Become a Creator today!Start creating today - Share your story with the world!
Start for free
00:00:00
00:00:01
Nobody Has Any Chill - Also, Reedy Creek Updates
88 Plays1 year ago
- https://www.cnn.com/2023/03/30/politics/donald-trump-indictment/index.html
- Samsung's AI photo feature adds creepy teeth to baby photos | Boing Boing
- Binance, CEO Zhao Sued by US Over ‘Sham’ Compliance Measures (4)
- Twitter says source code was leaked on GitHub, now it’s trying to find the culprit - The Verge
- https://www.crazyforcrust.com/best-chocolate-chip-cookie-recipe/
Recommended
Transcript
Baseball Fandom and Team Loyalties
00:00:00
Speaker
Happy opening day. We're recording. Happy opening day. Jake, are you actually a baseball fan? Yeah. So I've told people this. The Oakland A's are my favorite team. Ooh. Ooh. Convince us that you're not a poser. I agree. Yeah. I'm not a bandwagon A's fan. I don't know. That's a pretty bad bandwagon, anyway.
00:00:25
Speaker
Yeah. Unless the bandwagon was like 1987 to 89, right? When was Conseco and McGuire? Yeah. Oh, well, that was the early 90s was the Bash Bros. We had our money ball, the heyday money ball with the trio of Barry Zito and Mulder Hudson. Sure. We've had good times, good times, bad times. Nobody seems to care because they have been talking about leaving Oakland for like 20 years.
00:00:55
Speaker
uh i grew up a warriors fan which worked turned out okay turned out pretty good after losing for a long time an a's fan and a raider's fan the raider's left the warrior is half left but i still count them as there because they are in san francisco now same bay area right yeah yeah uh but if a's leave
00:01:16
Speaker
But first of all, in case you didn't know, if you're listening and you don't know, the A's owner has been tanking the team on purpose to try to sweeten up a way to move to Las Vegas. Well, it's also to get the better draft picks and stuff. There is a benefit to being the worst of the worst in terms of better draft picks and the benefits from the luxury tax redounds then to you more. It's more the luxury tax. He's not trying to win. He's trying to lose.
00:01:47
Speaker
But I've told people like if they move out of Oakland, I'm probably giving up on professional sports in general, like being a fan of a corporation. That is just like, you know, it feels like kind of just a matter of chance that I became, you know, a fan of compared to being a fan of a school in college football or college anything where you actually win, you have a literal connection to.
00:02:13
Speaker
Otherwise it's like, this is a corporation that doesn't care about you is basically just, you know, you, the, your loyalty to it is just a way that it can extract money from the government or from you. Uh, I don't remember what comedian loyalty to them is just a way they can extract money from you for their loyalty is just to the uniform. Yep. Yeah, exactly. Yeah. Yeah. All right. Well, I think we're going to start officially.
00:02:44
Speaker
Anything to get out of a question. Yeah. What was mine? What? I'm sorry. I can't hear you. He's a Yankees fan. He's a Yankees fan. Oh man. Yes. Yes. I mean, I think I, I think I knew that. I think I knew that we've had this conversation probably several times.
00:03:01
Speaker
What's your team Jason? The Braves. I'll still be your friend. Okay. Thank you. I'll still be your friend. My dad is a Yankees fan. He was born in Brooklyn, grew up on Long Island. He's the only Yankees fan and his family. They're all, the rest of them are all Mets fans. Uh, and so this is where my father who does, I don't think even knows that this podcast exists. I'll totally throw him under the bus. I'm the son of a just, uh, just a, uh, guiltless conscience free front runner from the 1980s. He's like,
00:03:29
Speaker
An LA Lakers fan, he's a Yankees fan, he's a Dallas Cowboys fan, Oklahoma college football fan, like just pick doing bad, bad things, kind of racist things. That's what I'm doing. Oh no. I like that. I'm rooting for you.
00:03:45
Speaker
Well, thank you. I'm rooting for me too. Most importantly, rooting for my client, but yeah, that's soon bad bosses. Jake, Jake, you're, uh, you're like retiring from the practice of law and just going to be a full time TV personality now. Yeah. I'm a professional talking head now.
Career Transition and Legal Drama
00:04:00
Speaker
My sole area that I'm talking head on is Florida local government law. So I'm sure the phone is going to be ringing off the hook for engagements, you know, CNN, Fox News.
00:04:16
Speaker
Yeah, this will not be a time-bound thing. This will just continue. Yeah, this train's never coming off the tracks. This will not be bound by the time of the last living descendant of King Charles plus 21 years. It will not be bound by that. It is in perpetuity. What a great tie-in to this week's topic. That was a beautiful segue. Yeah, that was really- Except we're not ready to segue now. Except we're not ready to segue yet. We got other stuff first. Yeah. No. Well, kind of. OK, so let's get the other stuff out of the way. So they're trying to put Big Donny in a cage, right? That's the big legal news today.
00:04:45
Speaker
Yeah, it seems that he's been indicted. It is happening. I say it's happening as we speak, but really what is there to do? An indictment exists and now we sit and we see if hopefully the y'all out there stay cool. Y'all, you know, the nation stays chill. Chill about this.
00:05:10
Speaker
It's just a little, it's just a little formal charge. It's okay. He's not going away forever. You know, he's getting up there, so maybe he does go away forever just by sheer coincidence, but you know. I thought Jake was going to channel, uh, I thought you were going to channel Stephen Colbert there for a second and just go, nation, nation, chill, everybody, everybody relax, nation.
