Central Florida Tourism Oversight District vs. Disney World
The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District (CFTOD) board members who were appointed by Governor DeSantis announced they’ll be suing Walt Disney World. This post covers developments from today’s meeting of the CFTOD that authorized this litigation, how it differs from Disney’s lawsuit filed last week, and more.
To quickly bring you up to speed, the new CFTOD board asserted that Development Agreements between Disney and Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID), which made national news for use of the “King Charles Clause” and other fanciful expressions, rendered them powerless to offer any oversight over Walt Disney World’s tourist district, effectively undermining their very name.
CFTOD has repeatedly called these eleventh-hour, last-minute, or clandestine covenants that were made unlawfully. It is worth noting that RCID gave public notice of the Development Agreements twice, in January and February 2023, and openly discussed them at two different public board meetings, both of which offered periods for public comment. CFTOD and the governor have also categorized the agreements as being a subversion of the will of Florida voters on countless occasions. However, “should the state get in a costly legal battle with its biggest employer and tourism engine, y/n?” was not a question on Florida’s midterm election ballot.
Fast-forward to last week at the normal meeting of the CFTOD, which which the new district’s Board of Supervisors declared that the Development Agreement and Declaration of Restrictive Covenants entered into by and between the (former) Reedy Creek Improvement District (RCID) and Walt Disney Parks & Resorts was void and unenforceable. Consider this analogous to yelling “I DECLARE BANKRUPTCY” on the floor of your office. Just because you loudly and forcefully proclaim it, doesn’t make it legally so.
Anticipating precisely this move, the company had a complaint ready to go, and Walt Disney World sued Governor DeSantis and the CFTOD board members in their official capacities in federal court within a few hours. In response to that, the CFTOD called a meeting for May 1, 2023 to discuss a single agenda item: “board discussion and direction to litigation counsel and authorization to defend District officials sued in official capacities.”
The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District meeting started out amusingly enough, with a public commenter who is a Disney Vacation Club member and, to put it bluntly, was mad as hell. He tore into the board, letting them know he always wanted to retire to the great and free state of Florida, that he was for DeSantis as president “until he started this stupid war” that is “destroying us.”
The commenter offered praise for Walt Disney World’s management of its property and infrastructure, asserting that roadways and landscaping on-property are exceptional as compared to the rest of Florida. He contended that DeSantis and the CFTOD have overstepped. “Raising taxes to pay for your defense is wrong; if you take any of our money, it’s wrong. You’re spending our money? You’re taxing us?!” He called on the CFTOD board to resign, stop, or starting doing what’s in the best interest of the district, not what’s in the best interest of the governor.
This follows last week’s meeting, when board chairmain Martin Garcia told Disney Springs business owners that the board would need to raise taxes to pay legal fees. Those Disney Springs operating participants had pleaded with the CFTOD to de-escalate due to their actions also harming them–many of whom are small business owners. Garcia saying the board would need to raise taxes occurred before any lawsuits had been filed. (It’ll be interesting to see if the CFTOD “loses” the firefighters–the one group that had supported them on the promise of pay raises and more resources.)
Following comments, the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board voted unanimously to sue Walt Disney World in Central Florida state court. Garcia attempted to justify the move by saying that the board “has no choice now but to respond” since the Walt Disney Company sued them. He went on to say that the CFTOD plans to “seek justice in our own backyard” where both they and Walt Disney World reside.
Garcia also stated what the new CFTOD board has achieved in its short time since taking over from the Reedy Creek Improvement District. The veritable laundry list of achievements related to reviewing documents, hiring lawyers, consultants, and engaging others to fight Disney. To their credit, these are mostly things that RCID never managed to “accomplish.”
He also claimed that the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board is modernizing Walt Disney World. “Disney sued this board to stop us from improving the district and its operations. Disney is asking a federal court in Tallahassee to turn back the hands of time to 1967, but this board is instead bringing the district into the 21st century.” I’m surprised they didn’t take credit for TRON Lightcycle Run finally opening, because why not?
