The Reedy Creek Improvement District says ... unless the state covers the estimated $1 billion in outstanding bond debt.
Either they included in the bonds a known risk that Florida could dissolve the district leaving bond holders holding the bag and that's what'll happen, or they failed their fiduciary duty and can be sued for misrepresentation.
In no case is it illegal for Florida to take back what they've giveth, although some diversity judge will no doubt put a stay on it anyway because feelings.
The Walt Disney Co. may be able to maintain its quasi-independent status thanks to the language of the 1967 state law which created the Reedy Creek Improvement District.
Then they passed a new state law...that's how that works. New laws can be passed that override old laws.
Either they included in the bonds a known risk that Florida could dissolve the district leaving bond holders holding the bag and that's what'll happen, or they failed their fiduciary duty and can be sued for misrepresentation.
In no case is it illegal for Florida to take back what they've giveth, although some diversity judge will no doubt put a stay on it anyway because feelings.
Then they passed a new state law...that's how that works. New laws can be passed that override old laws.