Skip to content
Search

Latest Stories

Follow Us:
Top Stories

Disney World will no longer be a ‘special district.’ What does that mean?

Disney World will no longer be a ‘special district.’ What does that mean?

The Florida Legislature is back in session to finalize a congressional redistricting plan. But Gov. Ron DeSantis authorized lawmakers to also consider a bill revoking Disney World’s status as a “special district” operating outside of municipal jurisdictions, and they quickly passed it Thursday.

This unusual – but not unique – quirk of state and local government largely goes unnoticed in Florida and beyond, so most people have never even heard of it. But this week it has been dominating headlines, so we wanted to take a closer look.


Since 1967, Disney World has acted as a self-governing entity, exempt from some regulations and running its own municipal programs. Officially, the zone is known as the Reedy Creek Improvement District, and through it Disney World levies its own taxes, runs its own emergency response units and controls construction permits and planning.

For 55 years, legislators have allowed this arrangement to continue, easily approving renewals on a regular basis. And it is one of nearly 2,000 such zones in Florida. But after the private company came out against a new state law regulating discussion of sex and gender in schools (known as the “Don’t Say Gay Bill”), Republicans have changed their tune.

"What I would say as a matter of first principle is I don’t support special privileges in law just because a company is powerful and they’ve been able to wield a lot of power," DeSantis said last month.

In a clear signal that he is targeting Disney, DeSantis on Tuesday called for an end to special districts established prior to 1968, affecting just a handful of Florida’s special districts. (DeSantis made the announcement about his directive to lawmakers during a press conference held in The Villages – a heavily Republican community that is itself a special district established in 1922.)

The massive complex – approximately 40 square miles – straddles Osceola and Orange counties. If the special district is indeed dissolved, those counties and two very small towns would become responsible for municipal services. According to the Miami Herald, Reedy Creek has an annual budget of $355 million and nearly $1 billion in debt.

Residents would most likely see an increase in their taxes to cover the added government responsibility, University of Central Florida professor James Clark told The New York Times.

Florida isn’t the only state with special districts. In fact, according to the U.S. Census Bureau, every state has at least one.

In 2017, the Census Bureau catalogued every special district in every state. At the time, Florida had fewer than 1,200 – not even cracking the top 10.

Between 2012 and 2017, approximately 1,500 special districts were created and about 1,250 were dissolved, according to the agency.

“In some cases, states create them to provide services to newly-developed geographic areas,” the Census Bureau explained. “In other cases, the special purpose activity or services already exist, but residents expect a higher level of quality.”

While many only exist for a short period of time to accomplish specific goals, Disney World’s has been in operation for more than a century. The state Senate approved DeSantis’ bill Wednesday and the House did the same Thursday, sending it to DeSantis for his signature. Reedy Creek will continue to operate until the summer of 2023, allowing time for negotiations on a new agreement.


Read More

An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed upon entering the Jacob K. Javits Federal Building on June 6, 2023 in New York City. New York City has provided sanctuary to over 46,000 asylum seekers since 2013, when the city passed a law prohibiting city agencies from cooperating with federal immigration enforcement agencies unless there is a warrant for the person's arrest.(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)
An ICE agent monitors hundreds of asylum seekers being processed.
(Photo by David Dee Delgado/Getty Images)

The Power of the Purse and Executive Discretion: ICE Expansion Under the Trump Administration

This nonpartisan policy brief, written by an ACE fellow, is republished by The Fulcrum as part of our partnership with the Alliance for Civic Engagement and our NextGen initiative — elevating student voices, strengthening civic education, and helping readers better understand democracy and public policy.

Key Takeaways

  • Core Constitutional Debate: Expanded ICE enforcement under the Trump Administration raises a core constitutional question: Does Article II executive power override Article I’s congressional power of the purse?
  • Executive Justification: The primary constitutional justification for expanded ICE enforcement is The Unitary Executive Theory.
  • Separation of Powers: Critics argue that the Unitary Executive Theory undermines Congress’s power of the purse.
  • Moral Conflict: Expanded ICE enforcement has sparked a moral debate, as concerns over due process and civil liberties clash with claims of increased public safety and national security.

Where is ICE Funding Coming From?

Since the beginning of the current Trump Administration, immigration enforcement has undergone transformative change and become one of the most contested issues in the federal government. On his first day in office, President Trump issued Executive Order 14159, which directs executive agencies to implement stricter immigration enforcement practices. In order to implement these practices, Congress passed and President Trump signed into law the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), a budget reconciliation package that paired state and local tax cuts with immigration funding. This allocated $170.7 billion in immigration-related funding for the Department of Homeland Security (DHS) to spend by 2029.

Keep ReadingShow less
Towards a Reformed Capitalism
oval brown wooden conference table and chairs inside conference room

Towards a Reformed Capitalism

Despite all the laws and regulations that apply to corporations, which for the most part are designed to make corporations more responsive to the greater good, corporations have wreaked great harm on our environment, their workers, their customers, and the general public. Despite all the rules, capitalism can still pretty much do what it wants.

The problem is not that the laws and regulations are not enforced, although that is partly true. The problem is more that the laws and regulations are weak because of the strong influence corporations have on both Congress (this is true of Democrats as well as Republicans) and those responsible for regulating.

Keep ReadingShow less
Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

The Bring Our Families Home campaign brought together loved ones of Americans wrongly detained overseas to display portraits in the Senate Russell Rotunda on Wednesday, May 6.

(Jacques Abou-Rizk, MNS)

Families of Americans Overseas Wrongfully Detained Bring Advocacy to Capitol Hill

WASHINGTON – American journalist Reza Valizadeh visited his elderly Iranian parents in March 2024 for the first time in 15 years. Valizadeh’s stories for Voice of America and other U.S. government-funded outlets often criticized the Iranian regime. So before traveling, he sought and received confirmation that he would be safe from a high-ranking commander in the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps, a branch of Iran’s armed forces. However, in September that same year, the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps arrested Valizadeh, and Tehran’s Revolutionary Court sentenced him to ten years in prison for “collaboration with a hostile government.”

In the Rotunda of the Senate Russell Building last week, the Bring Our Families Home campaign set up portraits of Valizadeh and 12 other Americans currently wrongfully detained overseas. The group, family members of illegitimately detained Americans, appealed to Congress to push for their safe return. Each foam poster board included the name, home state, and country of detainment. The display also included portraits of the 33 people released after advocacy by the James W. Foley Foundation.

Keep ReadingShow less
DHS Funding During the Shutdown
Getty Images, Charles-McClintock Wilson

DHS Funding During the Shutdown

When Congress failed to approve funding for the Department of Homeland Security for the remainder of this fiscal year in February, almost all of its employees began to work without pay. That situation changed, however, on April 3, when President Donald Trump issued a memorandum ordering the DHS secretary and director of the Office of Management and Budget to “use funds that have a reasonable and logical nexus to the functions of DHS” to pay its employees and issue back pay.

Trump shifted money to avoid the political embarrassment that would be caused by the collapse of airport security screening through the actions of disgruntled agents and the disruption to air travel that would ensue. But it’s legally dubious.

Keep ReadingShow less