Originally Posted By Admin This topic is for Discussion of: <a href="http://www.LaughingPlace.com/Blogs/FanBoy/View-ID62.asp" target="_blank">6/20/07 SOAR Update</a>
Originally Posted By gmaletic Who, exactly, is anti-SOAR...and why? I'm unsure of the logic behind the SOAR opponents (or more accurately, the moviations of whomever SOAR is fighting against.) Thanks.
Originally Posted By Darkbeer Well, of course the SunCal company is against the SOAR folks, as they should make tens of millions of dollars if the zoning change is allowed, and SunCal is allowed to build what they want. <a href="http://www.weareanaheim.com/" target="_blank">http://www.weareanaheim.com/</a> Two councilpersons are strongly in favor of the project, Lorri Galloway, who thinks any low cost housing is good, and her friend, councilperson Bob Hernandez. They both are Democratic folks, and have strong union backing. The last council meeting had lots of union folks, paid by the unions to attend and talk about the need for low cost housing. Now the unions are splitting their vote, as the construction folks would rather have high rises and lots of steel work instead of traditional housing, where they have less work, and more non-union folks being used. And while the Service unions helped to support Ms. Galloway, some are realizing that if Disney loses, the amount of new Union Jobs will slow down in the area, which is not in the unions best interest in the long term. But on the other hand, to get a victory against Disney should help them in future contract negations, so folks are split. But expect to see a LOT of money spent by both sides the few months before the election (date not yet set, presumably February 2008), and a lot of competing flyers and other political type of mailers and associated material. Most of the funding will come from Disney and SunCal, and I presume that SunCal will be watching the internal polling, and if Disney gets a big lead, then they will stop funding the fight. Will be interesting to watch.
Originally Posted By disneywatcher I find it hard to sympathize with either side. First, because the DisCo has botched things like its second Anaheim theme park, DCA, so thoroughly. And, second, because the people who are trying to alter previously approved zoning ordinances -- in order to squeeze in housing -- may make an already compromised situation even more compromised.
Originally Posted By ChiMike ^^ I agree a lot Disneywatcher. Maybe if they wouldn't have doubted their own product, standing, and potential in Anaheim for years at a time they wouldn't have to worry about housing breaking into the resort area.
Originally Posted By ChiMike In other terms, they might have already owned that land by now and this all would be moot.
Originally Posted By SuperDry <<< But expect to see a LOT of money spent by both sides the few months before the election (date not yet set, presumably February 2008) >>> So, you don't think that the city council will change its mind at their next meeting and avoid the public vote?
Originally Posted By Darkbeer ^My guess, not, they only choice if Lucelle Kring changes her vote, she was the swing vote, but Ms. Galloway has too much invested to switch her vote, and Bob Hernandez will vote with her. Ms. Kring might switch, but more than likely will stick to her original vote. This might be due to the tactics Disney used to have her not be allowed to vote the first time due to her interest in Garden Walk, but then it was ruled she could vote.
Originally Posted By SuperDry I wonder if this will cause Disney to become much more involved in city council races in the future, perhaps by funding candidates that are decidedly pro-Disney. Maybe they already do this. And, the information about unions being involved in the situation is interesting. I can easily see why a private developer would be interested in getting the zoning variance passed. But with the additional explanation that unions have "affordable housing" as one of the things they promote, it all makes a lot more sense on how it could gain enough momentum to pass city council. And, the conflict about the different types of construction that might depend on zoning, and Anaheim having a lot of union jobs based on Disney's presence, creates an interesting conflict. I can't help but be reminded of something that happened with the Teamster's local here in Houston a few years ago: <a href="http://www.chron.com/CDA/archives/archive.mpl?id=2003_3700956" target="_blank">http://www.chron.com/CDA/archi ves/archive.mpl?id=2003_3700956</a> The best part of the article was "[The Teamster's union hall] was built with nonunion labor because Local 988 officials believed union workers were too expensive."
