxes on to the respective counties. (There was/is a long-running legal battle between Disney and the Orange County Property Appraiser as the company has successfully sought to reduce its tax burden on multiple occasions.)
According to Orange County Tax Collector Scott Randolph, dissolving the Reedy Creek Improvement District would be a financial burden on local residents with no gain. If RCID is dissolved, “it’s zero revenue, but [Orange County taxpayers] take on the obligations,” Randolph said in an interview with WKMG-TV (Orlando’s CBS affiliate).
“If Reedy Creek is dissolved, my guess would be Orange County would have to raise property taxes 15 to 20%,” Randolph stated. Orange and Osceola residents would take on the burdens of fire fighting, wastewater, power, road maintenance, and more at Walt Disney World, all that without additional revenue. Randolph said that it would “punish” local taxpayers more than Disney.
Dissolving the district would mean Reedy Creek employees, infrastructure, and more would be absorbed by Osceola and Orange Counties. The counties would essentially step into the shoes of RCID as its successor, collecting at least some of the tax revenue Walt Disney World currently pays the Reedy Creek district, while also being saddled with RCID’s current liabilities.
However, it’s unclear whether the counties could collect the entirety of RCID’s annual budget. To the extent that Reedy Creek is inflating charges or duplicating taxes assessed by the counties, they could not. Without a thorough audit of Reedy Creek’s financials, it’s impossible to say how much of what Disney is paying to the district could be collected by the counties.
Additionally, Reedy Creek typically operates at a loss of around $5 million to $10 million per year, according to the district’s financial reports. That doesn’t matter to Disney, as that’s peanuts and that lose can be subsidized by theme park revenue. For local governments and taxpayers, those shortfalls are more significant.
The bigger issue is the $1 billion to $2 billion in outstanding debt that RCID has taken on, which sounds almost like defensive poison pill provision to prevent a hostile takeover. (Don’t let the bungling of recent controversies fool you–Disney is incredibly adept at playing politics and protecting itself.) If the special district actually is dissolved, that liability doesn’t just disappear, it becomes the responsibility of taxpayers.
Before we delve into commentary, you’ve probably noticed a lack of coverage here about the standoff between Disney and Florida, which has been breathlessly covered elsewhere. That’s simply because it is not relevant to vacation planning. If we devoted attention to all of the company’s lobbying or controversial business practices, that would likely be a stressful full time job, and one upsetting fans of all political persuasions. When it comes to that, choosing which stories to cover is just as political as the substance of said content.
I hadn’t planned on writing about these Reedy Creek developments as of earlier this week, either. With that said, we have already received countless questions about how the dissolution of Reedy Creek will impact Walt Disney World, prices, and myriad other things. Accordingly, I wanted to break this down in a straightforward manner, free of hyperbole and sensationalism. Hopefully this one article will suffice, and we won’t have to address the topic again.
In short, I don’t think this will have any material impact on the guest experience at Walt Disney World. That’s because I don’t think Reedy Creek Improvement District will actually be dissolved when all is said and done.
I’ll offer the caveat that although I have generalized knowledge of Walt Disney World and degrees in law and political science, I have zero expertise in administrative or municipal law. I’d further add that you should be skeptical of anyone who claims to be certain of how this will unfold. This involves novel issues, unsettled law, and political calculuses that defy convention. There’s not exactly a ton of precedent concerning the dissolution of special districts controlled by corporations.
Moreover, the legislation as passed raises more questions than it answers. Those will almost certainly be settled by the courts, which will need to determine, among other things, whether this amounts to viewpoint discrimination that runs afoul of Citizens United and its progeny.
Even before that, there’s the threshold issue of whether the Florida legislature even has the authority to dissolve RCID without the approval by a majority vote of the residents or landowners of the district. (If required, there’s a zero percent chance of that approval being given.) The bill even tacitly acknowledges this, stating that it is “notwithstanding s. 189.072(2).”