00:05:33
Speaker
I didn't know he did that. I should have done that. I like that. That's good. It might have just been on the one episode of the Colbert Report that I ever watched. But now that's his thing to you, right? To me, yeah. That's his thing. It's just permanently imprinted. So as of right now, we don't know what the indictment is for. We haven't seen a count. It looks like it is still confidential inside the grand jury. And obviously, the prosecutors know about it. And I guess it's
00:06:01
Speaker
Unconfidential enough that it's been announced that there's been an indictment, but the actual indictment itself has not been released, right? Yeah. Yeah. As best I can tell, as of now, as of 10 minutes, they've said that it remains sealed. And I think it might remain sealed until arraignment. I don't remember. It's going to be filed under seal and announced in the coming days, according to
00:06:24
Speaker
CNN as of 7.13 PM today. I think it's pretty, yeah, huge news. I think it's pretty obvious that it's connected to the hush money that was paid to Stormy Daniels and potentially somebody else, right? That's what the grand jury was chasing after.
00:06:46
Speaker
That's what Cohen, his attorney, got in prison for, was for helping on that. I think he's said that's what it's about. They do not play with the secrecy of grand jury proceedings. Let me tell you, obviously, I'm not a New York attorney.
00:07:06
Speaker
In Florida, we have grand juries for only for the like most serious crimes. I think only for capital crimes. I knew this back when I was a public defender, but one time I won and make super certain that like, you know, Alabama or wherever there's something kind of fun. And then if he was to win that, that is also sort of funny. Just having a state you just can't go to. You know, I'm Florida says they won't extradite him. The thing is the States have, uh, have an agreement on extraditing everybody. That's,
00:07:36
Speaker
It's a thing. It seems like it would have to be a thing. Yeah. Yeah. Uh, so our, our New York and California, just not going to start extraditing people that have fled Florida. Like, is it just going to start being something like that? I, the implications over this one guy are kind of, are
00:07:56
Speaker
Very annoying. Each state would become a hellscape for the escapees from the other state. New York would be completely filled with Florida criminals, and Florida would be completely filled with New York criminals. Sorry, Jason, go ahead. Florida is already filled with New York criminals. I was going to say, we got plenty. It's going to become like a gas filling the chamber that it's in. Oh my god. Yes. Sorry. That's the only sound effect I have, and it was delayed, but I had to hit it. Sorry. Go ahead, Jake.
00:08:23
Speaker
No, I was making a joke. You should have saved it for my joke. It's going to be like a gas filling the chamber that it's in. We're just going to equally distribute all criminals throughout the entire United States. That's how it's going to end up being. Thank you. It's not really, not really rimshot worthy, but you know. Okay. You get one too, though.
00:08:41
Speaker
Thank you. So going back to the original question of, is this guy ever going to see the inside of a jail cell? Certainly not. He will not see the inside of a jail cell, right? Like we spend so much money on the protection of current and former presidents and the people attendant to the current and former presidents. We spend so much money on their security that I suspect what will happen is there will be some sort of arrangement of something that we'll call
00:09:05
Speaker
I'm going to put up the little bunny ear air quotes like house arrest or something like that. He would be confined or something like that. And the secret service is going to be air quotes guarding him. And there will be a consequence of, hey, look, you've got this criminal conviction on your record, assuming that he's convicted.
00:09:27
Speaker
Okay, great. Thanks. He's 79 right now, I think. He's going to be 80 or 81 by the time, realistically. I think he's 79. I don't know. A quick Google will tell us one way or another, but he's very old.
00:09:47
Speaker
not a particularly healthy individual. I assume that he would end up doing the, oh gosh, what's the guy who was just saying, let me out of jail because I'm so sick and old. Oh gosh, was it not the locker? There's so many people.
00:10:04
Speaker
Yeah, I don't know. Oh no, it's Harvey Weinstein. Harvey Weinstein. Oh, really? He's doing that? Yeah, I don't know. But anyway, I don't think there's any chance he sees the inside of a jail cell other than something perfunctory like he sees the inside of a jail cell as he's walking by in the precinct where he surrenders himself for his mugshot. Like, OK, great.
00:10:29
Speaker
Maybe he'll stick his head in there and take like, uh, take one of those goofy pictures. Like you ever go to a theme park and you put your head in the stock, your head in your hands and the stocks and you take a picture that way. Like, yeah, maybe he'll take one for his campaign or something. Look, I'm behind bars. They arrested me.
00:10:45
Speaker
Yeah, that's a good point. The protection thing. Is it difficult? I mean, how is that going to work? How is he going to be? It just doesn't, it doesn't seem sort of administratively feasible to put him in anywhere other than a house arrest thing in Mar-a-Lago and let him haunt there with, you know, with his secret service agents. Two members of the secret service are going to have to commit crimes. It'll be, you know, it'll be fun. They'll just draw straws. Whoever does that has to commit a crime and become his roommate.
00:11:09
Speaker
His cellmate. It's the ninth season of Prison Break or whatever. Remember that show that was where the one guy had to like get into jail to get his brother out or whatever? Yeah. It's more than that. It's two secret service agents that need to commit enough crimes in order to get in to go with the president to protect or the former president to protect
Disney's Legal Strategies and Governance
00:11:24
Speaker
him. I was wrong. He's not 79. He's 76. A spry 76. Oh my God. Yeah. Wow. He's going to be around. He's going to live forever.
00:11:34
Speaker
Okay. Well, I think we've beaten this, uh, this, uh, dead horse to, to, to water and it's not gonna drink. I'm so sorry. I'm so sorry, Mr. Trump. I didn't mean a dead horse. Um, moving on, right? Uh, the main topic we really want to talk about greedy Creek, which is now called, I never get the name right. It's the central tourism, something central Florida, Florida oversight board.
00:11:58
Speaker
OK, you're the expert. Am I what you got? Somebody asked me this today and I was like, wait, I think this is it. And I told I told a reporter so hi, I'm Jacob Schumer. I am best known for my Bloomberg pieces about Reedy Creek because I became the guy because one day people were wrong on the Internet about whether or not Reedy Creek could be dissolved. And I decided to step in and stop that.
