Disney’s Reedy Creek deal violated state law, attorneys for DeSantis' oversight board say

LAKE BUENA VISTA, Fla. — Disney’s agreements seeking to preserve its power over development in Central Florida didn’t follow requirements in state law, rendering them null and void, lawyers for Gov. Ron DeSantis tourism oversight board said Wednesday.

“The bottom line is that Disney engaged in a caper worthy of Scrooge McDuck to try to evade Florida law,” said David H. Thompson, a lawyer with the Cooper & Kirk law firm.

After hearing legal presentations, members of DeSantis’ Disney World oversight board decided to ask staff for a resolution they plan to consider on April 26 voiding the agreements. That action could set off a legal dispute and open another front in DeSantis’ battle with Disney that’s generating national headlines.

The board’s new lawyers said the previous Disney-friendly Reedy Creek board failed to properly notify affected property owners by mail of the development agreement, a requirement spelled out in Florida statutes. Although the agreements were publicly advertised and approved in public meetings, no record was found of those notices being mailed, they said.

“Disney’s efforts are riddled with illegality, and they will not withstand judicial scrutiny,” Thompson said.

In a previous unsigned statement, Disney company officials said the agreements were approved in open and public meetings in accordance with Florida law. Disney company officials did not respond to questions about the mail notice requirement.

At issue is a development agreement and restrictive covenants approved on Feb. 8 by the Reedy Creek Improvement District’s Board of Supervisors ahead of a state takeover. State lawmakers voted to put DeSantis in charge of appointing the five members of Reedy Creek’s board, replacing an arrangement that essentially allowed Disney to hand-pick the board and self-govern its theme parks and resorts.

The development agreement preserved Disney’s control over growth and planning, according to the new board’s legal analysis. A separate declaration of restrictive covenants spelled out that Disney must review aesthetic changes to the district’s buildings, among other stipulations.

DeSantis, widely seen as a 2024 GOP presidential contender, vowed to get the agreements voided, which he says run contrary to his desire to end Disney’s control over the Reedy Creek district.

To bolster the state’s case, lawmakers quickly sent to the Senate and House floor bills that would allow the development agreement to be voided by the new board, which is known as the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District.

Voiding the development agreement could put the state on shaky legal ground because it would impair a contract, said Jacob Schumer, a Central Florida attorney specializing in local government law not affiliated with the district.

But if Reedy Creek didn’t properly provide notice of the changes to affected property owners, it could bolster the new board’s case, he said in an email.

“Significant case law out there basically says that if statutory notice requirements aren’t followed, then the government action is void from the outset,” he said.

The primary property owners affected by the agreement are Disney and its affiliates, which own almost all of the land in the district.

Under the previous arrangement, Disney controlled the Reedy Creek district because landowners elected board members. That gave Disney vast influence over who sat on the board overseeing government services for Disney World.

———