Assuming the state finds a way to sidestep all of that, there’s also the question of how unwinding the Reedy Creek Improvement District would occur. Orange and Osceola Counties clearly don’t want to take on the municipal obligations, and even if they did, that would require a period of transition–not a clean break.
Then there’s the issue of RCID’s debts. Florida isn’t just going to give Disney a $1 to $2 billion tax break as “punishment” for its transgressions. Assuming RCID is dissolved, the most likely outcome is thus that it’s immediately replaced by another special district consistent with those established in or after 1968.
With all of that said, let’s assume, arguendo, that RCID is dissolved and nothing replaces it. What happens then? In theory, Walt Disney World has to jump through more hoops on projects, resulting in delays and more costly construction. The case could also be made that urgent work or needs aren’t serviced in as expeditious of a manner, as Disney is at the mercy of Orange and Osceola Counties.
I wouldn’t be so quick to assume that. For one, you’ve seen the TRON Lightcycle Run construction site, right?! Joking aside, RCID actually has pretty onerous standards, and does not simply rubber stamp all of Imagineering’s plans. Look no further than the incredibly wide walkways at Wilderness Lodge or the giant support column under the Cosmic Rewind starship. You can thank Reedy Creek for all of that, and much more.
The company would undoubtedly face added costs, delays, red tape, and unpredictability, but it’s not like Disney is exactly the paragon of corporate efficiency. They’re about as bureaucratic as any government. Conversely, Orange County seems relatively adept at building and maintaining infrastructure (by government standards) even amidst the current population explosion.
All of this analysis is reductionist, superficial, and filled with broad assumptions. The point is that even if RCID is dissolved, it would hardly mean the sky is falling for Walt Disney World. Guests probably wouldn’t notice anything other than different colored signs along the roads.
Ultimately, even though the bills dissolving Reedy Creek Improvement District have passed and will be signed into law, this is really just the beginning of a long saga that will last the next year-plus. While it’s impossible to foresee everything that will happen, my main predictions are that many attorneys will be enriched and much digital ink will be spilled about the ramifications of RCID’s demise.
Personally, I do not think that “demise” will happen, nor should it in this manner. There are legitimate critiques of Reedy Creek and whether a corporation should perform the roles of government, enjoy special treatment, and have such an outsized influence in state and local politics. Legal scholars, politicians, and others have debated all of this for years. This is not the first time RCID has been called into question–Disney has made changes to stay in Florida’s good graces before.
However, it’s hard to argue persuasively that what’s happening now qualifies as a good faith check on Disney’s self-governance. If motivated by the best interests of voters, dissolving Reedy Creek would be a methodical process, with its financial implications studied and recommendations made for the orderly unwinding of the special district to minimize the negative ramifications on the company and taxpayers. None of that has occurred.
One could argue that this is because no legislator on either side of the aisle actually believes Reedy Creek Improvement District is going to be dissolved. Perhaps they’re cynical, thinking that it’s more about theater, a way to score a quick “win” in today’s era of ‘politics as team sports’ and the ongoing culture wars. Maybe it’s a means of grabbing headlines, dominating the news cycle, and fundraising for midterms before moving on to the next outrage du jour that fuels each side’s base long before next summer.
There’s a reason Orange County (the main “beneficiary” of this change) is against RCID being dissolved in this manner; separately, there’s also a reason Disney has gone quiet on issues concerning Florida politics, including this very Reedy Creek legislation. This isn’t to say that a special district with the name Reedy Creek Improvement District will exist on June 1, 2023. It is to say that it would be incredibly surprising if there are any changes to Walt Disney World’s governance between now and then that materially impact guests.
Planning a Walt Disney World trip? Learn about hotels on our Walt Disney World Hotels Reviews page. For where to eat, read our Walt Disney World Restaurant Reviews. To save money on tickets or determine which type to buy, read our Tips for Saving Money on Walt Disney World Tickets post. Our What to Pack for Disney Trips post takes a unique look at clever items to take. For what to do and when to do it, our Walt Disney World Ride Guides will help. For comprehensive advice, the best place to start is our Walt Disney World Trip Planning Guide for everything you need to know!