00:12:26
Speaker
Um, but yeah, so your life has changed forever and my life was changed forever. Not in any meaningful way, except to that people and my, my bar association come up and ask me about reading Greek, which is fun. I love that. I love that. I love talking to people about it. Um,
00:12:46
Speaker
But so the lose today in case brief, brief rundown after a battle last year where the Florida legislature decided they were going to dissolve Reedy Creek because this is the special district that governs Disney World was basically handed to Disney to control
00:13:05
Speaker
and has all kinds of special rights, the ability to control the land use in Disney World, completely in control of Disney from the 1969, I believe, or 1967.
00:13:17
Speaker
I forget, uh, until last, until last year or until this year, uh, they, after a fight with Disney over, uh, the, uh, don't say gay, uh, education bill, uh, they passed a law saying that Reedy Creek was going to dissolve, but that wasn't feasible for a million reasons, both practical and legal. And they were like, don't worry, we're going to fix it. We're going to fix it. Um, but legally they basically couldn't do very much except for take control of the district.
00:13:47
Speaker
which they did. That's what they did in January and February of this year. February is ultimately when they passed it. They basically took Reedy Creek, renamed it the Central Florida Tourism Oversight Board, said everything continues and in effect, this is the same district, it's renamed this Governor's Appointees will control.
00:14:06
Speaker
So in February there was like a lot of news about hey this this takeover happened is Disney Disney gonna fight it and they didn't Disney was just like Okay, we we look forward to working under your new system And
00:14:24
Speaker
And little did they, little did the governor acknowledge, maybe knew, little did the media realize what they were looking at. What came out today, or what was a big deal yesterday and today, was that all the members of the Florida, Central Florida to SIFTOD, I told a reporter I was going to keep calling it Reedy Creek forever. It has a good nickname.
00:14:51
Speaker
but sift Todd board members were like, uh, it turns out that Disney and the previous Reedy Creek board before the law came into effect wrote a bunch of agreements that are long-term agreements where basically our board is now has no power. That's what they said. It took, it stripped all the power away from us and it made Disney, the government of Reedy Creek.
00:15:17
Speaker
And they made a big deal about it in the media. And these agreements were entered on February 8th and January 29th, or late January. February 8th is the big day.
00:15:36
Speaker
What was the actual Reedy Creek conversion date where it went from being Reedy Creek under the control of Disney and its favorable board and then turned into Central Florida Tourism Oversight District?
00:15:53
Speaker
I want to say it was around February 17th. I want to say it was around February 17th. It was not immediately after the law was passed, which was passed on the 10th.
00:16:08
Speaker
The governor took a little bit to sign the bill. It might have been a week or two, but that was when that happened. You can look it up. So, yeah, this became a huge story that Disney had quietly, it was said in these articles, entered into these long-term agreements that took away the power of the district.
00:16:35
Speaker
And here's what this is the, this is the Jake down of what actually happened here, which is that the Jake break down. This is, let's clarify Jake breakdown. It's the Jake. Yes. This is a joke. We already had audience try to keep up TM, TM, TM. Uh, so what, what the agreements are, they're like, they're like seven agreements. Um, and.
00:17:01
Speaker
But two of them are more important than others like five of them are license agreements because Reedy Creek owns a bunch of infrastructure that Disney uses and basically these are agreements that say Reedy Creek you're gonna keep doing this thing sift Todd you're gonna keep doing this thing for ten years 20 years however long it is and Disney gets to keep using it which is
00:17:27
Speaker
Uh, these are normal agreements. Like it might be like, why would a, why would a government give a corporation this for free? Governments do that normally, but especially in reading Creek where that was kind of their command, their legal commands until, I mean, even now is to assist Disney world and existing. Basically that's their, their legal command. There's basically nothing else there, right? Yeah. That's that is it. They like Disney property. Is it?
00:17:55
Speaker
Um, but there, are we talking about the kinds, are we talking about the kinds of agreements that a developer would ordinarily make with like a zoning board or a local government development board that would be, uh, related to the developer having some sort of planned, uh, development or mixed use development or something like that, where you get some agreement from the government that's going to last over a long period of time. That's the sort of typical thing that we're seeing repeated here with Disney, right?
00:18:23
Speaker
Well, the ones that I just talked about, not exactly. It would be like a small part of that agreement. The five that I just mentioned, the license agreement, would be like the city saying, hey, we have a parking garage. We want you to develop this land. So in order to get you to develop it, you get to use our parking garage forever. And that's pretty normal.
00:18:47
Speaker
But the one kind of thing that you're talking about, there are two of them that are really major things that stick in the craw of the new CIFTA board. One of them is a development agreement, which is a statutory agreement. It tracks the statute basically perfectly, which basically says,
00:19:09
Speaker
For the next 30 years, Disney gets to do whatever it wants with its property, the existing land development regulations in place at the time, which are very favorable to Disney, I'm sure, will continue to exist on the property for 30 years. And that's explicitly something that is allowed under the law. And so the CIFTA board is like, this basically takes away all of our power to do land use regulations.
00:19:37
Speaker
So pausing on that, the reason you want to do that is because if you have long term development, I'm asking this, I'm not stating this. The reason why you would want to do this is because if you had long term development plan, like the non spiteful reason to do this is you're engaging with a developer that has some sort of long term plans and
00:19:53
Speaker
the developer or you or both of you are concerned that local land use laws could change, right? And so this plan we're going to do, that's cool. I will enter into this agreement with you, but I want to be certain we're going to get to do it and see it to completion. So it's, it's, it's, uh, uh, able to be done under the current law. So we need to have something in the agreement that says it doesn't matter what happens. We can do this in perpetuity. Okay. Yeah. Cause development can take many, many years. And so like,
00:20:20
Speaker
you know, some people are saying, is it really okay that they that they did this specifically to avoid a law that was about to come into place? That's like, yeah, that's kind of the point. Yeah, that's good. Yeah, because that's the like, the purpose, one of the purposes is to, to get these agreements is to get these rights in place, knowing that a turnover is about to happen.
