Corporate Giant in a Medium-Sized City

• In Event: Corporatism and Its Effect on Cities

Abstract

How and why has the relationship between the city of Anaheim and Disneyland, the city’s largest employer, changed over time? This paper examines this relationship as it broke down following several key events, including a tax rebate and tax moratorium offered to Disney by the city council, the city’s switch to district elections, and the 2016 municipal elections. The relationship turned from a collegial one, in which Disneyland received just about everything it want for 50 years, to one in which the mayor, newly elected officials, unions, and people in the neighborhoods demanded that the city turned its attention from Disneyland’s neighborhood to the city’s neighborhoods. As Jose Moreno, a new city council member who led the lawsuit for district election said in 2017, “We’ve invested in the children of tourists, it’s time to invest in the children of Anaheim.” This paper uses the theoretical framework of urban political order to describe how the agenda-setters and agenda-supporters changed in this recent period. It provides reasons for this governing shift, including changes to demographics and institutional structures; it ends with lessons about democracy and capitalism for other cities that attempt to strike a balance between corporate giants that exist within the city limits and the interests of people in neighborhoods.

Authors

• Peter F. Burns, Soka University of America

• Matthew O. Thomas, California State University, Chico

• Max Bieganski, Soka University of America