The DeSantis gambit

[kookbreaker]

Let remember that the changes Disney made required that Desantis’s leeches not pay attention to several public announcements. They were too busy padding their patronage jobs to notice.

 

[Donal]

Like I said in the Hershel Walker thread

But, Republicans these days don't even bother to learn what laws they need to get around to make this stuff happen. And its not just the candidates. Even their advisors and staff seem to be clueless about what's involve in running for and performing the duties of elected office. Campaign managers, legal counsel, comms teams, etc all seem to be lackeys, grifter, and\or internet trolls rather than serious professionals.

 

[Ziggurat]

are you predicting that the Disney move to retain control will be overturned/ annulled ?

Yes.

If you want an in-depth analysis of why that's likely to happen, you can check one out here:

This is a breakdown of CFTOD's state suit to have the courts declare that the development agreements are null and void under Florida law. And if that happens, then Disney's federal suit basically collapses.

ETA: He starts getting into the meat of the problems with the development agreement around the 26 minute mark.

 

[Armitage72]

Taking a break from Disney, a bill has been sent to DeSantis that will allow Florida's roads to be paved using mildly radioactive industrial waste from the fertilizer industry.

Roads in Florida could soon include phosphogypsum — a radioactive waste material from the fertilizer industry — under a bill lawmakers have sent to Gov. Ron DeSantis.

Conservation groups are urging DeSantis to veto the bill, saying phosphogypsum would hurt water quality and put road construction crews at a higher risk of cancer.

HB 1191 would compel the Florida Transportation Department to study using phosphogypsum in paving projects, calling for "demonstration projects using phosphogypsum in road construction aggregate material to determine its feasibility as a paving material."

Don't worry. I'm sure they have plenty of time do do their evaluation.

The bill sets a deadline of April 1, 2024, giving the transportation agency less than a year to complete its work and make a recommendation.

 

[Ziggurat]

Don't worry. I'm sure they have plenty of time do do their evaluation.

It's not a new idea, and it has been studied quite a bit already. For example:

https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2405844022028067
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9667268/

Phosphogypsum disposal is an environmental challenge. Keeping it piled up in ever-growing stacks (as we do now) is far from ideal. Finding a way to recycle the stuff would have major advantages.

Apparently the EPA approved its use in road construction back in 2020:
https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-approves-use-phosphogypsum-road-construction
but then reversed itself in 2021:
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...for-use-of-phosphogypsum-in-road-construction

Note that this Florida bill only authorizes studying PG for road use. The EPA ban on actual road construction with PG remains in effect, and even if the commission recommends its adoption, EPA approval would still be needed to actually go ahead.

Also note that Florida has a particular interest in finding a way to recycle PG because it's a leading producer of PG, and therefore has a lot of PG disposal stacks it would like to limit or get rid of.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

And how much is Florida going to get paid for dealing with this hazardous waste?
And are they going to use it initially in affluent neighborhoods?

 

[Armitage72]

Apparently the EPA approved its use in road construction back in 2020:
https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-approves-use-phosphogypsum-road-construction
but then reversed itself in 2021:
https://www.federalregister.gov/doc...for-use-of-phosphogypsum-in-road-construction

The linked article mentions that.

The EPA says "phosphogypsum remains prohibited from use in road construction," as it has been almost continuously for more than 30 years.

Under former President Donald Trump, the EPA briefly rescinded that policy starting in October 2020. But it reinstated the rule in June 2021.

Andrew Wheeler had it approved on behalf of a fertilizer lobbying group and then the EPA said the required information for the approval was never provided and they restored its original status.
"Today, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Administrator Andrew Wheeler approved a request from The Fertilizer Institute (TFI) to allow phosphogypsum to be used in government road construction projects."
"Upon further review, EPA has determined that the approval was premature and should be withdrawn because the request did not contain all of the required information."

 

[dudalb]

Desantis going to ship more illilegal immigrants to Democratic cities.
Act is old, Ronnie, won't get the attention he got last time.
I think he is beginning to get desperate.

 

[dudalb]

I am looking forward to Disney and Marvel villians that will bear a certain resemblence, physical or otherwise to Meatball Ron.l You know that is coming.

 

[dudalb]

Yes.

If you want an in-depth analysis of why that's likely to happen, you can check one out here:

This is a breakdown of CFTOD's state suit to have the courts declare that the development agreements are null and void under Florida law. And if that happens, then Disney's federal suit basically collapses.

ETA: He starts getting into the meat of the problems with the development agreement around the 26 minute mark.

You are a good loyal follower of your new Dear Leader.

 

[dudalb]

are you predicting that the Disney move to retain control will be overturned/ annulled ?

because if not, it seems very much like a master stroke, compared to having to deal with a bunch of people who objectively have no clue whatsoever about the Special District.

Dear Leader is always right.