00:20:45
Speaker
Um, and so you don't have to worry about the turnover because you don't know I mean it happens all the time in development it's a developer gets through a huge development through a board and everybody on that board gets thrown out because the people are mad about the development and so uh, you know, this is basically a way of a developer saying like we don't want to have a situation where we get approval and then everything gets thrown out and then they make you know Our life our life becomes miserable
00:21:15
Speaker
Right. That makes sense. I mean, that seems like a legitimate use. And it seems like a sort of avoidance of waste type issue as well, because you don't want a developer to engage in something, start on a project, have the whole board get thrown out, not be able to continue on the project. And now you have some sort of halfway done, I don't know what these, I don't know what really would be being considered down there, like casinos and hotels, or I don't know what. But whatever, you don't want some half done. Disney being notorious for casinos. It's definitely a casino.
00:21:42
Speaker
Right. So, uh, Jake, can you tell me, can you tell me, can you explain to me, uh, you mentioned that the, that this locks in the, basically the existing land use structures, uh, for, for 30 years is the 30 years, something that they specifically chose is a statutorily prescribed. How do we, how do we come upon 30 years? That's the statutory max.
00:22:09
Speaker
Okay. Gotcha. Yeah. And I was going to go through the two agreements, but I'll just stick on the development agreement for, and tell you guys what exactly, what actually happened. And thinking about it more, I'm a little surprised about how big of a deal they made about this. Cause it's not, it's very, it's very standard. Like the thing that's nonstandard about it is that it covers, I believe basically all the district, basically the whole district. So they're like,
00:22:37
Speaker
Why would he, you know, this is so strange. It covers so much property. Usually these agreements are for like specific developments. And the thing is, it is a specific development. That development is just incredibly large. It's just maybe the biggest development in the country. And it's Disney World. So it's really a difference in degree rather than a difference in kind from all the normal development agreements that come in all the time.
00:23:07
Speaker
The reason why I'm a little surprised they made a big deal out of it is because there is a giant exception to the freezing in place. Giant might be the wrong word. But there are ways to apply new regulations under the agreement, and that's if you make specific findings that the new regulations are essential to the public health
00:23:31
Speaker
or that circumstances have changed that from the original enactment of the development agreement. And it's not legally clear whether Disney has a good way to challenge those findings once the government has found that those things have happened.
00:23:49
Speaker
But it's something they'd have to deal with. If they wanted to apply some land use regulation to Disney and Disney wanted to fight about it, they could have a fight about it.
00:24:03
Speaker
Um, but it's, you know, it's definitely a big, they made it a big deal. They made it sound like they didn't have the ability to do anything. They have the, they have so much to do, even if both of these agreements were interpreted to their maximum effect. And I'll talk about the other agreement in a second. They have so much to do. They are one of the biggest, like in terms of employees, in terms of things they do, governments and general purpose governments out there. They're bigger than a lot of small cities by law.
00:24:33
Speaker
when it comes to how many infrastructure people they have and building people they have. They have a big job to do. The number of citizens who actually live in the district is like either zero or very near zero, right? It's just not very many people. You got Mickey, you got Goofy, I can't name them all.
00:24:52
Speaker
Do you cast members sleeping on the property? Among cities or districts like this, they probably have some of the highest tax revenue that's available. We probably have an extremely large number of public servant employees
00:25:15
Speaker
like the streets department, the sanitation department, fire, and policing and stuff like that. So huge district, not in terms of the number of people that live there. Maybe not even that huge in terms of the acreage that's covered, but huge in terms of the economic footprint of it. I mean, they too have two small cities within it. Oh, really? Reedy Creek size. Let's see what Google shows me.
00:25:44
Speaker
I have a question. 39 square miles. Wow. I'm going to compare it to a relatively medium-sized city. Medium-sized as in about 50,000 people. Also 32 square. I did it. I did a great job. Apopka, which is a city right next to me, has 32 square miles compared to 39 per degree. Apopka's got about 50,000 people in it.
00:26:09
Speaker
So it's a big, important district. Yeah. Yeah. Maybe, actually, Apopka's approaching more like 60,000. Anyway. So in terms of these land use laws that are frozen, I had a quick question that you were talking about. You were talking about how they...
00:26:25
Speaker
Generally, you enumerate the different projects that you're trying to freeze in place. And you were saying that basically, well, right, this district is one giant project, right? Do they need to enumerate the land, for lack of a better term, like land use laws that are being frozen in place? Or is it just sort of like take the whole book and we're going to operate under this for 30 years? It's the whole book. Really? Wow. And the law says so.
00:26:52
Speaker
One interesting part about this is that's a development agreement under the statute. The statute explicitly says the land development regulations in place for that city at the time are the ones that govern for the duration of the agreement. That's what it says. It says that in the statute.
00:27:08
Speaker
You know, they didn't even have to have that in there. Right. They could have just been like, this is a development agreement and it would have happened by operation of law. I mean, it makes sense as long as you have that escape hatch for the health and safety, because you wouldn't like putting that administrative burden on having to like, I got to sort out every possible zoning, little tiny thing I need to come up with in order to, you know, continue this project. It makes sense. You just want to look, this is the book. I want this to be the set of rules we need to operate under. Okay. Sorry. Go on.
00:27:35
Speaker
And the agreement itself has like, here's the height limitations. The height limitations are whatever the FAA allows us to do, the maximum allowed under FAA regulations. Outstanding. And then it has like a list of like tables of density and stuff like that that they are allowed.
00:27:55
Speaker
And that's stuff that has to be in there under the under the statute It's like the list of permits that they need etc, etc But if you're a city government if you're a county government and you have something called home rule power Which means that you can act?
