Disney Sues Ron DeSantis Over Florida Special District

Winston Cho
·5 min read
2
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.
  • Oops!
    Something went wrong.
    Please try again later.

In an escalation of the standoff between The Walt Disney Co. and Ron DeSantis, the entertainment giant has filed a lawsuit in Florida claiming the Republican governor’s hand-picked oversight board illegally voided an agreement that allegedly transferred certain powers of the company’s now-dissolved special district back to Disney.

Disney is asking a court to rule that the new board’s action — as well as legislation targeting Disney — is unlawful and unenforceable for multiple reasons, including that they were “enacted in retaliation for Disney’s political speech in violation of the First Amendment.”

More from The Hollywood Reporter

“A targeted campaign of government retaliation — orchestrated at every step by Governor DeSantis as punishment for Disney’s protected speech — now threatens Disney’s business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights,” states the complaint, which was filed Wednesday in Florida federal court and is embedded below. “Today’s action is the latest strike: At the Governor’s bidding, the State’s oversight board has purported to ‘void’ publicly noticed and duly agreed development contracts, which had laid the foundation for billions of Disney’s investment dollars and thousands of jobs.”

The development contracts in question were quietly signed by the previous oversight board on Feb. 8, the day before the state legislature passed a bill reshaping the leadership structure and changing the name of Disney’s Reedy Creek Improvement District. The legislation was meant to cap off a retaliatory move by Florida Republicans for Disney’s opposition to the so-called “Don’t Say Gay” law, signed in March 2022. Under the new bill, the governor was granted the authority to appoint every member of the special tax district’s five-member governing body. It was intended to cow Disney into keeping quiet on cultural issues or risk having the state disrupt company operations. Disney also claims that the DeSantis-controlled board cannot “declare its own legally binding contracts void and unenforceable.”

The 30-year pact signed by the previous, Disney-appointed board includes approval to build another theme park and restrictions that bar the new, DeSantis-controlled board from making changes to Disney’s sprawling property without securing company approval. The complaint was filed the same day the new board passed a resolution nullifying the agreement, alleging Disney’s constitutional rights are being violated “under the Contracts Clause, the Takings Clause, the Due Process Clause, and the First Amendment” and that the state has inflicted “a concerted campaign of retaliation because the Company expressed an opinion with which the government disagreed.”

In the complaint, Disney stresses that the contracts the new board voted to nullify are basic land-use agreements between a developer and its local regulator that are “similar in character to deals involving special districts to fix long-term development rights and obligations.” They’re necessary to “facilitate the certainty needed to ensure investment and effective commercial progress.” Contrary to statements from some lawmakers, Disney argues the deal doesn’t undercut the new board’s ability to govern and exercise authority, including by imposing taxes, exercising the power of eminent domain, approving or disapproving building permit applications, building roads, providing emergency services, or issuing bonds.

Disney has maintained that “all agreements signed between Disney and the District were appropriate, and were discussed and approved in open, noticed public forums in compliance with Florida’s Government in the Sunshine law.”

The company is also amplifying First Amendment issues and positioning this suit as a last resort. “Disney finds itself in this regrettable position because it expressed a viewpoint the Governor and his allies did not like,” states the complaint. “Disney wishes that things could have been resolved a different way. But Disney also knows that it is fortunate to have the resources to take a stand against the State’s retaliation — a stand smaller businesses and individuals might not be able to take when the State comes after them for expressing their own views. In America, the government cannot punish you for speaking your mind.”

In reasserting developmental authority over the land where Walt Disney World is located, DeSantis has threatened further retaliation by building another amusement park, a prison or a state park on the 24,000-acre parcel near Orlando, in addition to announcing legislation that would end Disney’s exemption to do its own safety inspections for rides. The new oversight board may also consider requiring Disney to post warnings about human trafficking at its hotels, creating more affordable housing for employees, giving the district’s first responders a raise and banning masking mandates.

Additionally, the Florida inspector general is investigating criminal fraud related to alleged ethical violations, such as conflicts of interest and self-dealing. DeSantis called for an inquiry on April 3 into whether the deal is valid, arguing that there was “inadequate notice” before the deal was struck.

During Disney’s annual shareholder meeting on April 3, CEO Bob Iger stressed that retaliation to “punish a company for its exercise of a constitutional right” is “not just anti-business, but it sounds anti-Florida.” He also pointed to the company’s value to Florida, announcing plans to invest over $17 billion in Disney World over the next 10 years and noting that “about 50 million visitors will go through our gates this year alone, about 8 million of them from outside the U.S., and we are the largest taxpayer in the state.”

DeSantis’ office has not yet responded to a request for comment.

Best of The Hollywood Reporter

Click here to read the full article.