DeSantis' Disney district takeover sparks leadership exodus and chaos

Oct 30, 2023 in "Reedy Creek Improvement District"

Posted: Monday October 30, 2023 3:00pm ET by WDWMAGIC Staff

In what marks a significant upheaval to the former Reedy Creek Improvement District, over thirty employees have resigned from the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, the governing entity responsible for Walt Disney World. This mass exodus includes almost half of its senior leadership and follows Florida Governor Ron DeSantis' controversial takeover of the district, raising serious concerns about operational stability and political influence.

The former Reedy Creek Improvement District HQ is now home to a Ron DeSantis appointed board of supervisors and CEO

Previously known as the Reedy Creek Improvement District, CFTOD has seen departures at every level - from the district administrator and chief financial officer to crucial roles in public works, procurement, and facilities management.

In an article published by long-time Reedy Creek observer Jason Garcia Seeking Rents, who obtained employee exit interviews in a public records request, one former manager with a 30-year career at Reedy Creek wrote that DeSantis' political appointees "show a severe lack of trust for employees" and made his work "uncomfortable," "stressful," and "demoralizing." Another manager wrote that the transition has been "very negative." And a department director called the new leadership "unqualified and incompetent."

A former executive assistant went even further saying, "The legacy of this special district is being destroyed by those who have been placed in power here. The Board of Supervisors and the new District Administrator could care less about the work that needs to be done for the taxpayers. They claim transparency and bridge building, I see non-transparency and bridge burning."

DeSantis' Political Maneuvering, Lawsuits and Presidential Bid

The root of this disruption traces back to Governor DeSantis' decision to assert control over the district, perceived by many as retaliation against Disney. The entertainment giant had openly criticized a so-called "Don't Say Gay" anti-LGBTQ+ law championed by DeSantis and halted campaign contributions, drawing the governor's ire. In a swift legislative move, DeSantis gained the power to appoint the board of supervisors, installing allies and loyalists who quickly ousted existing executives.

The CFTOD board sued Disney in a Florida state court in May 2023, following Disney's federal lawsuit against CFTOD board members and Florida Governor Ron DeSantis.

Disney claims in its lawsuit filed in a federal court that there has been "A targeted campaign of government retaliation-orchestrated at every step by Governor DeSantis as punishment for Disney's protected speech now threatens Disney's business operations, jeopardizes its economic future in the region, and violates its constitutional rights."

Impact on Employees and Operations

Former employees have painted a grim picture of the current work environment, describing it as toxic, demoralizing, and stressful. The new leadership, criticized for its inexperience and lack of qualifications, has been accused of fostering a climate of distrust and incompetence. These factors have not only affected morale but also raised questions about the district's ability to efficiently manage services critical to the Walt Disney World Resort.

Strategic Hires and Alleged Political Motives

In the midst of this turmoil, the DeSantis-appointed board has been active in positioning allies in key roles. High-profile hires include District Administrator Glen Gilzean, appointed with a $400,000 salary, and Paula Hoisington, a former DeSantis transition team member, now Chief of Staff. The board has also awarded lucrative contracts to firms with close ties to DeSantis, including a $1 million no-bid contract for a new telecoms system. As this news surfaced, CFTOD cancelled a planned board meeting this month, with the next session scheduled to take place on Wednesday, November 15, 2023.

Operational Challenges and Public Perception

The district is currently grappling with significant operational challenges. Recent job postings in facilities management highlight the gaps left by the mass resignations. Critics argue that these vacancies hinder the district's ability to deliver essential services like fire protection, trash collection, and building inspections, potentially impacting operations at Walt Disney World.

The Shift from Efficiency to Political Arena

Under the previous management, the Reedy Creek Improvement District was known for its efficiency and detailed project scrutiny despite criticisms over its unique status and Disney's influence. However, the transformation into the Central Florida Tourism Oversight District, now under DeSantis' control, marks a shift from a well-run administrative body to a politically charged arena.

Discuss on the Forums

Get Walt Disney World News Delivered to Your Inbox

mkt8 days ago

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

mikejs789 days 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 days 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.

JoeCamel10 days ago

Saved them a bunch of cash

Chi8410 days ago

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

mikejs7810 days 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.

Chi8410 days ago

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

mkt10 days 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.

flynnibus10 days 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-110 days ago

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

MR.Dis10 days ago

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

mkt10 days 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.

LAKid5310 days ago

Precisely

UNCgolf10 days 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.