Brawl in Mickey's Backyard
Brian Caywood
BUS250: Corporate and Social Responsibility
Instructor: Jodi Feikema
July 13, 2015

This is a story that weighed the needs of the community against the largest business to see which was deemed more important people or money. SunCal and Disney put themselves into a challenging situation in trying to settle a dispute over land that was available near Disney’s park in Anaheim, California. SunCal wanted to build affordable housing for the local populace. The Disney Corporation also wanted the same land so that it may utilize it in case of future expansion; Disney also claimed that the housing would be an eyesore that would diminish the magic of the Disney experience. This dispute was fought in the public but eventually would be decided by The Chamber of Commerce of Anaheim, California. The market and non-market shareholders in this dispute are both equally important. For Disney the expansion would add jobs and much needed revenue to the local economy as well as stop what it thought would be an eyesore. On the other Disney, a company that makes billions of dollars every year bringing the innocence and magic of the Disney experience, has to take into account that if the dispute is deemed mean spirited or immoral it could have a devastating effect on the finances of the company. For SunCal it was fighting for affordable housing for area residents many of whom were Disney employees. Many of the employees have to travel long distance because there was no affordable housing closer to the park. It would seem that collaboration would have benefitted both parties in this disagreement. Disney says any new residences in the neighborhood would threaten the commercial potential of the booming entertainment zone Anaheim created in 1994, critics of Disney say the corporation appears callous to the needs of its own workers for affordable housing in Orange County, where the median home price is $650,000 (Kasindorf, 2007). Disney on the other hand cared more for the illusion of the customer fantasy then an affordable place to live for employees and local residents. In reaching its decision The Chamber of Commerce vote ended in a deadlock. The employees, members of the community, and the employees union all must have felt defeated. A possible solution could have been collaboration between SunCal and Disney which could have used the skills of Disney’s designers to help diminish the look of a bland housing development. Not only can the decision of a company affect the company as an individual, but in turn it can also alter the lives of many others, including members of the immediate society, customers, suppliers, employees, stockholders, creditors, and business partners (Lawrence & Weber, 2011). This would have brought good will and positive publicity as well as providing much needed affordable housing that for many employees would have greatly reduced the travel to work.

References 1. Kasindorf M (2007) Disneyland balks at new neighbors, USA Today 2. Lawrence, A. T. & Weber, J. (2011). Business and Society: Stakeholders, Ethics, Public Policy (13th ed.) New York: McGraw-Hill/Irwin.