Here's my counter-take after reviewing for about 6 minutes.
This case is distinguishable from Kensington for one reason - there are over 1500 "Special Improvement Districts" in Florida. Florida moved to strip authority and punish just one - the one that disagreed with DeSantis. Had Florida terminated the contracts of ALL special improvement districts then perhaps that analysis would apply. Kensington would be directly on point had the municipality in that case only eliminated the funding for the firemen who spoke out.
Seems like this case Kansas v. UMBEHR 518 U.S. 668, is more on point:
Following nonrenewal of his trash hauling contract with county, independent contractor brought § 1983 action against two members of board of county commissioners, alleging that they had terminated his government contract in retaliation for his criticism of county and board. The United States District Court for the District of Kansas, Richard Dean Rogers, J., granted summary judgment for defendants, and contractor appealed. The United States Court of Appeals for the Tenth Circuit, 44 F.3d 876,reversed, and certiorari was granted. The Supreme Court, Justice O'Connor, held that First Amendment protects independent contractors from termination or prevention of automatic renewal of at-will government contracts in retaliation for their exercise of freedom of speech.
Finally, Twitterlawyer's analysis seems to gloss over that the crux of the lawusit is over Florida trying to revoke a valid contract and replace the existing, agreed upon terms with ones they prefer. That's just basic contracts stuff and really doesn't have a lot to do with Kensington.