YOUR THOUGHTS
Any thoughts on the potential dissolution of Reedy Creek Improvement District? Keep the comments civil, as this is not the place for politically-charged arguing, antagonism, personal attacks, or perpetuating pointless culture wars. While this topic is inherently political, we will be heavy-handed in deleting comments that amount to little more than vapid political cheerleading. Respectfully debating the pros & cons and implications of RCID being dissolved (or whether it’ll actually happen) is totally fine, but don’t step outside the bounds of this narrow topic. If you wish to shout your opinions about Ron DeSantis, Bob Chapek, or other politicians/executives into the internet abyss, that’s why Facebook was invented. 😉
Nice write-up, Tom. RCID is like a planned unit development, where you set up an area to develop in a master planned fashion, parts at a time, as economic conditions warrant, under certain conditions agreed to by the developer and the city/county/state/etc. We did them all the time for developers, who would build a subdivision on part of it, so as to not saturate the market with lots and lower their income potential. RCID is a little more than that, operating as a town charter and able to adopt their own building codes and such, which was a brilliant move. To me, the biggest was as you mentioned, not having to bother with local city or county permit office or inspectors.
This push for dissolution is in a word, dumb. And I agree that it won’t just happen, if at all. Not only would the two counties have to absorb the duties and maintenance, they would have to BUY all of the improvements in relation to the conversion. Roads, fire stations and equipment, utility facilities and distribution networks, etc that would be in the ‘public’ right of way. Disney would not and could not be forced to just hand this over to the counties.
Disney could also require the counties to pay them for an annual lease for the properties under them as well, because you know they are not going to hand over deed and title to a single square foot of the land they own. Want to double my property taxes? Fine, your lease cost is being raised 400%. Now, obviously this is quite oversimplified and would be fought over in court for years, if not decades.
If I were the CEO, and the state DID go through with dissolution and no realistic (fro Disney) replacement agreement, I might, as the largest employer in the state, driver of the state economy and Orange/Osceola CO economies and the sole reason Orlando isn’t still a small farming village, Just ignore it and keep operating as usual. So sue us, might be the response when the harassment started…
The bottom line is that in the near term, county residents would be devastated by such burdens. In the long term, the guest experience would suffer, as the lesser county maintenance would lead to degraded roads and utilities. But no, Disney will not be losing much if any money, and might actually come out ahead.
Canadian lawyer here. Question for you, if you feel comfortable weighing in. As best I understand, a SCOTUS decision during GWB presidency held that corporations have the same constitutional rights as real live human beings, including in particular freedom of speech / expression. Seems very clear that the Governor and State legislature targeted the Disney corporation for their expression of a political opinion. Whether or not one agrees with Disney’s opinion on the “Don’t Say Gay” or “Parent’s Choice” legislation (I am trying to be neutral here; afraid I am just too lazy to look up the actual name of legislation and using the shorthand phrasing that comes to mind), isn’t this fairly clearly unconstitutional? I naturally don’t expect you will be prepared to give an actual legal opinion, but curious as to your reasonably well informed and educated thoughts.
Thank you for the unbiased reporting on this Tom.
As a DVC member, shareholder, lover of Disney it has been disheartening to see the headlines from both sides of the political aisle regarding Disney lately. (Not to mention the hit to the stock price.)
No matter which side we all fall on, having the unbiased facts can only help and I applaud your efforts Tom.
Thank you for this informative article Tom! As always, you break it down in consumable pieces and don’t dirty yourself with personal political leanings. I’ve always enjoyed your writing and I further respect the man behind the years of catchy wording and witty insights. Thank you!
I don’t live in Florida, so this is a non resident view point on this mess.
I think the district was an incentive for disney to build their parks in central Florida. Now, it seems to have run it’s course, IMO.
