Disney: The Big Bad Wolf?

There are two contradictory images of the Walt Disney Co. out there today. One is that of the family-friendly company that says, yes, there is a world where little birds help fairy tale princesses get dressed in the morning and there is a place set aside as the happiest place on earth. Then there is that other image out there of Disney as the big, bad wolf with lawyers who work just to find every legal infringement on the Disney name, image, brand and whatever else the company is unsatisfied with in the world.

No other recent event than that of the SunCal development proposal in Anaheim near Disney-owned property better illustrates that latter image of Disney as the bully.

After more than a year of protests, legal headaches and proposed ballot measures, the Anaheim City Council backed down from an earlier decision it made that would have altered zoning in the Anaheim Resort area to allow developer SunCal to build residential properties across the street from where Disney is considering building a third theme park (let's hope it's more successful than the flop that is the California Grand Adventure theme park).

The Anaheim Resort area is geared toward tourism-related businesses. It is lined with hotels, eateries and the Disney theme parks. There is also the Anaheim Convention Center in that area. SunCal had proposed building 1,500 residential units, some of which would have been affordable housing. When the proposal first came into the light, it set off a major backlash from opponents, which included Disney and several area business owners, of the plan. Those in favor of the development saw it as a great way to introduce more affordable housing into the city in a state that has been deemed one of the least affordable places in the country.

The Anaheim Planning Commission pondered the proposal. Members made their recommendations to the city council. The city council pondered the proposal. Then a decision was made: the city would alter its zoning code to allow for the development. Disney then filed a lawsuit challenging the city council's decision. It also funded a petition to place a referendum on the June 3 ballot that would have required all residential development proposals to go before voters.

And then everything just began to crumble. SunCal sent a letter to the city stating it would no longer pay any of the city's legal bills with respect to the Disney lawsuit. Then SunCal filed a lawsuit against the owner of the property it was going to purchase for its proposed development citing the owner violated the purchase agreement.

And then the city council decided it made a mistake and that they would repeal their decision to change the zoning code, and the year-and-a-half spent arguing the issue fell to complete waste. One has to wonder if Disney had not been a part of this issue, would it have become so high profile? Would it have gone to the courtroom and would there have been a potential referendum on the ballot?

Certainly, there were others against the development - many of the business owners in the area, but would they have had sufficient resources to bully the city into changing its mind?

The only thing to come away from this incident is the great waste of time and money spent on the issue. The whole purpose of having a planning commission is so that commission members spend time researching the issue to make the best judgement call for the area and for residents and businesses in the area. The city council is then supposed to take into account the commission's research as well as what members of the public have to say.

It just seems that with the timing of everything that fell into place, the city never really fully backed the development and that SunCal felt the city council was wavering on its position over the matter so much so that it no longer felt the desire to build in the area. Some city councilmembers were quoted in local papers as saying that there was nothing to support anymore if SunCal was no longer interested in the project, but it had nothing to do with SunCal. What was the developer supposed to do and why build in area where no one is truly fighting for your development? It seems the city only continued to be on board for the project because SunCal was paying the legal fees.

What a shame and an extreme waste of time that the issue could have been dragged along for so long when nothing good really came out of it for the area or for residents.