Disney rift with its city could endure
In a city that long ago hitched its wagon to Disney's star, it was a rare and sobering rejection. Over the fierce objections of the entertainment giant, the Anaheim City Council cleared the way for low-cost housing right across the street from where Disney someday plans to build a third amusement park.
The classic battle between housing advocates and tourist officials, simmering for nearly a year, is likely to dominate city politics for months to come and spill into next year's elections.
Political observers called the vote something of a declaration of independence for Anaheim and say it portended a chill between city politicians and Disney brass.
Just a decade ago the city was all but branding itself Disneytown. The entertainment empire owned the city's two professional sports teams and was building a second theme park.
But as the city struggles with trying to find housing for the thousands of service workers who support the tourist industry, Anaheim has found itself on a collision course with Disney.
In many respects, Disney saw it coming.
A company spokesman had a losing statement prepared for the news media minutes after the vote. And Disney, already in an offensive mode, had filed a lawsuit to block the development and had joined forces with business leaders in a bid to force a citywide election that would preserve the area for tourist-related uses.
"There were no surprises," conceded Todd Ament, president of Anaheim's Chamber of Commerce.
Even Mayor Curt Pringle, the project's strongest and most fervent council opponent, seemed resigned to defeat moments before the vote. "I've seen the way this was going for some time," he said.
At issue is a plan to build about 1,275 condos and 225 low-cost apartments that might appeal to the resort's workforce, on land designated for tourist-related uses. The property is currently home to an aging mobile home park.
Disney contends a sprawling housing community would jeopardize its vision for the area. The company envisions boutique hotels and pricey time-share units, as well as the eventual third park in the area.
The council vote changes the land's zoning to permit housing, but the project proposal must come back for a final vote. A specific plan has not been submitted.