What does Universal, sEa world, and other parks, attractions do? They have to jump through the hoops of government without any relief system such as Reedy Creek. In all fairness, I think disney should have to do as all the other parks have to do. They don’t get their own Reedy Creek deals like disney has for so many years.
I know that’s not a popular opinion but as an outsider, just another viewpoint.
Disney too big now. I believe they have the second biggest transportation system in the state (behind only Miami, I think). No county is keen to take on another city, also they’d be taking on debt not really new assets. It’s all kind of a wash in the end.
The other theme parks are significantly less complex. You couldn’t build something like Disney World today. It basically is it’s own little kingdom in Florida.
This is not precisely true.
First, Universal receives lots of perks. In fact, Universal has received millions of dollars in tax incentives originally intended for impoverished and “high crime” neighborhoods, according to the Orlando Sentinel. And in 2020, the Orlando Sentinel reported Sea World had earned nearly $193 million in pretax profits but paid less than $8 million in total income taxes – that’s about a 4% tax rate. (Walt Disney World paid $780.3 million in state and local taxes in 2021 per US News & World Report.)
Second, special districts are created was so taxpayers who don’t benefit from the services of the special district aren’t required to pay for it through taxes. Since Universal isn’t a special district, to build Epic Universal, Universal paid half while Orange County contributed $125 million and the state contributed $16 million per the Orlando Sentinel. That’s taxpayer money Disney doesn’t receive from the state/county because it pays for expansions/services/maintenance by raising internal municipal bonds on its own properties via Reedy Creek (and pass the costs onto guests, not residents). Also, just pointing out that Florida still has over 1,850 special districts – including The Villages, where DeSantis made his announcement about this – and those are still in operation. So this isn’t really about special districts and eliminating their perks.
But now who gets to pay for WDW municipal operations? Florida residents even if they never set foot on WDW property.
Also, Reedy Creek operates at a loss every year, which means Disney puts more into improvements, services and maintenance than it takes out. Disney can do that, because not only does WDW run at a profit, but it has revenues from all its global businesses. But states and counties don’t have the same ability to carry a lot of debt.
Regardless, I’m with Tom. Reedy Creek isn’t going anywhere, because Florida just doesn’t have the resources nor the desire to take on WDW operations. Remember, Florida already gets their tax revenue. There won’t be extra money coming in from dissolving Reedy Creek, as there are very few Reedy Creek residents to add to the tax base to absorb new taxes. So they won’t be able to pay for taking on WDW operations unless they raise property taxes exorbiantly on exisiting county residents, and even then they probably won’t be able to service all the debt.
Not to mention, a big part of the draw of WDW is its immersive, much better maintained bubble than other theme parks. People plan holidays around WDW; they don’t plan as much around Universal or Sea World, which are usually add-on visits. They aren’t main draws.
Take that bubble away and WDW becomes just another amusement park, which means less tourism, which means less jobs, which means less money for Florida’s state budget because it is heavily reliant on taxes relating to tourism.
Neither UO or Sea World are probably big enough for it to be worth it. Remember the RCID costs Disney more money, but it’s worth it then for the control they have over WDW, given the experience they are trying to offer and also just the scale of the operation.
Also, arguably Disney has done a lot more to deserve the special treatment than other parks. They negotiated for the RCID as a condition of building WDW where it is and then they built up the infrastructure necessary for WDW in a uninhabited swamp at no cost to taxpayers. Furthermore, they single-handedly turned the Orlando area into the tourist Mecca it is today. The tourist infrastructure Disney brought to the area and the actual infrastructure was already built by the local governments when UO and Sea World came on the scene.
Thank you so much for your unbiased reporting. Other Disney sites have been so biased that after 20 plus years of following them I am unsubscribing. Thank you for just giving the facts and for only reporting on the political stuff when you feel you have to. Your site is fun and refreshing and very appreciated.
@Rose
The poll you are citing is from ABC, which is owned by Disney. Actually, many other polls indicate broad support for the bill’s language. The numbers are flipped, with over 60% of American voters supporting the bill. See Quinipac, Public Opinion Strategies, among others.