 

[TurkeysGhost]

Yes.

If you want an in-depth analysis of why that's likely to happen, you can check one out here:

This is a breakdown of CFTOD's state suit to have the courts declare that the development agreements are null and void under Florida law. And if that happens, then Disney's federal suit basically collapses.

ETA: He starts getting into the meat of the problems with the development agreement around the 26 minute mark.

Gonna be real with you my friend, ain't nobody watching a 90 minute youtube video.

If there's some useful information in that you want to share you're going to have to paraphrase it or find some other source, preferably text that's much, much shorter.

 

[a_unique_person]

Not really. That last-minute development agreement wasn't some master stroke, it was an act of desperation, done by people who didn't understand Florida special district law in detail (because that's not their area of specialty) and who consequently messed up some key details which will likely bite them on the ass.



Given that so far Disney hasn't been denied permission to do anything, I don't think they can really rely on this play.

You can't think that it could be otherwise. It's not often that corporations have legislation specifically drawn up against them to further a politicians hopes of becoming president. So, in the time they had, it was not a bad tactic.


Popehat says on his latest podcast that DeSantis is an idiot for telling the whole world in his book the intent of the legislation, that this is Trump level stupidity. It's not a simple open and shut case like you portray and the damage it does to DeSantis will be ongoing for years.

 

[Ziggurat]

You can't think that it could be otherwise. It's not often that corporations have legislation specifically drawn up against them to further a politicians hopes of becoming president. So, in the time they had, it was not a bad tactic.

Acts of desperation aren't unreasonable when you're desperate. But that's still what it is. And again, they screwed up the execution. There are serious substantive problems with the development agreement, but the procedural problems were largely avoidable if they had known what they were doing.

Popehat says on his latest podcast that DeSantis is an idiot for telling the whole world in his book the intent of the legislation, that this is Trump level stupidity. It's not a simple open and shut case like you portray and the damage it does to DeSantis will be ongoing for years.

I haven't read what Popehat said so I don't know if he's making the same error as you, but you're confusing intent of legislation with DeSantis's motive. They aren't the same. The intent of the legislation is to make Disney play by the same rules as everyone else. That's not a problem. As for DeSantis's motives, I wouldn't assume that's the problem you think it is either. It doesn't matter how his motives play with people who were never going to vote for him no matter what. A lot of people don't view this through nearly the same lens you do, and probably Popehat as well.

 

[The Great Zaganza]

Acts of desperation aren't unreasonable when you're desperate. But that's still what it is. And again, they screwed up the execution. There are serious substantive problems with the development agreement, but the procedural problems were largely avoidable if they had known what they were doing.



I haven't read what Popehat said so I don't know if he's making the same error as you, but you're confusing intent of legislation with DeSantis's motive. They aren't the same. The intent of the legislation is to make Disney play by the same rules as everyone else. That's not a problem. As for DeSantis's motives, I wouldn't assume that's the problem you think it is either. It doesn't matter how his motives play with people who were never going to vote for him no matter what. A lot of people don't view this through nearly the same lens you do, and probably Popehat as well.

You are getting desperate.

 

[Segnosaur]

So far Disney's lawyers have demonstrated that they are better at legal wrangling than them.

Not really. That last-minute development agreement wasn't some master stroke, it was an act of desperation....

Actually I think it was a masterstroke.

You see, Desantis holds a substantial amount of power (especially with the boot-lickers in the republican party helping him in the legislature). It is quite possible that Disney might lose (although I don't think its assured as you seem to think), but given the position they were in, dragging it out as long as they have through smart legal tactics is a good thing.

Disney could have just given up right from the start. "Sorry, god-emperor Desantis... we should have known better than to acknowledge that gay people exist.". It would have been a complete victory for Desantis, and he could have gone on to implement more of his pro-fascist agenda.

But by fighting Meatball Ron the way they have (with their very clever tactics), they have kept the issue prominent in the media. They have harmed Desantis on a public stage, gotten even hardcore republicans to question his viability as a presidential candidate. Possibly even given other right-wing politicians pause before they launch into similar culture wars against Disney. And they have elevated themselves, made Disney out to be the hero at a time when Disney gets a lot of criticism (such as "too powerful", "ruining starwars", "too much copyright protection").

Plus, as we pointed out before, we don't know what the end result will be, whether Disney will prevail at the end or meatball Ron and his merry band of pro-fascists will ultimately prevail.

I haven't read what Popehat said so I don't know if he's making the same error as you, but you're confusing intent of legislation with DeSantis's motive. They aren't the same. The intent of the legislation is to make Disney play by the same rules as everyone else.

Disney WAS "playing by the same rules" as everyone else.

Yes, they had the long-standing Reedy Creek agreement, but special districts are common in Florida, and having one was not illegal. Any company can probably request similar terms. If you approached florida and said "I want to invest a billion to create the Ziggurat wild and wacky fun park but with no gay people" they might consider setting up a similar type of agreement for you.