Before turning to commentary, the key distinction here is that Disney filed its lawsuit in the Northern District of Florida federal court, as opposed to state court. The simple explanation for why the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board is filing its own lawsuit against Walt Disney World–instead of answering the existing suit and making counterclaims–is because state court in Central Florida has a higher likelihood of a favorable outcome for the board, governor, and their allies.
In offering his reaction to the lawsuit last week, Governor DeSantis hinted at this. “I don’t think the suit has merit. I think it’s political. I think they filed in Tallahassee for a reason, because they’re trying to generate some district court decision, but we’re very confident on the law. The days of putting one company on a pedestal with no accountability are over in the state of Florida.”
DeSantis’s remark about filing in Tallahassee for a reason is a reference to the complaint being filed in the Northern District of Florida, where the case has been assigned to Chief U.S. District Judge Mark E. Walker. This draw sets the company up for success, as Walker has extensive experience with First Amendment cases and his recent rulings suggest a high likelihood of success for Disney.
In striking down key provisions of Florida’s Individual Freedom Act, Judge Walker called the state’s approach “positively dystopian” and invoked Stranger Things in (mind)flaying the law. “In the popular television series Stranger Things, the ‘upside down’ describes a parallel dimension containing a distorted version of our world. See Stranger Things (Netflix 2022). Recently, Florida has seemed like a First Amendment upside down.” That was the opening salvo to Walker’s 44-page opinion.
“Normally, the First Amendment bars the state from burdening speech, while private actors may burden speech freely. But in Florida, the First Amendment apparently bars private actors from burdening speech, while the state may burden speech freely.” The remainder of the opinion is a potential partial sneak peek at Walker’s ruling on Disney’s First Amendment claims.
It may thus appear to make sense for the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board to forum shop to find a more friendly judge and secure a more favorable decision. But it doesn’t work like that. The outcome of the federal case will preempt the outcome of the state case, effectively superseding or rendering moot the state court decision. It will be a hollow victory, totally meaningless in the bigger picture.
So why bother wasting (taxpayer) money to file a separate suit in state court? For like the thousandth time, this is wholly a matter of political theater. The show where everything’s made up and the points don’t matter. My guess is that the CFTOD board figures it has a good shot at winning in state court while the federal case is still pending. Politicians and board members will then tout that dubious decision while declaring “victory” and “Florida beating the California company” and whatnot during television appearances in the immediate aftermath of the case.
In today’s news cycle, being first is often more important than being accurate, so headlines about the board and governor winning could carry a certain amount of weight when it comes to public opinion, fundraising, poll numbers, etc. All of that is what matters most to them. The goal here is not governance, it’s “owning” the opposition in the culture wars.
If and when the federal case is decided in Disney’s favor, the CFTOD can still point to the state court win in public, and offer that as the basis for arguing they’ll prevail in front of the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals. (Of course, all of this presupposes that the CFTOD will actually win in state court, and that Disney will win before Judge Walker.)
Regardless of the legal outcomes, through the prism of political theater, an early win here could be “important” for the governor. Other Republicans have started distancing themselves from DeSantis on this issue, or smelling blood in the water (several 2024 candidates who have commented thus far). Our commentary on two different past posts (here and here) largely revolved around that angle of the battle, questioning whether DeSantis has overplayed his hand, or made a miscalculation in continuing to push this once Iger returned. As always, it’ll be interesting to see how it plays out from here.
Planning a Walt Disney World trip? Learn about hotels on our Walt Disney World Hotels Reviews page. For where to eat, read our Walt Disney World Restaurant Reviews. To save money on tickets or determine which type to buy, read our Tips for Saving Money on Walt Disney World Tickets post. Our What to Pack for Disney Trips post takes a unique look at clever items to take. For what to do and when to do it, our Walt Disney World Ride Guides will help. For comprehensive advice, the best place to start is our Walt Disney World Trip Planning Guide for everything you need to know!
YOUR THOUGHTS
Thoughts on the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District suing Walt Disney World in state court in Central Florida? Think it’s a savvy move, or a waste of tax dollars that could be better spent elsewhere? Any other reactions to the latest season of the RCID/CFTOD drama? Hope this escalating battle starts to de-escalate soon so we can focus again on the fun of the parks? Keep the comments civil, and avoid personal attacks or perpetuating pointless culture wars. Respectfully debating the change is totally fine, but don’t attack others or troll for controversy. That’s why Facebook was invented.
