In the end, Disney’s Florida dream succumbed to its democracy problem

It had to happen sooner or later. On Monday, the corporate privilege of the Walt Disney Co.. in Florida finally succumbed to its democracy problem.

In particular, Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed legislation stripping Disney of its highly unusual control over a special entity, the Reedy Creek Improvement District, which had the power to tax, spend, plan, to classify and generally inspect Florida. .

More specifically, the move stemmed from a dispute over Disney’s stance on a parental rights law in Florida, described by opponents as “Don’t Say Gay,” which limits sex and gender education to younger children.

But in reality, the withdrawal was a prolonged interruption in a business/political structure that concealed a hidden flaw. Reedy Creek was a utopian construction that 55 years ago was endowed with powers – including the right to produce nuclear power – in anticipation of the successors of company founder Walt Disney fulfilling his plan to create a technology-based paradise. a truly working experimental prototype community of tomorrow. Then-Florida Governor Haydon Burns called EPCOT “the biggest announcement in the state’s history.”

Of course, everything did not go as planned.

I was investigating the Reedy Creek device at the time, as a reporter for the Wall Street Journal In 1985, the Disney Group, now under CEO Michael Eisner, had already discovered a structural flaw that would never be fixed. Eisner and his colleagues dubbed this the “One Man, One Vote” problem.

In essence, Reedy Creek, which made up most of Disney’s 28,000 acres in central Florida, was a corporate dictatorship. When I was there, electoral control in the district was carried out by about 50 full-time residents, almost all employees, who were given small lots that enabled them to participate False Democracy fully controlled by the corporation.

As created by Walt, political control was part of it indispensable requirement if Imagineers designed a perfect world. Technocrats would establish order. But if residents choose too freely, it will inevitably become muddled – or worse, fall apart. “Walt wasn’t against the vote,” Eisner explains. “He just didn’t want them to air their dirty laundry.”

While Disney developed his country with theme parks and resorts, the problem of democracy was never fully resolved. Permanent residents were allowed into niches like the Golden Oak development and the master-planned Celebration community, with careful concessions to Democratic involvement. But the massive housing development that was once expected, not to mention Walt’s utopia, with a large population living the dream, never materialized.

Instead, Disney remained an undigested part in Florida’s body politic. It was given special powers by Reedy Creek. But those powers would be diluted if true Floridians were allowed to live in the district. And as we learned this week, they would be doomed if Disney tried to impose its ideals on elected officials in the rest of the state.