Monorail Inspections Teed Up for DeSantis in Disney Battle
Disney and other large theme parks conduct their own safety inspections because of a carve-out from oversight by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
May 04, 2023 at 12:28 PM
4 minute read
The Florida House gave final approval to a bill that would lead to the state Department of Transportation inspecting Walt Disney World's monorail system, as Gov. Ron DeSantis is locked in a battle with Disney.
The monorail inspections were included in a broad transportation bill (HB 1305) that is headed to DeSantis. The House voted 83-32 to pass the bill, which was approved Tuesday by the Senate.
The bill would require state oversight of "any governmentally or privately owned fixed-guideway transportation systems operating in this state which are located within an independent special district created by a local act which have boundaries within two contiguous counties." That definition would apply to Disney.
Democrats argued the change is politically motivated amid a feud that started last year when Disney opposed a DeSantis-backed law that restricts instruction on sexual orientation and gender identity in schools.
"I just don't think it makes sense for us to legislate in a manner that is punitive towards a private business," Rep. Anna Eskamani, D-Orlando, said.
But Republicans pointed to safety considerations. The monorail system had a fatality in 2009, when an operator was killed in a collision between trains on the EPCOT line.
"There was an incident in 2009 where a death occurred, but FDOT [the Department of Transportation] is looking at inspecting this so we know what issues do arise," House bill sponsor Shane Abbott, R-DeFuniak Springs, said. "What this is important for is, we don't know what we don't know right now."
The state already requires Department of Transportation safety standards for governmentally owned fixed-guideway systems and systems that are privately owned but funded all or in part by the state.
But Disney and other large theme parks conduct their own safety inspections because of a carve-out from oversight by the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services.
The department inspects amusement-park rides except at facilities or parks that have more than 1,000 employees and full-time inspectors on staff.
The bill would require compliance reports every three years and an annual on-site evaluation.
The state and Disney are tangled in two new lawsuits rooted in a decision by DeSantis and lawmakers to revamp the former Reedy Creek Improvement District, which was created in the 1960s and largely gave Disney self-governance power.
DeSantis this year appointed board members of the renamed Central Florida Tourism Oversight District. But the former Reedy Creek board entered into development agreements with Disney before the new board was seated.
The Central Florida Tourism Oversight District filed a lawsuit this week in Orange County circuit court to try to nullify those agreements.
That came after Disney filed a lawsuit last week in federal court in Tallahassee, alleging DeSantis and other officials improperly retaliated against the company over its opposition to the controversial 2022 education law.
Disney's lawsuit contends the retaliation threatens the company's "business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region and violates its constitutional rights."
Lawmakers this week also could pass a separate bill (SB 1604) that seeks to nullify the agreements reached by the former Reedy Creek board. That bill is pending in the Senate after passing the House on Wednesday.
Under the bill, 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 bill also would give new boards four months to review any development agreements and decide if they should be re-adopted.
Jim Turner reports for the News Service of Florida.
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2025 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllPlaintiffs Attorneys Awarded $113K on $1 Judgment in Noise Ordinance Dispute
4 minute readAs Unpredictability Rises, Gov't Law Practices Expect Trump Bump. Especially in Florida
5 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Rejuvenation of a Sharp Employer Non-Compete Tool: Delaware Supreme Court Reinvigorates the Employee Choice Doctrine
- 2Mastering Litigation in New York’s Commercial Division Part V, Leave It to the Experts: Expert Discovery in the New York Commercial Division
- 3GOP-Led SEC Tightens Control Over Enforcement Investigations, Lawyers Say
- 4Transgender Care Fight Targets More Adults as Georgia, Other States Weigh Laws
- 5Roundup Special Master's Report Recommends Lead Counsel Get $0 in Common Benefit Fees
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250