Talk:Central Florida Tourism Oversight District/Archive 1

Archive 1

POV

The article is presently a slanted editorial piece with uncited facts and hyperbole (e.g. "the power to ignore any laws" or "to keep its residents from having power over Disney." 65.33.143.165 21:56, 12 November 2006 (UTC)

This article is clearly written as a slap at the Disney Corporation and the way they district was created, and is in severe need of a POV-ectomy. RickK 08:33, Nov 2, 2004 (UTC)

Please provide examples. The only part I see that could be is the paragraph on Fogelsong's book, and that was there before I majorly rewrote it. -SPUI

I just made some changes in the wording to make it less POV, and some unrelated changes that I have found more information about. -SPUI

People in #wikipedia (IRC) recommended that I remove the NPOV dispute thing because nothing specific was brought forth. Thus I am doing so. -SPUI

This article may seem biased, but everything here seems to match my recollection of how things are. If it is biased, it is slightly weak in supporting statements for Disney, which could be added. For example, it mentions that Disney can bypass the "Regional Impact study process", but fails to mention if Disney has abused this. I know they have some environmental problems there, but also they have done a great deal of conservation which could be mentioned. (I would, but I only know it exists, not what it it involves or if it counterbalances any hyptothetical abuse.) Some of this is listed later in the article, but it should probably be at least mentioned near the negative statements.

One POV statement I'll make here. The article mentions that they do not have their own police force, but instead has Disney Security. The intent here is to maximize safety (both to guests and to Disney property) while minimizing publicity of any problems. This is a two edged sword. While they are not publicly accountable (i.e., don't have to report statistics of what they do or find), when Real Bad Things happen, they are powerless and have to call in the real police, which tends to get reported in the media. As to having their own fire department, I've seen it. It is extremely modern and efficent. Fire response is extremely quick, and even so, the automatic systems tend to put them out before anyone gets there.

On a lighter note, the current verbage includes the phrase "On a related note" too many times. (Once is probably too many.) --ssd 05:43, 29 Nov 2004 (UTC)

______________

One can take the point of view that the Reedy Creek Improvement District was created to allow Disney to "ignore local and state codes allowing them extreme latitude in the planning ans construction of their facilities. It must be taken into account however that there has NEVER been a single structural fire death or a death from the collapse of a completed structure in the District's history. Further the fire defense forces, the Reedy Creek Fire Department (Emergency Services) has NEVER lost a structure due to fire. (RCFD Fire Loss Statistics 1966-2006) For a community of 37.5 square miles and an estimated daily population of 200,000, this is a remarkable accomplishment. Because of the District's insistence on safety construction, it is the most fire sprinklered community in America!

One should also keep in mind that Florida Statute 119 (Government in the Sunshine) requires all of the District's meetings, work and communications be open to public scrutiny. One would be hard pressed to find another community,regardless of its creator or the number of taxpayers, that can live up the District's record. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.41.185.143 (talk • contribs)

The article has an NPOV template dated December 2007, three years after any POV discussion here. This article has had no POV discussion in years. As the template is not accompanied by any open NPOV disputes explained on this discussion page, I am removing the template. Roothog (talk) 22:54, 15 January 2009 (UTC)

Works for me. SchuminWeb (Talk) 10:39, 16 January 2009 (UTC)

Private highway

I started the private highway article, which will specifically deal with Disney's private roads. If anyone has any info about that, or has seen any useful articles about those roads, please feel free to add that. Thanks, Rad Racer | Talk 18:07, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)

• Specifically, the RCID roads are not private roads, but other Disney roads like World Drive north of Epcot Center Drive and Osceola Parkway west of Buena Vista Drive are. World Drive was at one time all private. --SPUI (talk) 19:06, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
  • Since RCID's Board of Supervisors is controlled by Disney, and RCID's operations are funded by Disney and its affiliates, can they really be described as public roads? Rad Racer | Talk 22:26, 3 Apr 2005 (UTC)
    • Funding often comes from non-Disney sources, or at the least they use tax-free bonds to build them. Police sometimes set up speed traps on them. They serve almost exclusively Disney traffic, but are public roads in any other sense of the word. --SPUI (talk) 00:21, 4 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Florida State Statutes require that any roadway that begins at a state or county road and ends at a state of county road must be public property. RCID roadways are those roadways maintained using District funds. Funds are acquired through property taxes and publicly issues improvement bonds. The District maintains approximately 180 lane miles of highway. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 70.41.185.143 (talk • contribs)

Opening paragraph

I think this article needs a proper opening paragraph that briefly explains what RCID is ("The Reedy Creek Improvement District is an area in Florida..."). I'd take a whack at it, but I'm not quite awake yet. tregoweth 12:20, July 30, 2005 (UTC)

Reedy Creek Improvement District is one of 250 political subdivisions in the State of Florida.

Map requests

• The existing map has good information about the original land purchases, but does not do a good job showing the cities within the RCID or features such as the theme parks. This PDF map from RCID itself does a much better job. It would be cool if we could get this map properly licensed, or if we could create something similar. -- Beland 23:29, 26 November 2006 (UTC)
• It would also be nice to have a map showing the location of the district within Florida, and/or in relation to neighboring counties and Orlando. -- Beland 23:31, 26 November 2006 (UTC)

Detainment

There is no section about detainment in regards to the security force. What are the basic facts about the RCID's detainment facilities? There have been issues in the past, but there is no objective information anywhere on here. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 74.235.10.112 (talk) 17:59, 30 July 2009 (UTC)

I added a cited paragraph from the article Disney Safety and Security as well as a link to the other article CptnSkippy (talk) 23:32, 15 August 2009 (UTC)

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 2 external links on Reedy Creek Improvement District. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20150918145601/http://www.rcid.org/About/History.aspx to http://rcid.org/About/History.aspx
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20110807211802/http://www.rcid.org/Dept_Building_Safety.cfm to http://www.rcid.org/Dept_Building_Safety.cfm

When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.

This message was posted before February 2018. After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{source check}} (last update: 5 June 2024).

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—InternetArchiveBot (Report bug) 21:47, 28 April 2017 (UTC)