There is a lot missing in your analysis of this.
There is a reason that the CFTOD filed with the state. The reason is because Disney violated state law on many fronts (spelled out in detail in the complaint) and a ruling by the state court really undercuts their federal case. Here is an attorney who specializes in this area of law (and represented other special districts in Central Florida including Celebration and Bonnet Creek) and he describes in painstaking detail why Disney is going to lose and lose badly.
https://youtu.be/PeMNBPmRs2E
Also, there’s another problem with the federal case. Disney is sorta stuck between a rock and hard place. If they say they aren’t RCID then there’s no standing. If they say they are RCID, they violate the laws for municipal bonds.
Judge Walker, who might issue a favorable decision to Disney, has been overruled by appeals more than once by the Appellate Courts including very recently.
And all in all, this will eventually improve guest experience. The RCID firefighters were FOR the state takeover because Disney violated safety rules and didn’t maintain investments in the Fire Department. Furthermore, the new board initially said it wanted to work with Disney and would have given Disney what it wanted probably 99.9% of the time. Very foolish move by Disney.
Of course there’s a lot missing in my analysis–the complaint hadn’t even been filed when this was published! With that said, legal analysis has been largely absent from these posts because this isn’t my area of expertise. I know enough to be dangerous, as they say, except that’s not a good thing when it comes to the law. Beyond that, I’ll repeat my preface from this saga a few posts ago:
I’d caution against drawing any premature conclusions. In part, this goes back to the ‘team sports’ nature of our system, and people wanting to believe their ‘side’ is in the right and will prevail in the end. It also goes back to all of the twists and turns in the Reedy Creek saga to date, and how no one got this completely right from the beginning. The only thing that’s predictable here is unpredictability.
Finally, I’ll add that almost nobody has subject matter expertise. This standoff is incredibly multifaceted, involving the intersection of law and politics; not just that, but several different areas of law, some of which is arcane and with little precedent. This was already like a law school finals fact pattern; throwing in the Rule Against Perpetuities was just the icing on the cake. If that doesn’t make sense, think of it this way: a podiatrist has more medical knowledge than you and might sound smart when discussing neuroscience, but would you really trust them to conduct surgery on your brain?
Same idea here. No one has an actual legal practice encompassing all these areas of law. The Reedy Creek saga involves myriad complex little-understood legal issues…plus politics. Although certain aspects are ascertainable (and relevant to the legal challenge and its likelihood of success), the eventual outcome as a whole is not. No one should pretend to know how it’ll play out from here.
Just as I wouldn’t put much faith in unbiased ‘analysis’ of this case coming from MSNBC or WaPo, I’m not watching a 90-minute video from some dude whose channel is full of culture war content.
Nothing screams “I know what I’m doing” like calling your legal analysis video a “pimpcast” and charging to learn how to “escape a DUI”. For the later, I’ve always thought not drinking and driving works, but I’m not a “law talking guy” like Mr. Pimp here.
My initial view of the lawsuit is that CFTOD may be correct that the Land Use contracts have procedural flaws and may not be enforceable. I think a Florida judge could bite on that. But I think Disney is correct that DeSantis is retaliating against Disney for opposing the Parental Rights in Education Act.
I also think your analysis on DeSantis being able to go through the state court faster than Disney can go through the federal court is spot on.
But I think this is overall a bad look for DeSantis. It definitely seems like he’s going overboard using government powers to stick it to Disney. It’s very unsettling.
Bills of Attainder are unconstitutional. Essentially — passing a law that punishes a single party for things they did in the past.
Putting aside the 1st Amendment issues:
You could pass a law that says, “Disney blogs are illegal, and anyone who posts a Disney blog in the future will pay a fine.”
But it would be unconstitutional to pass a law that says, “Tom Bricker’s blog is illegal and we are fining Tom Bricker.”
The Reedy Creek situation isn’t exactly a Bill of Attainder, but it’s pretty close. There are 1,000 special districts in Florida. Florida singled out just Disney/Reedy Creek for changes, as punishment for 1st Amendment activity.