00:28:14
Speaker
In always consistent with the government and you don't need a statute so it's pretty it's not it's pretty ordinary for development agreements and not follow the statute at all and Instead do something else. So I think some people were
00:28:29
Speaker
This is this kind of niche, but some local government officials were like a little bit confused about why they were laying it out this way because it's so annoying. And it's so there's stuff in there that's very strange. And it's like, oh, the statute requires this, actually, because they needed that statute in this case.
00:28:48
Speaker
I see. Okay. Yeah. But so that's one agreement. And maybe like that one might be the most dramatic, I guess, depending, depending on your perspective, but it's also pretty, I can't find a good reason to say that it's illegal.
00:29:05
Speaker
But the other one, the other agreement that's kind of crazy is this restrictive covenant. And this is a, you know, like a HOA covenant where it's an agreement that the district, Reedy Creek agreed to that binds Reedy Creek's own property so that Reedy Creek cannot use its own property except for things that Disney allows it to be used for.
00:29:31
Speaker
um which is no kidding that's out of like i've never seen that that is crazy yeah uh like that's like the guy who's been bitten by the werewolf who locks himself in the cage because he knows he's going to become the monster and he'd be like don't let me out no matter what right he's basically locking themselves in before they become the monster okay yeah
00:29:50
Speaker
The thing is, I could see it being valid for a specific project. We are interested in doing this development, but we want to make sure that we're not going to have a competitor. So you agree on this other parcel that you're going to sell that you won't allow this, and so add this restricted company.
00:30:12
Speaker
in a specific case, I could see that. But right now, it almost looks like, because it affects all of the district property,
00:30:22
Speaker
as far as I can tell um it's it's basically like okay we'll agree that we only it put themselves in a straight jacket like the like a werewolf like you were saying right it really put themselves in a straight jacket um which is kind of like why do you exist if you don't trust yourself that's that's maybe uh
00:30:44
Speaker
that agreement. And they made a big deal about it there being a veto mechanism for Disney can veto things through architectural review process. It discusses that Disney needs to provide comment. I'm not sure whether or not that actually gives them a veto, it gives them feedback.
00:31:03
Speaker
Um, but that's something they could fight about. But this is one where I could definitely see a court being like, no, this wasn't a valid public purpose. This was you, you have to continue your job. Uh, really Creek, you have to continue your job of being in government and putting, putting yourself in a straight jacket. Isn't actually that beneficial though. Also I could see it being held up because the purpose of the central Florida tourism oversight district is still to enable tourism.
00:31:33
Speaker
is still to help Disney World exist. And it doesn't help Disney World to exist if they have a competitor government building bowling alleys or whatever it is. Right. So if the purpose of the Central Florida Tourism Oversight Board, the SIFTOD, is to facilitate tourism, who knows how to facilitate tourism better than Disney World when it comes to what is
00:31:58
Speaker
The sift Todd now and was Reedy Creek before like the it is Disney of course Disney is gonna have like the most important say in that situation Is it is it? kind of analogous to Let's say like you're talking about
00:32:16
Speaker
signing a commercial lease with a landlord and you have the restrictive covenant that says, okay, landlord in this strip mall, you can't allow another hot dog stand or hot dog restaurant to go into the strip mall. And if another hot dog restaurant goes in on property that you own or you can't put in another hot dog restaurant on property that you own within X miles because we want to be able to control the hot dog store market.
00:32:45
Speaker
Is that kind of what they're doing just on a much grander scale? It's like that. The only problem is that the consideration in this case is maybe a little as a little weak compared to that one. Because you know, in that one, there's the there's the direct competition.
00:33:02
Speaker
issue right whereas here, you know, they they excluded direct one of the things they prevented was direct competition But also stuff that's not at all competition Also, they said you have to keep using these these properties for their existing use So it'd be interesting. I'd be had I if they actually come to blows over this which is
00:33:27
Speaker
I, the, I'll, I'll get into the other stuff around these agreements in a second, but if they actually come in, I'm showing with this, I'd be interested. I'm showing my ignorance with Disney on this, but to what extent are there other property owners within the confines of Reedy Creek? Oh, I don't think any, how much competition could there, so then wouldn't that also be an issue with that? Where's, where, where's competition coming from? Well, the competition, the property, isn't that already the district itself?
00:33:52
Speaker
is I guess the issue. But I mean, in terms of the legitimate public use type argument, if you were to say, well, my, my concern is that we could have future competition, aren't you only, isn't that sort of a tacit, tacit acknowledgement that it would be the district itself that is the, like, isn't that sort of a tautology kind of? Well, the district could sell that property. Yeah, there you go. So, oh, I see. So the district owns like the property that they put the fire station on and the district owns the property where they build the sewage treatment plant.
00:34:21
Speaker
And in the event that they ever had excess sewage treatment facility there and they wanted to sell it off to a neighboring district or something like that, they're saying that you can't. Disney is, I think, probably reserving for themselves to the extent that they have a veto power and that's not just an overly simplifying way of putting it.
00:34:41
Speaker
We're saying that, uh, let's say, uh, imagine entertainment, right? That's who does the minions and grew movies. If they wanted to build imagine imagination or illumination, whatever it is. Uh, if they wanted to build an illumination world next door to Disney world, you can't really Creek now. Sif Todd can't sell off the old sewage treatment plant to illumination world. Yeah.
00:35:07
Speaker
All right, that makes sense. One of the things that is this isn't a legal aspect of it, except kind of the things that it that it was really like sticking in my brain today, other than the actual legal part is that this was all done in public. This was all done at public hearings on anywhere in February. And nobody noticed or like the people that noticed kept quiet.
00:35:35
Speaker
And it's hard to believe that today they were acting surprised. The governor said they didn't know. It's hard to believe nobody noticed this happening when everybody was looking at this district at the time that these were approved. It was approved on February 2nd.