Only because the bill is weaselly worded making it sound maybe reasonable on the surface, but it’s a solution looking for a problem, since there isn’t any such instruction going on in schools. This is a dog whistle, just like how florida is censoring books. The intent of the law is clear. It’s a slippery slope by design, targeted at kids who need supported, which is the sickest part.
@Kurt This is so obvious that it’s disconcerting that most people don’t see it. Solve a made up problem now, that gives them more control later.
Dear Tom,
Thank you. Honestly. This article was extremely well written, well researched, and was as polically dispassionate as you can get. You knew opening this powder keg was necessary to address obvious concerns and did so understanding this was going to bring out comments from those with nothing but political nonsense that no one wants to read unless it matches their personal opinions. I applaud your dedication to providing the best Disney information one can offer. You have now cemented my belief that not only are you are true Disney fan but a decent person who just wants the best for the company. #Tom4CEO
What relationship exists between Irvine County/Anaheim and DisneyLand? Couldn’t these parties arbitrate their differences and arrive at equitable solution? I can’t believe Disney World wants to see Orange County in financial straits as a result of the Reedy Creek dissolution.
Not good. One indicator is the fact there are no longer any runDisney events in Cali. I wonder if we’re seeing the beginning of the end for races in WDW as well..
THANK YOU for this article! You are my first stop when it comes to planning all things Disney in part because of your measured, thoughtful and researched perspective, and will continue to be so in the future. I very much appreciate you sharing your take, and I, too, hope you can get back to discussing the theme parks and not political shenanigans.
I will say we just cancelled our upcoming Walt Disney World trip and rebooked at Disneyland, club level and all. We won’t be pumping any money into Florida’s economy for the foreseeable future.
I’m having second thoughts.
All week long I figured that repealing the Reedy Creek arrangement would hurt Disney more than it helps them. I’m not so sure now.
Disney liked the Reedy Creek deal because it allowed them to control the speed of construction projects (fast) without waiting for slow government bureaucrats. But now they have a tantalizing opportunity to make a trade off for slower construction in exchange for debt relief of a $1 billion bond and an annual tax liability of $163 million. (Surely the politicians who endorsed this bill were aware of this. How could they not be?)
Fast paced construction is extremely helpful when you’re building a 100 acre theme park from the ground up. So from 1967 until 1998 it was a fabulous perk. But after Disney’s Animal Kingdom opened in 1998, they haven’t built any new theme parks from the ground up. Obviously they’ve built thousands of hotel rooms and many big attractions since 1998, but the perk is less useful now than it was in 1970.
So maybe Disney won’t fight this change. Or maybe they’ll fight a little, but fold early without waging all out war on Florida’s government. Offloading a $163 million annual tax bill without spending a penny lobbying for it isn’t such a bad deal for this mouse.
If Disney wanted this arrangement to end they could have just asked for it to end. While they might save money, they clearly see the value in this arrangement that makes the extra costs worth it. From their perspective the ability to have complete control of the WDW property is key to their operations.
This was a fantastic summary of what is happening! I personally am more inclined to visit WDW based on recent events, but I do also agree that Chapek hasn’t been the leader that WDW needs. I do hope that changes, but I also hope that this theatric stunt goes away as well.
Absolutely! This might be Chapek’s last dance. Not only did he give florida an excuse to spin up their political circus and lose Disney’s special status, but he can’t even claim the high ground because he only did the right thing after staying silent and facing (appropriate) pressure. On the other hand, with all the price hikes, Genie+, etc, I was becoming inclined to limit my support of the parks and thus Mr. Chapek, but now I guess I have to support them again. Dang it!
If only all journalism were as unbiased as this and made options clearly opinions and even then not taking a political side. Great writeup. I learned from this.
Can you report all the news? Because that was a fantastic summary. Refreshingly unbiased.
IMO, I sure hope the Orange and Osceola County tax payers don’t get left holding the bag over a political temper tantrum.