(They wrote the legislation in a way so essentially only Reedy Creek was affected).
Florida might have successfully skirted around the Constitutional issues (we will see). But their actions definitely run afoul of the spirit of the Constitution.
The law that effectively dissolved Reedy Creek Improvement District targeted all special districts established before the ratification of the current Florida Constitution in 1968. I heard it affected five other special districts, which were casualties in this fight against Disney.
My understanding is that the other 5 districts aren’t even really active anymore. This was Florida’s way of targeting Disney and only Disney. … and getting around the Bills of Attainder rule
I certainly understand that this was meant to specifically target Disney and that if they were going to do any cleanup work, it would be to reestablish any other special district as they were if needed, but not for Reedy Creek.
The FL legislature is continuing with an amendment to a transportation bill that would by construction only apply to Disney and no other private transportation operators in Florida. The bill was for inspections on public transportation systems. But for private operators it only applied to “fixed guideway” transportation located completely within special districts that were located in more than one county.
Decisions about the district are now in the hands of appointed partisan people who have no background in land use or municipal infrastructure. That their first order of business was prohibiting non existent mask mandates is telling. What do they hope to accomplish and what is their end goal? Do they just want to make things difficult for Disney for being on the other side of the cultural landscape? If not, what is the issue? Disney runs their infrastructure better than most cities.
Is there a way out for either side? Probaby not… Would the sides agree to a reconstituted and non partisan oversight board consisting of professionals and people with expertise? again, likely not.
They’ve publicly stated that they might try and use their power to guide Disney in their creative decisions. That’s a rather broad category since Disney owns ABC, ESPN, 538, Pixar, Star Wars, Marvel, etc. Some of the thought is that gay couples will be out and that they’ll someone how punish WDW for content they consider inappropriate.
That resolution didn’t ban mask mandates… it only banned Covid passports which have never been required for guests at WDW.
However, there is a bill in the state legislature to ban mask mandates, not just at WDW but also at other businesses such as Universal, or, for that matter, Costco.
Can I just say that I love the fact that you’ve cited Stranger Things in your article. Both because it’s directly relevant, amazingly so, and was actually used in a court of law. Fantastic! The way that you wrote this is why I keep coming back for your point of view on all things Disney, very entertaining and fun.
They’ll keep the firefighter vote, unfortunately. They already have a tentative agreement that’s going to be voted on by the firefighter union in a few weeks. Gives the fire department almost everything they’ve been asking for including a lot more pay and a few dozen more firefighters. Not to mention the dept hasn’t had a contract for the last few years, so this is a nice change for them. This might be the ONLY thing the new board has been successful with and what the public will agree on. Although I still wonder how this will all be paid for since they’re spending at least $800/hour on attorneys.
Thanks for sharing that!
If I were a firefighter, I would probably support them given that. It’s possible to not like how a bigger-picture situation is playing out while also having a sense of self-interest–I think we all do that in various scenarios.
I never did understand why RCID didn’t treat the firefighters better. I know there are always two sides to a story/standoff, but it really did seem like the department was underfunded and staffed, especially with the growth of Walt Disney World.
Let’s keep to debating the merits of the current lawsuits and their ramifications. The eventual outcome does not hinge upon legislation (HB 1557) from last year. I understand that was the catalyst for what has transpired since, but there’s no need to relitigate that legislation (or its follow-up) to discuss what has arisen since that is germane to Walt Disney World. The standoff has evolved well beyond HB 1557.
Name calling will not be tolerated. That’s especially true when it comes to one another, but also towards elected officials, corporate leaders, etc. You can make a point without resorting to insults. To the contrary, personal attacks only undercut your argument. No one is going to be persuaded by demeaning or inflammatory rhetoric.
And this is exactly why you are my favorite Disney Blogger. Well said!
My main takeaway from all this continues to be it’s never good for the actual residents of a state when their governor/ senator/ etc. has eyes on the presidency or just general higher office. Huge increase in political posturing with little to no benefit to the actual residents. Good luck to the people of Florida.
Arcane question – why can’t Disney remove to federal court?