00:35:54
Speaker
when the bill to replace reedy creek was actively actively being debated in the florida legislature and i think it might have been the only thing being considered uh at the time because i think it was a special session um so it's just like i can't believe that i can't believe on the other hand don't understand why you would lie for lack of a better term about
00:36:18
Speaker
Noticing like I don't understand the governor's office's position if they did know and they did know I mean other than They hoped it would never come out that they would have their little win They could do a quick little celebration dance and then move on and this wouldn't come out So now the easiest thing is to just say oh we didn't know but that seems sort of like
00:36:35
Speaker
I don't know. Outside looking in, I don't know that much about land use, but it just seems like the governor's office didn't know. Nobody alerted you. Get better staff. There are very few things that are less interesting than a local government board meeting. And I say that having served as the attorney for more than one local government and not just a town, but also like municipal corporations within them.
00:37:02
Speaker
They're just not exciting. They're not interesting. And when you start getting into stuff like development agreements and the contracts that they enter into, they're extraordinarily dry. And then you're also talking about that in a district that nobody lives in. And so there's probably not a lot of attention being paid to it.
00:37:25
Speaker
I would expect not enough attention being paid to it that somebody would actually go through and read these things before they get past other than the people who are passing them and even then I'm not so sure.
00:37:35
Speaker
So it's not that surprising that people didn't notice from my perspective because they're so dry. There were like six members of the media present. Oh, really? Yes. I understand if you're a reporter.
00:37:56
Speaker
that it's undeniably true. Local government meetings, very dry development agreements, not particularly interesting reading, even to a local government. But you are there already. I mean, if you're, if you're present, like you, you haven't sent to, this is your beat now. I mean, you think this is the one thing you're doing for sound bites and hot takes.
00:38:16
Speaker
Well, yeah, you're there to see whether anybody says anything interesting. You're maybe not reviewing the agenda materials ahead of time because you're going to see what people say. You're not going to study all the restrictive covenants and that kind of stuff. So
00:38:36
Speaker
Like, I'm not sure you can attend one of these meetings. I don't know how Reedy Creek did its meetings, but, you know, things get approved without putting it up on a PowerPoint or something. The copies are available to you, but, you know, I showed, so I talked to a couple of reporters today.
00:38:54
Speaker
And one of them was like, hey, could you print the agreement so that we can use it for a prop kind of, just for some B-roll? You could be holding it. So we can get that B-roll. And I was like, sure, let me go do it. Give me a minute. And I come out with just the text of the development agreement, not the exhibits.
00:39:18
Speaker
just the development agreement just the text and she was like wow that's a lot and i was like this is this is this is less than a third of the total pages of the agreement. And that's just the da and then for the next reporter i printed out the the the covenant just the text again.
00:39:38
Speaker
even longer. And he was just like, what do we need? Like this is too much. Right. I'm like, okay, that's fine. Okay. But even stepping back, stepping back on like a theoretical level, wouldn't you expect someone for the governor's office that is looking to pursue this broader project of taking over Reedy Creek would have some knowledge. These sorts of agreements are permitted by statute and that would be the thing to look out for.
00:40:02
Speaker
a little bit like you would intentionally kind of send someone in like, hey, let's make sure that we're not going to be made fools of by this and send someone there to look at that huge phone book size document and make sure there's none of these types of development agreements. I mean, they had a PDF out there of their agenda that was like bookmarked. Like it wouldn't be, you know. Surprise district of power is the 2A little Roman numeral.
00:40:29
Speaker
Yeah, and you could have you could have had somebody go. The truth is that there wasn't very much the legislature and the governor could do to stop it from happening. Oh, once it was once it was on the agenda, once they knew it existed, the only thing you could do is like hurry up and replace them, hurry up and pass a law to replace them before they could finish the process, which I think would have been a practical impossibility. But they could have had somebody stand down there and object on a microphone.
00:40:58
Speaker
But I think maybe, you know, this is political prognostication, political, you know, tea leaf reading. Maybe they didn't consider it that big of a deal, like, because there's still a lot they do. And they still are the government. Like they say, basically, you know, one of them said this basically made Disney the government. It made Disney the government the same way that I'm the government of my own house. Like,
00:41:24
Speaker
I decide what happens at my own house because I own my property. And really Disney is just a developer and there's nothing that says the local government can't say developer, you get to do whatever you want with your own land. That's totally valid. So as we look back on your very correct, very insightful prognostication, when all of this was kind of being talked about and they were talking about
00:41:50
Speaker
We're going to take away Disney's special treatment that they've had over 55 years. And you just nail on the head, figured out that Disney wasn't going to sue them over the First Amendment implications of doing that in response to Disney's opposition to don't say gay or lackluster opposition.
00:42:12
Speaker
This was what Disney was planning all along, wasn't it? It was like, all right, you guys have your fun, grandstanding plan here, and we're going to do this stuff and take the steps that we need to take in order to protect ourselves.
00:42:26
Speaker
And it's going to last 30 years. And in 30 years, literally all of the people who get appointed to this board are going to be dead. Because not a single one of them is going to be under the age of 60. Right. Natural causes. It's not a threat. All of these people are going to die in the coming nuclear war. So it's fine. It'll be a waste. Yeah, right. Gosh, we're really going just full genocide tonight, aren't we? Yeah. No.
00:42:56
Speaker
Uh, this is what they had planned, right? They're just like, all right, you guys come take our Reedy Creek districts. It's not going to matter because by the time, uh, our, this thing that we have planned is over with, uh, you know,
00:43:11
Speaker
the political climate will have shifted radically. Who knows if that's going to be even worse yet, but it'll be different. Yeah. I think that they definitely had this in mind. Sure. But all this does is make it so that it's less painful to lose control. So I think that they
00:43:32
Speaker
they knew that this was coming, but I don't think that they would, I don't think that they would have changed their decision, even if they didn't have this, just because, I mean, they can still cause so much pain if they wanted to. And they've talked like, even after today, they were like, look, we're still not oppositional to Disney, but we think that these are invalid. That was what maybe the chair said.