And their criticism of the "don't say gay" bill should have been covered by the first amendment, so meatball Ron's attempts to change the agreement for no other reason than "disney exercised free speech" is significant.

 

[Ziggurat]

Gonna be real with you my friend, ain't nobody watching a 90 minute youtube video.

That's fine. But it's a resource that's available, an in-depth analysis by a lawyer who specialized in Florida special districts. Basically nobody the press is quoting, or mentioned in this thread, has that specialty. It's worth watching if you really care about the legal details. Not everyone will, you don't have to, but they're quite relevant to figuring out how these lawsuits are likely to turn out.

If there's some useful information in that you want to share you're going to have to paraphrase it or find some other source, preferably text that's much, much shorter.

If you want a text resource, CFTOD's suit is all text, you can find it here:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1hZ2LWi3CjvRu-qjh-baueO-Hy1kpR_yt/view
Legal arguments really start on page 11 and go to page 34 (most of the length of the document is an attachment of the development agreement).

Problems with the development agreement can be put in two categories: substantive and procedural. Substantive problems are problems with the contents of the agreement. Procedural problems are problems with how the development agreement was made.

My guess is that the state court will probably throw the agreement out on procedural grounds. Florida has very strict rules about the required procedures for making these sorts of development agreements, and if you don't meet every single procedural requirement, the agreement is invalid. You can't fix deficiencies after the fact, you would need to start over (which obviously isn't happening). So if the claims of procedural inadequacies are correct (for example, that they did not send proper notice to all property owners in the district), then that suffices to throw out the agreement. No complicated analysis is required, it's a very simple factual question, so that's probably the easiest path for the court to take.

As an example of a substantive problem, local governments (and RCID was a local government) cannot give their powers away to private parties. But that's what the development agreement did. The legislative act that created RCID gave it certain powers, and it has those powers and nothing else. It does not have the authority to grant those powers to anyone else. There are other substantive problems as well, but the courts don't even need to touch on these issues if they dismiss the development agreement on procedural grounds.

And note, if the state court invalidates the development agreement, then that basically invalidates Disney's federal suit. They are basically suing to enforce the development agreement, but if the development agreement is void under state law, then that's not possible.

 

[jadebox]

you're confusing intent of legislation with DeSantis's motive ...

Wow ...

But, judge I just wanted to inherit his money. That was my motive. It wasn't my intent to murder him. It was just a way to get his money!

And the intent in this case was to punish Disney for speaking out against the stupid law. The motive is mixed ... to get back at Disney, to prevent others from criticizing, and to score points among the "anti-woke" people.

 

[Segnosaur]

Nice work if you can get it...

From: WESH.com (Florida NBC affilate)
The people appointed by Gov. Ron DeSantis to oversee the land where Disney World sits will choose a new administrator Wednesday. The Board of Supervisors for the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, formerly known as Reedy Creek Improvement District, plans to hire Glen Gilzean as a district administrator. Gilzean will receive a salary of $400,000 per year. Gilzean is also the CEO of the Central Florida Urban League and a supporter of Gov. DeSantis...

Remind me again why republicans are supposed to be the ones who are most concerned about government overspending?

 

[Ziggurat]

But by fighting Meatball Ron the way they have (with their very clever tactics), they have kept the issue prominent in the media. They have harmed Desantis on a public stage, gotten even hardcore republicans to question his viability as a presidential candidate. Possibly even given other right-wing politicians pause before they launch into similar culture wars against Disney. And they have elevated themselves, made Disney out to be the hero at a time when Disney gets a lot of criticism (such as "too powerful", "ruining starwars", "too much copyright protection").

You're assuming that this will play to the general public the same way it's playing to you. That's not a safe assumption. Furthermore, you're mistaken about some fundamental aspects of the conflict, as we will get to in a moment.

Disney WAS "playing by the same rules" as everyone else.

No, they were not.

Did you know that under RCID, Disney never actually needed to abide by building codes? Nominally they were supposed to, but the only body that could enforce those codes was RCID, and Disney controlled RCID. They policed themselves. Nobody else operates that way.

Yes, they had the long-standing Reedy Creek agreement, but special districts are common in Florida, and having one was not illegal.

Obviously RCID wasn't illegal, since it was created by Florida legislation. But you're wrong, RCID was unlike every other special district in Florida. There are no other equivalents.

Any company can probably request similar terms.

Plenty of companies have tried. Universal did, for example. They have all been denied. You can get a special district made in Florida, but you can't get one like Reedy Creek. Florida has never repeated that mistake.

And it was a mistake. The legislature made the district under the assumption that Disney would build a city, which would mean that RCID's board would be elected by residents of that city. But Disney never made that city, and so was able to keep a stranglehold on RCID.