Disney sued in federal court and the new board countersued in state court. It will likely be removed to federal court.
I don’t believe Disney will prevail in its suit. Disney is clothing the removal of their special status via the Reedy Creek District in first amendment garb but those special privileges were always maintained at the discretion of the State of Florida. Florida isn’t suppressing Disney’s right to free speech or to conduct their business. They’re welcome to continue criticizing or supporting whichever policies they choose and operating their businesses as they see fit. They’ll simply be subject to all the same laws, regulations and policies as the other entertainment parks and businesses in Florida.
No. Binding contracts aren’t “at the discretion” of the state. And there are 1000+ special districts in Florida, including for Universal and Sea World.
DeSantis made so many overt statements that targeting Reedy Creek was in retaliation for Disney’s protected speech – he even has a chapter in his book about it.
See you in court, governor.
Also, one of the largest retirement developers/complex owners, have the same deal Disney did. (can zone, build & plan roads, ASSESS OWN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT, etc). However, this community, the largest in the US, is 80-90% registered, retired republican voters. They are untouched by any of this. This is not about leveling the playing field. Tax breaks and incentives, special provisions are given all the time. This is about DeSantis wasting money and time to raise his national status, to further his own ambitions. just look how quickly they pushed through all their legislation for DeSantis ( Don’t say gay, Disney, how ONLY the gov.gets to choose the board of governors of the district, the necessity to resign to run for Presiden OR VP,etc.)
I compare it to “at will” employment. You can terminate an at-will employee for any reason except an unlawful reason. If I terminate you for a discriminatory reason, it’s wrongful. Here, while Florida would have a right to walk back legislation, it seems wrong that you can do it for unlawful reasons.
For Brody k (sorry – can’t respond directly to leaf comments):
Reedy Creek and The Villages didn’t necessarily have tax breaks. They did have a certain amount of autonomy and to provide municipal services that would be superior to what city or county government could provide.
I looked up a typical WDW property tax bill where Reedy Creek and its bond debt were the highest line items, but they were still paying the standard county general fund and school funding taxes. I was kind of surprised because it was about 3.5% of assessed value and Reedy Creek was less than half of that. But they were clearly paying a higher property tax rate than the typical Orange County taxpayer.
False. The state is imposing a new level of state control upon Disney that no one else – not even Universal – is subjected to.
Two.words for Ron: Citizens United. SCOTUS said since corporations are people so.they can be sued, they have first amendment rights, including political speech and donations. It is illegal.to retaliate against someone for making critical.remarks about a politician. The state is subordinate to the feferal.government on constitutional issues, so.Ron has taken an unconstitutional action by punishing Disney.
The Supremes either have to.find for Disney or overthrow Citizens United. This will go to the Supreme Court. The Roberts Court would have to co.p merely repudiate their own decision or find for Disney, even if the FL.courts side with him.
Remember Disney got itself in this mess. They did not want to work with DeSantis they wanted to dictate to him. I love Disney Parks but not the Disney Company and its policies. I think there is always political bullying in big business and vice versa. Disney is about the bottom dollar. DeSantis is about the good of the Floridians and the state. It’s not to his advantage to get in a fight with Disney. He believes it’s the right thing to do. I admire him for standing up to Disney. Disney for its own good needs to start appreciating all it has in Florida.
I can’t tell if this is a parody account.
“Disney got itself in this mess” – by using its freedom of speech and sharing its opinion on legislation. Americans call that free speech.
“They did not want to work with DeSantis” – Work with him how, specifically? I believe Iger has mentioned he is willing, and wants to meet with DeSantis to solve the issue. DeSantis meanwhile, as Florida had some issues, decided he needed to go on a book tour.
“Disney is about the bottom dollar” – Yes, it’s called capitalism.
“I admire him for standing up to Disney” – DeSantis is a bully who is weaponizing government to try and hurt the most important employer in his state because they dared to disagree with legislation he supported…you admire that?
If the government can target and punish Disney, imagine what they can do to you.
