Disney and DeSantis End Dispute with New $17 Billion Walt Disney World Development Agreement

Jun 13, 2024 in "Reedy Creek Improvement District"

Posted: Thursday June 13, 2024 4:30pm ET by WDWMAGIC Staff

Disney officially ended its First Amendment lawsuit against Florida Governor Ron DeSantis on Thursday, concluding a two-year conflict triggered by the company's opposition to the so-called "Don't Say Gay" law.

Team Disney Orlando

This decision followed last night's Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board's approval of a new 15-year development agreement, permitting Disney to invest up to $17 billion to expand its Orlando theme parks.

"Walt Disney World is inextricably intertwined in the fabric of the state of Florida, and the success of Walt Disney World is the success of Central Florida and vice versa," said Brian Aungst Jr., a Central Florida Tourism Oversight District board member. "This agreement provides a lasting, sustainable, and prosperous future for the district, the people of Florida, and the Walt Disney Company."

In a statement, Jeff Vahle, President of Walt Disney World Resort said, "This new development agreement paves the way for us to invest billions of dollars in Walt Disney World Resort, supporting the growth of this global destination, fueling the Florida economy, and allowing us to deliver even more memorable and extraordinary experiences for our guests."

The resolution marks the end of a contentious culture war that dominated headlines in 2022. The legal battle left Disney in a weakened position, as it lost control over the nearly 40 square-mile area surrounding its parks, a privilege it had held since 1967.

U.S. District Judge Allen Winsor dismissed Disney's First Amendment suit in January, ruling that Florida had the authority to revoke the district. Disney had initially planned to appeal, warning that the case had significant implications for the rule of law.

In March, Disney and DeSantis settled most of their disputes, dismissing state lawsuits and agreeing to focus on the new development plan. Disney suspended its federal appeal pending the resolution of development issues.

On Wednesday night, the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District voted 5-0 to approve the new development agreement. With the agreement finalized, Disney notified the 11th Circuit Court of Appeals on Thursday that it was dismissing the case.

"All parties to this appeal hereby stipulate to dismissal of the appeal with prejudice," the notice stated.

CFTOD HQ near Disney Springs

Discuss on the Forums

Get Walt Disney World News Delivered to Your Inbox

mkt4 hours ago

The free speech claim was federal, the land use claim was state.

mikejs785 hours ago

The federal case was not predicated on FL free speech law, it was based around 1st amendment jurisprudence and the US Constitution contract clause. The state case was based around state law but not speech state law.

Bullseye19679 hours ago

I am not sure of the actual filing and I will admit that I am too lazy to look through all the filings you posted, Thank you, but I think it was a claim on FL law and not Federal. The Sol on "free speech" in FL is 3 years, but it is not limited in USC, And if this is right, it was what I quoted above. The clock is ticking. A federal court can not take action on a state law case if SoL has expired.

JoeCamel1 day ago

Saved them a bunch of cash

Chi841 day ago

The State was happy with the way things were. For many, many years.

mikejs781 day ago

My gut says that beginning in 2027 there will be legislation that slowly picks away at CFTOD and gradually returns control to Disney. It won't happen all at once - but I bet it will happen.

Chi841 day ago

There's a battle being lost, but it's not really a PR battle and it only tangentially involves Disney.

mkt1 day ago

You’re right that there wasn’t a massive public rally to defend Disney. At least not in the way we often see with political figures or causes. But that doesn’t mean they lost the PR battle. It just means they played it differently. They didn’t need cheering crowds. They let the state’s actions speak for themselves. The Lake Nona cancellation - whether intentional or not - ended up being the loudest statement. Thousands of high-paying jobs. Gone. Local business groups noticed. Real estate noticed. Economists noticed. That stuck. Meanwhile, the “win” Florida claimed was largely symbolic - swapping one board for another - while Disney kept building, kept expanding, and retained the infrastructure and bond authority they needed. The machine never stopped. And let’s not forget: the only only people visibly waving flags on the property line during this entire episode? They were on the state’s side, and those flags bore symbols we all agree have no place in a civilized society. So no - Disney didn’t lose the PR war. They just didn’t fight it with soundbites. They let time and economic impact do the talking.

flynnibus1 day ago

Who came to defend Disney? Who lined up to call out DeSantis' action? Who lined up to point out the cabel action in the Legislature? Who used Disney as an example of what can happen? I'm not talking about who wrote stories to cover the news.. I'm talking about who put their name on the line to call out the injustice that was happening? How many people did you hear regurgitating the false propoganda about taxes? How many people did you hear thinking this RCID thing was some long running scam that was time to go? I'm talking about who the gen pop saw as in the wrong... most did not flock to defend Disney... they saw it as some corporate scam that finally was being taken down.. Disney was pretty much the target of the most direct, blatant, outright cheered political driven retribution I can think of in any recent memory... and the gen pop thinks DeSantis was eliminating corporate benefits and DEI non-sense. That's the PR battle Disney lost.

Prince-11 day ago

Oh Ronnie didn't need Disney's help to accomplish that. He was never going to be president.

MR.Dis1 day ago

Disney won in one respect, this incident totally destroyed a certain Govenors hope of ever being seen as Presidential material.

mkt1 day ago

That’s a fair framing if you’re evaluating from a strictly structural standpoint Yes, Disney no longer controls the board, and yes, they negotiated toward a new normal rather than scorched-earth resistance. But to say they “lost the PR battle”? I strongly disagree. Florida came off as punitive, erratic, and willing to jeopardize thousands of high-paying jobs over a political tantrum. The Lake Nona cancellation - whether coincidental or not - felt like fallout, and perception did the heavy lifting. That loss is now linked to the state’s actions. No press release needed. Florida is viewed as having cost the region several thousand high earners, along with their housing demand, business growth, and tax revenue. That’s not just bad optics. That’s third-world-level policy sabotage. Meanwhile, Disney kept building. The board that was supposed to rein them in greenlit a $17B expansion. Bond authority stayed. Infrastructure control stayed. Functionally, nothing stopped. Sure, the expansion brings jobs. But they're mostly tourism and hospitality roles. These aren't six-figure white collar transfers — they're hourly park positions. Florida traded a long-term white-collar boom for a short-term PR win and a few more popcorn carts. That’s not a victory. That’s a downgrade. If anything, Disney let Florida win the headline, then quietly walked away with the outcome. That’s not “dealing with the devil.” That’s knowing when to let the devil shake his fist at a cloud while you pour the foundation for your next park expansion.

LAKid531 day ago

Precisely

UNCgolf1 day ago

Indeed. And while I wish Disney had fought to the end, that was never likely. Publicly traded corporations just don't really operate that way. For example, I've represented corporate clients who had a good chance of prevailing against the government in regulatory investigations, but they would have spent more on the fight than they spent on the settlement -- so they settled. There's always going to be a cost/benefit analysis (which often involves more than just the potential legal fees) regardless of whether they think they're right. Incidentally, this is one of the reasons Harvard is more likely to fight to the end in their current litigation (although that's certainly not guaranteed). They don't have to worry about shareholders, although they do have some other outside concerns.