Dissolving Disney's Reedy Creek would cause massive tax hike to Orange County

The problem is that their voters seem to think that oppressing every non-white hetero person at the cost of democracy is a benefit.

Yep. It’s all about what they can do to keep other people down. I guess in their twisted minds that elevates their miserable lives.

This is cancel culture on steroids.

Twitter thread with a summary of the financial impact:

https://twitter.com/npapantoniswftv/status/1517272880882585602?s=21...BH_ODHB3tA

https://www.thedailybeast.com/seth-meyers-drags-pervy-ted-cruz-for-...having-sex

From an accounting perspective (and without digging into Florida law), Reddy Creek presumably collects sufficient revenue (call them taxes, fees or pixie dust assessments) to pay for/provide the services that it provides. Same is true of the $1 billion+ in debt RC has (which presumably isn't payable tomorrow but rather over a number of years like 10, 20 or 30). Revenues should be planned to make required debt service requirements as well.

So it seems to me from an accounting perspective, you can transfer the responsibilities to provide those services and make debt service payments to the applicable counties and the same revenue streams as well and the services would still be provided and the debt still paid. Disney would have less control over what happens/it does as a result though.

Florida law may not allow the revenue to be collected by the counties in the same format (don't know enough about Florida law to say). But that would be as of today. The Florida legislature and governor can make changes to Florida law to allow the same revenues from the same sources to flow to the counties. The special districts are a creation of the legislature. So the question isn't whether Florida law today would allow the same revenue sources to be raised by the counties but whether Florida legislature is unable to make it so. May be the case that it cannot. I just don't know enough about Florida law to say.

I've enjoyed your thoughts on this, but is there some kind of inside joke behind why you keep calling it "Reddy" Creek instead of Reedy?

A local journalist made a good point... Disney would trade autonomy, which is important to do the kind of traffic reengineering that they're doing right now, for less taxes. They already pay the same tax to the counties that they would regardless. However, they also pay an additional $163m a year to their own government, which in turn funds the fire department, builds the roads and maintains the utilities. In the new arrangement, they would no longer pay that, and that burden would be absorbed by the counties. So the strange beyond strange outcome is that this isn't actually good for anyone, except to some extent Disney. The idiots in Tallahassee have no idea what they're doing.

I don't think I should feel surprised by this, but you can already purchase t-shirts to show your support for Reedy Creek.

Or you could find a way to make Disney pay that $168 million to the counties instead. Never underestimate the ability of politicians to find creative ways to tax. And given how government works, those same services will likely require Disney to pay $200 million every year.

T-shirt is nice but the name is misspelled. ;)

bigboy--maybe an inside joke with high school physics teacher with that name but more likely sloppy reading. Duly noted. Thanks.

I’m leaving for Orlando tomorrow. It’s too bad the shirts weren’t a little more on time, I’d love to order a nice pink one and wear it to Springs.

Governor Dip**** signed the bill, to exactly no one's surprise. Should be interesting to see what happens next, but OC folks are generally flipping out. Meanwhile a guy in my neighborhood believes this is just a conspiracy to get everyone to take Disney's side.

Reedy Creek = Walt's Legacy.

Is now an OK time to say he's rolling over in his grave?

GoBucks89 said:

There hasn't been a party that actually wanted limited government in my lifetime.

Right, but at least on one side they are usually pretty open and honest about their intention to increase the size/power/reach of the government - universal health care, more regulation, etc. While the other side just straight up gaslights people by saying they're for one thing while frequently doing exactly the opposite, which is the hypocrisy I think bigboy was pointing out.

Which is exactly why both parties suck hard.

I've got a lot of thoughts about this but right now I'll just say, the only real winners in this will be lawyers.

And, I will add that what we have been witnessing over the past five years...at many levels...is not governing. There is plenty of blame to go around.

No, everything is about grievance. But the caveat there is that, as Brandon was indicating, is that the grievance isn't all morally equivalent. It's not even close. One side fears anyone who is not white, straight and Christian, and is willing to subvert democracy to address that fear, while the other seeks simple equity and inclusion in society. The latter is not being "woke," it's just basic human respect. (And yes, I concede there are elements on the left that go too far, but this isn't that situation.)

The Verge covered this story.

Jeff said:

Meanwhile a guy in my neighborhood believes this is just a conspiracy to get everyone to take Disney's side.

I can't figure this one out. Who is behind the conspiracy? I assume he thinks it is Disney because they took a stand which "forced" the Governor to respond against them which gets people on Disney's side?

why does everything need to be a conspiracy?

Because that's the people who hijacked "conservatism" and the GOP.