I think Florida is dam lucky to have Disney. Think clearly about Disney being gone!!! The tax dollars gone. Hotels, tourist stores closed, Jobs in the thousands gone. All because Desantis got hair up his butt because Disney didn’t back his don’t say gay bill!!! Not to say the debt the state will pick up taking over Reedy creek! You want to pay it. Do you even live in Florida? Even other Rebulicans say this is a bad move for Desantis. He needs to sit down with Disney and solve this instead of throwing a temper tantrum … “I’ll build a prison next to Disney” What an ass!!!
how did disney dictate anything? All they did was exercise their right to say they didn’t support the actions of the governer, or a bill that was passed. For that, DeSantis has spent the last 6 months creating legislation to only target Disney. This has been his stated goal. Even one of the bills has W.O.K.E. in the acronym.
Tom Bricker’s analysis of Disney’s First Amendment case is consistent with what I’m seeing at The Atlantic (two stories), NY Times, CNN and more. Next year’s legislature will likely address the mess, perhaps posing as general update of special district law.
Disney will not prevail here. The argument that their first amendment rights being infringed hinges on whether every other corporation in every other state of the country is without first amendment rights because they don’t enjoy the private kingdom rights afforded Disney 60 years ago. That’s a bit of a stretch and won’t pass a reasonability test. The revocation is in line with the original covenant in that it was not in perpetuity, but at the discretion of the government of Florida.
Worth reading: https://www.oyez.org/cases/1995/95-191
@Tom
I was just about to cite that case lol!
I don’t see how the special district rights have anything to do with first amendment rights or any other rights a corporation or individual may enjoy. They are not mutually exclusive. I don’t think Disney’s case is that complex. Occam’s razor (the simplest explanation regardless of feelings, emotions, biases, etc.) often prevails in suits. It is fairly obvious the governor, the state government violated Disney’s first amendment rights in retaliation for taking a position issue.
I appreciate the case link. However, in this instance, Disney’s business income has not been materially affected by Desantis partisan retaliation. Banning government employees from going on Disney property for vacation or purchasing purposes would be different. The question isn’t really whether there are primary, secondary or tertiary political motivations for the dissolution of reedy creek. The question is whether the government has the authority to remove a special district’s autonomy within the bounds of the original agreement. I believe there isn’t a “must show just cause” rule within the original agreement, where either “just cause” is explained or left for legal interpretation. Without that rule, the government isn’t bound by having to demonstrate any reason whatsoever. Therefore, how can such a dissolution impact the corporations freedom of speech rights?
I think you would be correct if they didn’t give a reason. But they did give a reason, and that reason was unlawful. But what do I know, I’m not a lawyer. I guess we’ll have to see how this plays out.
Because the governor said, many times, that the aim was to punish Disney for expressing opposition to his legislation. That’s a First Amendment violation.
Disney also failed to follow state law and is going to have a tough time claiming RDS did anything to Disney without Disney saying they are RFID. And if Disney says that then they engaged in municipal bond fraud and would be immediately liable for those bonds.
The media is making hay out of this but local municipal law attorneys are saying Disney is going to lose badly.
https://youtu.be/PeMNBPmRs2E
You wonder if CFTOD will lose the firefighters? NO WAY! While there are some firefighters that didn’t want everything to get this far, the fact they will be getting a massive pay increase will certainly keep them fat and happy and quiet for a good long while….
If the firefighters get that massive pay increase, you’re absolutely right. Will they still get it in light of all the CFTOD’s legal expenses?
Oh yes. Union negotiations are almost done. No way the board backs out. The governor will make sure of that. CFTOD will raise the millage rates, raise utility costs, slash the budget in other areas going forward.
Lose firefighters? LOL. The firefighters wanted the state takeover.
While I agree that those of us who don’t live in Florida would probably have less of an impact on Florida politicians, I also believe that as DVC owners (since the 1990s for us) the value of our property is being negatively impacted by DeSantis and his board — and I do believe that DVC owners should get involved in this. I spent my whole working life in politics in my home state, and this is a truly dangerous sham on the part of Florida.
That’s fair. I also think this is why the ‘mad as hell’ dude who spoke during the public comments portion of today’s meeting was so impactful. He is exactly the type of person Florida should not want to lose (he’s also the type DeSantis should not want to alienate).