00:43:58
Speaker
said like we still don't want to take a oppositional view to Disney, but we we want to fight this. We want to bring in attorneys to fight this. So, you know, but not opposition. We don't want to we don't want to oppose. They're not anti Disney. They're just non oppositional. They just want to have they just want to have the option for them to do what they want to do. They just they aren't saying they would use it against Disney. They just want to have the option.
00:44:29
Speaker
OK, well, we can move on. First of all, I want to thank you, Jake, for going through all of that because I'm sure you've told that whole tale a thousand times already today or in yesterday and everything. And so forever. Super appreciate it. This is my thing. This is my brand. Whenever anybody brings up Reedy Creek, I'm going to get added. Right. And before we move on really quickly, I want to give credit where credit is due. Jason, I think listeners will be able to go back and hear that. I don't know if you so much predicted, but you at least rooted for Disney to do something and not kind of just roll over.
00:44:55
Speaker
So I don't know if in there somewhere there might be a prediction that you might have kind of got right there, but I think you both kind of get credit. Somehow you both were right. So before we go, the restrictive covenant has a rule against perpetuities clause that says it's in effect for perpetuity.
00:45:15
Speaker
But if that's construed to violate the rule against perpetuities, then it's in effect until the last descendant of living descendant of King Charles III dies plus 20 young years.
00:45:27
Speaker
They did not, they did not use the King Charles thing against Florida. That is like a backfall that they will never have to use. Anyway, that's been sticking in my mind all day because everybody's like King Charles, King Charles, King Charles, King Charles. Is that a usual way to use? Apparently that's a thing people do. I've never put on my agreements.
00:45:48
Speaker
Oh, yeah. That's from law school, I remember. That's the example that, I mean, it wasn't King Charles back then. It was Queen Elizabeth. Queen Victoria when you were in law school, right? Thanks for that. Thanks for that. Sorry. Friendship over. Friendship over. I'm terribly sorry.
00:46:07
Speaker
But that was really fun because basically everybody who went to law school kind of had panic, bar exam, law school property exam, or trust to exam, like, negative terrors about the rule against perpetuities. And the rest of America, like the normal part of America that didn't go to law school to have their brains broken, discovered that the rule against perpetuities exists. So that's fun.
00:46:35
Speaker
It was a teaching moment. So moving on, we have quick follow up. We'll move really quickly because I don't think there's much to say about much of this. But did you guys see the Samsung AI thing that basically is exactly what we
Tech Updates and Nostalgia
00:46:45
Speaker
talked about? But it's adding teeth to baby photos. They did it. They mooned the baby's teeth. They did moons on the baby's teeth. It's horrible. It's one of the worst things I've ever seen that isn't actually like a gory photo. It just is very distressing. I've never seen it. I didn't realize I've never seen a baby with full teeth. Let me bring it up.
00:47:03
Speaker
Yeah, I want to see a picture. I only saw them because you brought them up, Andrew. And it's terrifying. It conjures images for me of, you remember that creepy internet thing? Don't go look this up if you've never seen it before. But the Momo thing that went around a few years ago? Yes, I remember Momo. Yeah, it was reminiscent of that for me. OK, so yeah, creepy baby photos. That was one quick follow up. Another follow up. We talk about cryptocurrency a lot.
00:47:31
Speaker
We forgot about Binance last week when we were talking about the big ones are left or whatever. Well, don't worry about it. The CEO is being sued for some colluding, paying off China in order to get some accounts unfroze. Not good. So they're going to fall down too. So they're retroactively correcting our error for not including Binance by imploding.
00:47:53
Speaker
I well, I try. I don't think I included finance. And I think Grant Gullifson, who's a friend on Mastodon, was like, yeah, they are not reputable at all. And he's a crypto attorney. And so I, you know, that doesn't surprise me very much. No. Our other story is unless you guys have anything really to say about finance or crypto generally. No. OK. Our other story is Twitter source code leaked onto GitHub.
00:48:22
Speaker
Not all of it, no parts of it, but the best part was like a good it was up for weeks I don't I still I don't really understand it's sort of like the local government law stuff I guess nobody's looking but with all the AI we have to check for things you think that would be something that we could maybe take a peek at like
00:48:40
Speaker
some sort of like authentication protocols or something. I don't know. It's very strange to me that that can sort of just be up there and they're like, oh man, it's been up for weeks. We're pretty sure no one downloaded it. I bet somebody already has something that's trolling GitHub for like code stuff that they could, that they can use in this preserve.
00:48:56
Speaker
So yeah, I mean bet a lot of people I mean, I'm sure many many people have the source code for Twitter saved now Thanks to that. Yeah, people have have sent by like put bots loose on github to pull like Authentication information because a lot of times people forget and like hard leave it in their notes or whatever or in the code itself They just want to you know Be able to have your little your program login to your mastodon instance or whatever and they just leave the login information so that's already there so you would think that
00:49:22
Speaker
There would be something that might pick up on this as well. Yeah. It was a renegade former employee or current employee? They think. Yeah. I mean, it makes sense. There are a lot of both of those. Yeah. The line between a current employee of Twitter and a former employee of Twitter is a very thin line that a lot of people pass through on a seemingly daily or weekly basis.
00:49:47
Speaker
One of the interesting things that I wonder about here is I'm a little surprised that Twitter is developed at all using GitHub. Is it intentionally developed using GitHub, or is this the rogue developer had it out on GitHub? I think it was just dumped onto GitHub the way they used to use like a paste bin. You always see paste bin. It's just a quick way to basically freely throw up the code someplace. I don't think it was developed or anything like that on there. This is intentional.