THIS!!!
Thank you for reporting on this with a level head and keeping it about the facts. I appreciate you explaining your expertise and what your expertise does not cover.
I know I’m probably among the minority in this comment section, but I’ll continue to visit, shop, and contribute to Disney; perhaps even more after all of this. I tend to patronize companies/brands with a culture more aligned with my own – those with informed empathy. Informed empathy: understanding the circumstances of the world beyond your own business. It also entails appreciating how other people see and experience the world. Informed empathy has emerged as a business imperative because companies today must build wider relationships – to engage with their entire ecosystem – and grasp how the world engages with or could affect their business.
My friends, family, colleagues, and I will put our expendable incomes behind these companies (even at a higher cost than others). Although I understand both sides, I don’t have to agree with the entirety of either. However, in this instance, the feud has done nothing but solidify my upcoming vacation to WDW.
You could not have put it better. I have my doubts whether Disney leadership (Chapek in particular) are actually aligned with our values, but there are clearly enough people in the company – employees and possibly investors – who are, in order for Disney to put such a strong statement in opposition to this discriminatory law. As a member of the community being targeted, the news out of Florida had left me very conflicted about my upcoming trip to WDW for the 50th anniversary, but now I feel a little better about it. Sadly, unless things change in FL, this will be my last trip to the state. I would rather have my money go towards governments and people who do not make a habit of targeting already marginalized minorities.
I’m not sure how to put this without sounding bad but Disney’s motivation to change their mind on the “not say gay” bill had nothing to do with an ethical standpoint. The only reason they eventually went against it was because they got slack from their customers. And in today’s cancel culture mentality, they can’t afford to lose a section of their client base. But it wasn’t ethics, it was money.
You are not alone. I feel zero sadness that people who throw temper tantrums because a company that has been making political donations stops making those donations and takes a stand for its employees are boycotting the parks. It will make my vacations more pleasant.
The Reedy Creek District was a perk that Florida gave to Disney. As WSJ so aptly stated, “The mystery is why Disney thought it could push around state lawmakers without any pushback.” The Parental Rights Bill has broad support by the majority of Florida voters of all political parties, even nationwide. They are losing the trust of parents and I fear it may take Disney decades to undo the damage.
The RCID was not a “perk” given by the state. The powers in the Reedy Creek charter were absolute conditions that Disney required for the Florida project to go forward. It’s disingenuous to consider all the power & privilege that was negotiated and agreed upon for the formation of RCID to be thought of as trivial trinket given to Disney by the state of Florida. There were some brilliant minds that put the original legislation together. Too bad those types of critical thinkers are rarely found in politics today.
Disney literally gave the most mild possible statement against the bill to the state, and the state immediately set about to destroy their district.
Is that really a precedent that we want to set? That to give the most mild critique to any government, business, or bill means that said entity can immediately act in a retaliatory manner towards said company or consumer?
Doesn’t sound like democracy to me. Nor a precedent I particularly want.
Actually, a robust majority of Americans oppose this type of legislation—see the Ipsos/ABC poll in March that found 62% opposed with only 37% in favor.
Not sure how stating they are against the bill constitutes “push[ing] the state lawmakers. The 1st Amendment gives everyone the right to voice opposition to the government without being punished for doing so. That includes businesses. It seems the ones screaming the loudest about the evils of ‘cancel culture’ are the ones quickest to employ exactly that.
We had planned a trip to Universal later this year because of the nickel and diming that Chapek has instituted. But we support Disney’s right to be inclusive of its guests and cast members, so we’ve changed plans and are headed back to Disney. Everyone should be welcomed at Disney, not just a choice few.
1. RCID was not a “perk” — it was a responsibility, negotiated between Florida and WDW. Florida did not have the capability to build the infrastructure WDW said, “ok, if we are our own district, we can just build it ourselves.” Meanwhile, the surrounding areas got massive benefits — They got taxes and tourism dollars from the massive economy created by WDW. Dissolution of RCID would be HORRIBLE for Florida taxpayers, who suddenly be on the hook for paying for much of WDW infrastructure and dept.