Amicus briefs are a thing…
As a DVC owner, I disagree. I think ultimately this is good for the State and good for our investment. The way Disney has been running RCID is outrageous. Look at Universal…are they suffering under State leadership? Hardly.
Let’s face it. Disney has hardly been looking out for our investment. You can’t look at the development of DVC properties and claim they’re looking out for our investment.
Are the board members of the CFTOD paid? If so, how much and who pays them?
with WDW having tens of millions of guests wouldn’t it be great to have a ” blog” ( hint hint) organize a day for those millions of fans to unit and email / snail mail the govener of Florida ( or tourist board) that if this fight continues we will not be voting for him come election day.
As a matter of principle, I don’t think it’s wise to meddle in the governance of a state where one does not reside. I understand the argument could be made that fans have a vested interest in Florida, but I think the appropriate response there is voting with your wallet and tourism dollars. Honestly, I don’t agree even with that (but I also don’t hold it against those who do so on principle), as the harm being done is not to the politicians, it’s disproportionately to businesses big and small.
It’s one thing to have an opinion on this and share it online, but an organized or targeted campaign makes me uncomfortable. I wouldn’t want that to be done by outside interest groups when it comes to other topics, so I cannot in good conscience advocate for that here.
At the end of the day, DeSantis wants to be president and this is already one of the biggest issues around which public opinion of him is forming. So I think anyone who is discussing the topic, or responds to polling accordingly, has already made about as meaningful of an individual impact as possible in this scenario.
For Tom (again I can’t respond directly to a leaf comment) I’m not sure about the whole thing about meddling in other states. DeSantis has stated that part of what he’s doing is punishing a company that he clearly defines as being located in California. Along with stating clearly that a goal of the district might be to extract concessions on Disney’s creative content that he describes would be more “family friendly”. But I tend to agree with you that he’s not going to be impressed by anyone from out of state (or even in state) who criticizes his actions. He’s been pretty immune to any criticism. And now the legislature agreed to shield his travel from any previously required public disclosure.
Excellent article, Tom. I value your legal skill in working through an issue like this, and your descriptions are supremely helpful. I do have to say that it seems like such a horrible waste of time, money, and energy for the Governor to force the state into a pi**ing match with such a huge employer of, and vendor to, people who pay taxes to support the State of Florida. I’m not talking just about Floridians and their taxes (as in no income tax), but all of us who pay the exorbitant tourist tax to spend time at Disney. Put all those folks out of work, and take away our destination, and see where the Florida economy ends up. And, it has nothing to do with other entities and their lack of special districts like Reedy Creek; they all have them. RCID has been a great steward of the land that is Disney, and I repeat my statement from a couple of weeks ago that I often use the District in my courses as an example of how things COULD be run to maintain a reasonable environment for the humans and the non-humans that inhabit the area.
Disney is claiming a 1st Amendment violation. The judge should make them demonstrate how this materially affect Disney’s bottom line. And Disney’s shareholders should sue the Disney board for breach of fiduciary duty.
And if the Board’s answer is they are pursuing a higher ESG rating through their “ speech “, the Board must be found guilty of a breach of duty, because ESG ratings have no positive quantifiable effect on share value. The costs to the shareholders of chasing a “ higher “ ESG rating, though, is quantifiable, and large.
Having the additional burden of the oversight board will certainly cause a financial impact, and the only reason why Florida made this change was directly attributed to what Chapek stated. The Supreme Court has ruled that Corporations do have First Amendment protections, just like individuals, and due to Florida’s retaliation against Disney, retaliation that is designed to not only suppress Disney’s speech, but the speech of other entities.
You absolutely don’t need to show evidence of monetary loss to have 1st Amendment freedoms.
Again, you don’t have to agree with Disney’s politics in order to support them and their free speech.
“I do not agree with what you say, but I’ll defend to the death your right to say it.”
– Voltaire
They do not have to prove sh*t other than the governor retaliated because Disney was not in favor of his don’t say gay bill. Desantis is a very dangerous man he is my way or the highway no compromise. Can you imagine this behavior with a foreign country. He needs to go and not to the White House!! He is he’ll bent on ruining the state of Florida.