00:50:16
Speaker
GitHub co-pilot is going to integrate Twitter's source code into it. So if you start using co-pilot to develop any sort of social media, anything, you're going to have Twitter injected all over the place in there, it sounds like.
00:50:32
Speaker
Yeah, the username of the, if I remember correctly, the username of the person that posted on GitHub was freespeechmaximalist, which is what? Freespeechenthusiast. Enthusiast? Oh, okay. He's not a maximalist. He's into it, but he's not all the way. He's not all the way. Oh, okay. He's just an enthusiast.
00:50:52
Speaker
All right, I mean, I think that's it for our follow up. And I guess all we have is just our quick recommendations and stuff. You guys have something I know mine. I know mine. I'm going to go with. So last time I already talked about it, Resident Evil 4. I'm still going to talk about it. So the full game of Resident Evil 4 came out, remake, full remake of Resident Evil 4 came out last week. And man, that game is still awesome.
00:51:17
Speaker
That game is if you didn't know one of the best games of all time came out in 2005 or 2004. Came out on a million other platforms after that. They really like.
00:51:29
Speaker
They did it, man. It's so good. I'm just like, just like peaks and valleys. But they are so good at managing, balancing white knuckle, excitement, action, like just like flying by the seat of your pants, shooting guys for two minutes. And then for the next four minutes, doing puzzles and just walking around and hitting boxes to get gunpowder out of.
00:51:54
Speaker
out of things and so it's such a funny it's so funny and stupid like the lot of this the you know it's this super serious creepy bugs and zombie game and then you'll get a really really stupid line like you get a you get a canister of fuel to fuel a boat that you found and the main character says that's what i'm talking about
00:52:18
Speaker
A boat. A boat. Mercy. Yes. I thought it would be on Game Pass. The last remake was on Game Pass. It didn't appear to be, so I guess I gotta shell out some actual money. You gotta drop this. I think it's $60 on PC. Oh, boy. Okay. All right. What do you got, Jason?
00:52:35
Speaker
Uh, I have the best chocolate chip cookie recipe. This is my recommendation for this week. Crazy for crust.com. Uh, I'm not going to give you the full URL because that's, that's lousy podcasting, uh, to just read off a URL, but crazy for crust.com. They have a recipe called the best chocolate chip cookie recipe. You got to plan in advance. This is not a, uh, it's nine o'clock on a Thursday night and I'm hungry and I want to make some cookies.
00:53:00
Speaker
You got a plan because it requires that you refrigerate, that you cool the dough for a little while, and it makes a great difference. We make one substitution. We use vegan butter. These are great cookies. I love them. They turn out really, really nicely for making chipwitches, which is an ice cream sandwich that's ice cream between two cookies, vanilla ice cream between two cookies. Absolutely great. Strong recommend.
00:53:29
Speaker
I'm looking at it now. Yeah, looks really good. We'll put it in the show notes. I like this expert tip. Do I have to chill the dough? Yes, yes you do in all caps. So that's very important. Don't skip on it. Just don't. When you said you can't make it on a random night, I was like, oh man, is this a sourdough cooked chocolate cookie recipe? When you culture it with yeast, that would be, man, I'm getting hungry just thinking about it, even though that might not make any sense at all. No, it sounds terrible.
00:53:58
Speaker
Chilling is good for your cookie dough. It's good for your former president enthusiast that might be thinking about protesting. Chilling is the, I think that's the sort of overarching theme of our episode today. Stand back and stand by. In the interest of that, mine is baseball's back.
00:54:14
Speaker
We talked about it at the start. My recommendation is pick a team, any team. Don't pick the Oakland A's. Jake, you live in Florida. Don't be sad. Yeah. You should watch the Tampa Bay Rays. They're pretty good. I mean, they'll, you know, they're probably not going to take the AL East, but they're decent. They're right there. The field is too stupid looking for me to pick. They got a moxie. Exactly. They got moxie. They have some really horrible. Oh no. Hold on one second. I want to let you guys go. I want to, we have to look up the Tampa Bay Rays mascot. Do you know who it is? What it is?
00:54:43
Speaker
It's not a devil ray? No, it's Raymond. And he is a cow-nosed stingray. And he is the largest of his species, yes. But he's unrecognizable as a stingray. He's sort of a horrible furry, like a rejected muppet or something. We'll put that in the show notes, too, so people can have nightmares. Like the Philly fanatic. Yeah, or the other one, the hockey one. Gritty?
00:55:05
Speaker
Billy has all terrible things. It's just anyway, the gritty is awesome. What are you talking about? No, no, no bad. He's disgusting. The city's dirty. And if you walked around wearing that fur, that fur would be dirty too. But anyway, uh, baseball, it's really good. Pick a team, watch it. If you have T-Mobile, you get free MLB dot TV. I do this every year. It's the, it's the best thing.
00:55:29
Speaker
Absolutely. And this is the last year you're going to be able to do it. This is the last year of their like five year contract or something. What? Yeah, I'm sorry. No. I'm sure somebody else will pick it up. A's, you know, decide what you're going to do by the end of this year so I can decide whether or not I'm going to keep caring about you. Okay. Yeah, because MLB is not cheap if you don't get it for free. It's like 150 bucks for the season or something. Yeah. Yep.
00:55:52
Speaker
It's the only good thing Team Ogle gives away all year. And that Tuesday's app, it's always junk. It's like some sort of free sandwich you don't want from some fast food place you've never heard of. You get a free whopper with the purchase of another whopper. I got a free snow cap one time, the little beanie that you put on your head with a little puffball on the top. It was magenta. I was going to ask if it was magenta. It was hideous. I would take that. You can have it. You can have mine. It's a lot of use in Florida.