Since allies of Florida Gov. Ron DeSantis took over Walt Disney World’s government earlier this year, morale has deteriorated, the governing district has been politicized and cronyism permeates the organization

  • Jake Farm@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    31
    arrow-down
    11
    ·
    1 year ago

    Walt Disney World getting to be exempt by state laws was pure corpo corruption to begin with.

    • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      27
      ·
      1 year ago

      They were not exempt from state laws. They just essentially ran their own municipality as opposed to being within one run by a nearby city or county. This also meant that they had to operate the government organizations of a municipality for the Reedy Creek Improvement District like police and fire, including taxes, etc. in addition to operating everything for the park itself. However, since the land owned by Disney was the only thing in the district, that wasn’t really an issue.

      The only reason you don’t really see this elsewhere is that amusement parks usually aren’t built on 27,000 acres of empty swampland with nothing else nearby. Amusement parks are almost always built near existing cities and municipalities already governing the areas. Disney World was built in the middle of a swamp with nothing nearby originally for it to affect.

      The Florida State Legislature in 1967 created the Reedy Creek Improvement District after Walt petitioned for more autonomy so they could build EPCOT, which was originally going to be a fully planned “community of tomorrow”. After Walt’s death the company decided not to get into city-building however, so EPCOT became more focused on the idea rather than actually building a city.

      It’s been operating semi-independently ever since, paying taxes, maintaining roads, police, fire, etc. just fine while allowing Disney to expand the park as needed. The only reason it became an “issue” was DeSantis not liking Disney’s politics and deciding to go after them for daring to speak out against his politics, which the US Supreme Court has continuously said over the years is clearly protected by the First Amendment. Notably his first attempt to “punish” Disney was going to saddle nearby counties with millions of dollars in debt and requirements to manage police, fire, etc. which they simply wouldn’t be able to do. No thought went into it whatsoever, it was simply a State Governor wanting to punish a company for publicly being against his politics.

      • Natanael@slrpnk.net
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        1 year ago

        They were mostly self governing like a corporate municipality. And state laws were AFAICT rarely enforced (probably in part because they didn’t need to be particularly transparent)

  • halcyoncmdr@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    16
    ·
    1 year ago

    What a surprise, the changes made by a wannabe fascist dictator Governor trying to “punish” a company for daring to talk bad about his politics resulted in new terrible management. Who would have seen that coming? Everyone.

    • Endorkend@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      19
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      The area it is in.

      The park itself is 39 miles² or 101km².

      That’s the same size as the city nearest to me (which is 102km²).

      The city of Boston is 125km².