The Florida Legislature passed amendments to laws today to revoke Disney’s efforts to escape the control of Governor Ron DeSantis. The governor was outraged because Disney openly opposed his “Don’t Say Gay” law. He got the legislature to dissolve Disney’s self-governing Reedy Creek district. But before the legislature acted, Disney made an agreement with its own Reedy Creek district board to extend its control for decades.
DeSantis’s new board met today and began the takeover process, raising Disney’s taxes. The legislature acted to void Disney’s efforts to extend its own control. The new law will lead to legal challenges.
Imagine, if you dare, a DeSantis presidency. Any corporation that dared to disagree with his multiple prejudices would be singled out for spiteful treatment. DeSantis is a mean, angry, hateful wannabee dictator. Woe to those who dare to challenge him.
Florida legislators on Wednesday quickly responded to Gov. Ron DeSantis’ call to retroactively invalidate an agreement between Walt Disney World and its special taxing district, adopting amendments despite warnings that the proposal will not withstand a constitutional challenge.
The Florida State Affairs Committee and the Senate Rules Committee each added an amendment to bills regulating land use and development regulations that requires the DeSantis-appointed board overseeing all of Disney’s parks and resorts to vote on the Disney agreement that limits the authority of the governor’s new supervisors to infrastructure and taxing issues.
The move came on the same day the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District Board of Supervisors met and announced a series of proposals that will require the governing board whose revenues come from Disney to raise taxes on itself.
Under the amendments added to SB 1604 and HB 439, special districts would be prohibited from complying with development agreements executed three months or less before new laws take effect that change how district board members are selected.
The amendment also would give new boards four months to review any development agreements and decide if they should be re-adopted. “The Legislature sets up special districts and allows them, and therefore we should be able to change how we think some of those things need to happen as we move forward,’’ said Rep. Stan McClain, R-Ocala, the sponsor of the House amendment.
IS THIS CONSTITUTIONAL?
But Democrats, who have for years criticized Republican lawmakers for their willingness to give Walt Disney World favorable treatment, said the amendments now appeared to be singling out the company for punitive treatment.
They warned that if passed, the provision would violate the Constitution. “I’m all about corporate accountability, but this isn’t it,” said Rep. Anna Eskamani, D-Orlando. “And it continues to be a distraction for us to focus on real life issues by continuing the Disney versus DeSantis drama.”
Sen. Shevrin Jones, D-West Park, said he worried the amendment would “set a very bad precedent” that “opens up the floodgates” for future legislatures. He said the Disney-backed district appears to have “operated within the law, and this shouldn’t be how we govern.”
Both McClain and the Senate sponsor, Sen. Blaise Ingoglia, R-Spring Hill, were asked if they could name other special districts to which the law would apply and how many would be affected. Neither could answer.
“I’m not sure how many, but I can think of one,’’ Ingoglia told the Senate Rules Committee, referring to the new Central Florida Tourism Oversight District.
The amendments come after DeSantis announced there would be “more to come” in his war against Disney, the largest single-site employer in the United States with 75,000 workers and an economic linchpin of the state’s tourism industry.
DESANTIS’ FIRST EFFORT DIDN’T WORK
Last year, DeSantis wanted to dissolve the Reedy Creek Improvement District, the special taxing district created in 1967 to pay for municipal services to the 39-square-mile area where Disney built its theme parks, hotels and resort areas at a time when the nearest urban development was more than 16 miles away.
After Disney officials voiced opposition to the Parental Rights in Education Bill, which prohibited classroom instruction on gender identity issues in certain grades, legislators rushed through a bill to dissolve the district.
But, after it became law, Disney quietly pointed to another state law that requires the state to pay for any outstanding debts before a special district is dissolved and, if the district were to be dismantled as the governor wanted, it would cost Florida taxpayers nearly $1 billion.
Lawmakers returned in special session in February, repealed the law dissolving the district and replaced it with a plan to allow the governor to appoint the district’s governing board.
But, before that law could take effect, Disney outmaneuvered the state by adopting a series of development agreement and restrictive covenants that undermined the authority of the DeSantis-appointed board. Invalidating those agreements, however, is expected to be a lengthy legal fight.
At its meeting on Wednesday, Central Florida Tourism Oversight District Board voted to void the agreements with no discussion. But because state and federal contract law may create legal obstacles to that decision, the legislation attempts to help them achieve the goal.
In the House, McClain had difficulty explaining the amendment under questioning from Eskamani. “The Florida Constitution says we can’t pass retroactive laws impairing contracts. Can you explain how is your amendment constitutional?’’ she asked. “Obviously this would be a new law,’’ McClain answered.
Read more at: https://www.miamiherald.com/news/politics-government/state-politics/article274492771.html#storylink=cpy
“Disney is one of Florida’s biggest employers, and had a $75.2 billion annual economic impact on central Florida in 2019.”
How about Disney announces a Friday one-day shutdown.
Announce far enough in advance for tourists not to book (don’t want ticked off tourists)
Still pay employees (which is a dent in $75.2 billion). Local businesses hopefully withstand one day with not revenue.
And let the republicans answer the tourists.
“The Florida Constitution says we can’t pass retroactive laws impairing contracts. Can you explain how is your amendment constitutional?’’ she asked. “Obviously this would be a new law,’’ McClain answered, MORONICALLY.
