DeSantis’ Reedy Creek board says Disney stripped its power
Orlando SentinelLAKE BUENA VISTA — Gov. Ron DeSantis’ handpicked board overseeing Disney World’s government services is gearing up for a potential legal battle over a 30-year development agreement they say effectively renders them powerless to manage the entertainment giant’s future growth in Central Florida.
Ahead of an expected state takeover, the Walt Disney Co. quietly pushed through the pact and restrictive covenants that would tie the hands of future board members for decades, according to a legal presentation by the district’s lawyers on Wednesday.
The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District’s new Board of Supervisors voted to bring in outside legal firepower to examine the agreement, including a conservative Washington, D.C., law firm that has defended several of DeSantis’ culture war priorities.
“We’re going to have to deal with it and correct it,” board member Brian Aungst Jr. said. “It’s a subversion of the will of the voters and the Legislature and the governor. It completely circumvents the authority of this board to govern.”
Disney defended its actions.
“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,” an unsigned company statement read.
Taryn Fenske, a DeSantis spokeswoman, called the move “last-ditch efforts” to transfer “rights and authorities” from the district to Disney.
“An initial review suggests these agreements may have significant legal infirmities that would render the contracts void as a matter of law,” Fenske said in a prepared statement. “We are pleased the new governor-appointed board retained multiple financial and legal firms to conduct audits and investigate Disney’s past behavior.”
The previous board, which was known as the Reedy Creek Improvement District and controlled by Disney, approved the agreement on Feb. 8, the day before the Florida House voted to put the governor in charge.
Board members held a public meeting that day but spent little time discussing the document before unanimously approving it in a brief meeting.
DeSantis replaced those Disney-allied board members with five Republicans on Feb. 27, who discovered the binding agreement the previous board approved.
DeSantis and Disney clashed over the corporation’s opposition to what critics call the “don’t say gay” law, which limits classroom instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in public schools.
The new DeSantis-aligned board expressed dismay over the previous board’s actions.
“This essentially makes Disney the government,” board member Ron Peri said. “This board loses, for practical purposes, the majority of its ability to do anything beyond maintaining the roads and maintaining basic infrastructure.”
Among other things, a “declaration of restrictive covenants” spells out that the district is barred from using the Disney name without the corporation’s approval or “fanciful characters such as Mickey Mouse.”
That declaration is valid until “21 years after the death of the last survivor of the descendants of King Charles III, king of England,” according to the document.
(Rule of Perpetuities)A development agreement allows Disney to build projects at the highest density and the right to sell or assign those development rights to other district landowners without the board having any say, according to the presentation by the district’s new special legal counsel.
Disney and its affiliates own the vast majority of the land in the district, and other companies have operated there with the corporation’s blessing.
The development agreement bars the board from regulating the height of buildings, which would be solely under the purview of the Federal Aviation Administration.
The previous board also agreed to give Disney vast authority over its own buildings, according to its declaration. The agreement states that Disney must review any exterior changes to the district’s buildings to ensure consistent “theming” with Disney World.
Aungst said he is hopeful Disney will work with the board and correct the agreement in a “very collaborative manner.”
But board members also approved hiring four outside law firms with Chairman Martin Garcia citing a need for “lawyers that have extensive experience in dealing with protracted litigation against Fortune 500 companies.”
One of those firms is Cooper & Kirk, which has gotten more than $2.8 million in legal fees and contracts from the DeSantis administration to defend a controversial social media law, a ban on cruise ship COVID-19 “vaccine passport” requirements, and a restriction on felons seeking to vote.
Cooper & Kirk’s lawyers will bill $795 an hour, according to the firm’s engagement letter. The boutique firm’s roster of lawyers includes Adam Laxalt, who roomed with DeSantis when he was training at the Naval Justice School in 2005 and made an unsuccessful bid for U.S. Senate last year in Nevada.
The firm’s alumni include Republican U.S. Sens. Ted Cruz of Texas and Tom Cotton of Arkansas.
The board also approved bringing on Lawson Huck Gonzalez, a law firm that was launched earlier this year. One of its founders is Alan Lawson, a retired Florida Supreme Court justice.
The board approved two local firms as well — Nardella & Nardella and Waugh Grant.
Those firms were needed because of the vast legal resources Disney has at its disposal, Garcia said.
“What it looks like to me [is that] because Disney has the Magic Kingdom, they thought they could be king for a day,” he said.
(Told you all before that this was a
real property issue. Now it will get tied up in the courts well beyond DeSantis' governorship, unless Reedy Creek's new board or the state can get some type of Temporary Restraining Order, which IMNSHO won't happen.)
