For well over 50 years, the people who run places such as Disneyland in California and Disney World in Florida have been trying to convince admission-paying people that they are entering The Happiest Place on Earth. Many patrons, young and old, may have felt that way because of experiences at the theme parks.

But Disneyland in Anaheim, Calif., was not in that upbeat mode this week when the city council approved a zoning change that would permit construction of condominiums inside a 2.2-square-mile resort district. The housing proposal includes a 26-acre parcel near Disneyland and across the street from Disney-owned land that might be the site of future theme park development.

News reports indicate the controversial 3-2 vote came despite a Disneyland lawsuit and a possible election battle. Supporters contend affordable housing is desperately needed for workers in the city’s vast tourism industry. Many share cramped quarters or commute for hours because they cannot afford Orange County housing prices.

Developer SunCal Cos. says it wants to build 1,500 housing units at the site, including 225 affordable apartments. The city is fighting the concept on the basis it would allow non-tourist uses in a district that brings in about $70 million in hotel bed taxes a year.

“Allowing residential development in the resort area will stunt future growth of the local economy and significantly reduce future tax revenues,” says Rob Doughty, a Disneyland spokesman.

But what about the people who have to make the tourism business function at a profit? How can the theme park and surrounding attractions operate and survive without workers who can afford to live within a decent distance?

There is some evidence the issue will be brought to a vote and people concerned about where resort workers can live are gearing up for a big effort. Let’s hope they succeed. What would be wrong with the Disney people and their compatriots providing more decent housing for workers who allow them to prosper?

What we have here is another case where high-profit operations do too little to make it easier for people who cannot afford to live near their work to live better without the costs of commuting. How many times do we hear and read about profitable areas where school teachers do not make enough to live there? What about factories and industries, and Disneyland is an industry of sorts, which do so little to help their workers’ wages and benefits stretch better?

Since money talks, there is good reason to believe that somewhere along the line Disney will prevail and that the affordable housing issue will be beaten down. But we can’t help wondering how late founder Walt Disney would feel about such insensitive behavior by his people.