It say that Florida had regulations and land-use policies that allowed private enterprises to set up effective mass transit! That's a good thing that most states didn't do!
Not really. Florida effectively gave a large chunk of land to Disney. This has famously been covered in recent litigation and they tried to claw it back. Such that, no, I don't think you can take Disney's situation as at all indicative of something from the Florida land-use policies. Would be akin to financial advice from a lottery winner.
Unless you are saying maybe we should pursue more local governments run by a corporation? That also feels wrong, all told. Though, I would grant I don't have enough perspective there to know.
FL didn't give land to Disney. Disney bought all of its own land via W.E.D. Enterprises and other dummy companies they used to discretely make the purchases in 1964 [2]. Later, after Walt's death in 1965, in 1967, Roy O. Disney made the case for the Reedy Creek Improvement Act [1], which gave Disney an exclusive zone in the state independent of county/city/state zoning laws, building codes, school districts, etc.
Part of the pitch to getting the Reedy Creek Act passed, was the plans for E.P.C.O.T. (Experimental Prototype City of Tomorrow) and the plan to build a new urban development. Those plans were complicated after Walt's death and permanently shelved after his brother Roy's retirement in 1968, but Disney retained its exemptions in spite of never truly undertaking the original plan and simply operated a tax-reduced, virtually regulation-free amusement park, until this year.
Right. "Give land" was used in a way that is a clearly meant more colloquially than any specific form. To the point of this thread, I am asserting that Disney acted far more independently in all things that they did than not. Such that counting it as a thing that the Florida government did well feels like a stretch.
At the least, it is far more complicated than makes sense, and can't really be used as evidence one way or the other for Florida making good choices.