2. Whether one agrees with the recent Florida laws or not is irrelevant. It has always been a central tenet of American values — The Government should not punish political speech. FULL STOP.
Great article as always, Tom! It’s clear you do your best to stay away from hot-button political issues. Sometimes, it’s hard to avoid! I agree with the other posters, Florida’s government waaaay overstepped their bounds with Disney for political leverage. For the sake of taxpayers, I certainly hope they back off. It cannot end well for Florida residents or for the Governor. Keep up the good work. Planning another trip to Disney World as we speak!!
Even if 100% of voters were in favor of the bill, that doesn’t give DeSantis and the State of Florida the right to do what they did. We have this little thing called the Constitution, and it expressly prohibits a government from retaliating or taking away rights due to something a person said. As a result of the Citizens United and Hobby Lobby decisions, the Supreme Court has made it very clear that all First Amendment rights (well mostly freedom of speech and freedom of religion) apply to corporations as well as individuals.
While Florida could argue that the bill changing the status of the RCID is neutral on its face since it doesn’t single out Disney that doesn’t matter if it’s clear that their intent with the bill was to retaliate against Disney for criticizing the Don’t Say Gay bill.
While no one can predict how the courts would respond, if I were back in law school and this came up as a fact pattern on my ConLaw exam, I would definitely focus my response on arguing that based on the Constitution and current Supreme Court precedent Disney is entitled to freedom of speech protections and that while the bill was neutral on its face but Florida and DeSantis made it clear that they were doing this to punish Disney for speaking out.
I’ve been checking DTB religiously hoping you would comment on this situation. Fantastic, unbiased, yet helpful article for me to better understand the situation and what that might mean for for Disney vacationers. Grateful for your input!
Bob Chapek presided over the worst-performing company of the Dow Jones. And he has ruined the park experience.
May Bob Chapek soon end up with Captain Hook, playing with the crocodiles somewhere outside Disney management.
As I write this, $DIS has hit a fresh 52-week low and is trading at the same level as mid-April 2019, before Galaxy’s Edge opened and Disney+ debuted.
There are a lot of reasons for its current poor performance (including Netflix dragging down other streamers), but it’s absolutely astonishing that it’s doing so poorly especially after Chapek and co. have boasted so openly about increased per guest spending and the resiliency of the parks.
Sure seems like investors don’t have a lot of confidence in the current management. I won’t pretend to know what that means for Chapek’s future, but I wouldn’t be the least bit surprised if he’s gone when his current contract is up.
I agree. Bob Chapek has been a disaster for Disney, in every area.
Thanks for this, Tom. I’ve been annoyed by the press coverage – headlines about Disney World losing its special tax status make it sound like WDW has been trying to masquerade as a non-profit for 50 years and that they just got caught this month. Those headlines (and the lack of people actually reading *past* the headlines) has made social media even more insufferable than usual this week.
THIS!! What Tom outlined was so informative!
“I have tried to allow every comment confined to analysis or critique of this specific legislation and its motivations through. A lot of commenters have brought up other bills, which are not discussed here, and those comments have not survived moderation.”
Problem is HB1557 is tied directly to the bill which is the topic of your post. You mention allowing comments about “motivations” to this specific legislation about Disney self governing but then seem to not allow discussion about the motivations for it……
That’s absolutely a problem, but discussion of that prior legislation would go downhill fast–and it is (or should be) irrelevant to the subject bills since they are not companion pieces of legislation. The politicians advancing these RCID bills would’ve been well-advised to keep the two separate in their own discourse.
It’s also not lost on me that I’m essentially saying “stay away from politics” in a post that’s inherently political. Yet, there is a way to discuss legislation and politicking in a rational and dispassionate way that is not inflammatory and doesn’t hurl insults or use meaningless buzzwords. Do that.