U.A. Constitution, Article I, Section 10, Clause 1:
No State shall enter into any Treaty, Alliance, or Confederation; grant Letters of Marque and Reprisal; coin Money; emit Bills of Credit; make any Thing but gold and silver Coin a Tender in Payment of Debts; pass any Bill of Attainder, ex post facto Law, or Law impairing the Obligation of Contracts, or grant any Title of Nobility.
U.S.,
ofc
Unfortunately that clause only applies to Criminal law. Mickey Might have to “stand his ground ” when DeScuzziest comes to town.
nope
Yup
“Since the 1798 case Calder v. Bull, the Supreme Court has interpreted the Ex Post Facto Clauses to apply only to laws that are criminal or penal in nature, not to civil laws”
I think that in this case, where the law is being changed after the fact to impair an existing contract, the impairment provision of that article would apply. Perhaps jrtheta might provide a legal opinion on this.
Not my forte. But I do think it’s a clear case of government retaliating against a company for exercising its First Amendment right to speak out. (Hey, Republicans believe corporations are people, and the Supreme Court has more or less said the same thing for some time.) And one federal court in Florida has already slapped him for trying to censor state university professors’ speech.
I don’t think I knew that.
So it gets attacked on First Amendment grounds.
jsrtheta
Your logic on the first amendment is clear. Between Citizens United and Janus, logic dictates that this court find that Corporations have free speech rights like people and forcing them to pay fees or incur costs due to their social beliefs is far more egregious than forcing a worker to pay union dues that may or may not even spend those dues on unspecified social or political causes. Just the fact that they Unions could was enough for the Taliban 6 in Janus. Although it was only 5 at the time.
As much as I loath Trump, not everything he said was as outrageous as we on the left made it sound. As much as he was gas lighting, the myth that the Courts are apolitical is like much of our History just that, a convenient Myth. The courts are apolitical when they agree with us and clearly political when they disagree. Making that worse, the court does not represent the Majority of voters. We don’t reliably know the views of the majority of voters on issues no matter how many polls we take . What we do know is who they have voted for. A Democratic President won the popular vote in 7 of the last 8 elections. Yet 6 of nine Justices are Republican appointees with the stamp of approval from Koch and the Federalist Society, Leonardo Leo and Opus Dei.
Good luck with Legal precedent and logic.
Joel, the scary part (and there are many) is that with this SCOTUS, precedent means nothing. They can overturn whatever they want.
That’s why I favor expanding the Court. Roosevelt made a stab at it, and lost.
Except in the Court, where he suddenly started winning.
jsrtheta
FDR used the bully pulpit and the Great Depression did not hurt his case. It even got John D. Rockefeller Jr. to drop his opposition to the NLRA.
dianeravitch
Agreed !
“This would be a new law.”
Yeah, idiot. A new law trying to alter a former law under which Disney had a right to make its moves. That’s why it’s called “retroactive”.
Welcome to Florida, America’s political lab for fascism!
You nailed it. I ask myself why I post so often about Florida: it’s our laboratory for fascism. And a Mussolini wannabe.
But when did it change. Did we forget the massacre in Ocoee or Rosewood . Or the numerous lynchings right through the 30s and 40s. Willie James Howard lynched for sending a Christmas card and New Years card to a white Girl in 1944. Flora Duh was the per-capita lynching capital of the Country.
Isabel Wilkerson describes Flora Duh well in her historical book on the Great Migration. It has to be on the book burning list. George Starling flees the State in 1945 and if I remember he is afraid to return in the 60s.
Isn’t the subtitle of DeFacist’s book something related to that? Flor-uh-duh as a model for the nation?
Yup. It’s “Florida’s Blueprint for America’s Revival”
Notice that the extreme right-wingers always, Hitlerlike, say that they are going to return us to a mythical golden age–in this case, revive us (with the Christian echoes of that–revivalism).
Ofc, “America’s Political Lab for Fascism” would have been perfect
The recent rash of unprovoked, random killing or maiming of innocents by gun-toting a______s raises to sharp relief Flor-uh-duh’s recent approval of permitless concealed carry, does it not?
Yeah, another brilliant idea, Ron Ron.
this should not come as any surprise, as the Republican Party will, try and stop all those who are, against them, and, the Republican Party goes, a step further, in its, unconsitutional acts to prevent people from exercising their free speech rights. But, there’s nothing that anybody can do about it.
The conclusion, “Don’t say Catholic,” is in the content of an article titled, “News Media Quiet as a Mouse Regarding Catholic Angles in Disney-DeSantis Dispute,” (Religion Unplugged, 4-5-2022). “Media has decided that Christians, and specifically Catholics, are not part of the coverage.”
The omission advances fascist hubris? Does Ohio Senate Bill 83 (anti-woke) introduced by Sen. Cirino, provide illustration? Ohio is the nation’s 7th largest state.
I’m curious—do those 75,000 Disney employees vote? Do they have relatives who vote? Maybe Ron isn’t as smart as he thinks he is.
This would be a good time for a voter registration drive in the Orlando area. Just to make sure people can vote for sane state legislators in next election.
I’m really glad we have these small government Republicans running so many things. It’s not like they are micromanaging corporations, women’s health decisions, lesson planning or anything else.
The Republicans function on one principle: power. And they use that power to enforce their ever-flexible morals. It’s only wrong to do certain things if one is not a Republican.
Yes, Florida Republicans favor “parental rights,” but only for some parents.