Two L.A. city councilmembers are softening their position on a proposed
ordinance that would place severe restrictions on Wal-Mart Stores Inc.
and other big box grocery retailers in developing so-called supercenters
within the city of Los Angeles.
The amended
proposal, introduced by City Councilmen Eric Garcetti and Ed Reyes,
would allow the stores in Los Angeles if they receive a conditional
use permit from the city's planning division--and, in some cases, from
the Community Redevelopment Agency. Decisions could be appealed before
the City Council.
Under
the new provisions, Wal-Mart and other big box retailers would have
to demonstrate the economic benefits of opening in various neighborhoods.
The move
allows for more local control from communities targeted for a store--a
strategy anti-Wal-Mart activists believe would make it harder for the
retailer to overturn through lawsuits or voter referendums.
The tactical
shift comes a month after Inglewood residents soundly rejected an initiative
that would have allowed Wal-Mart to bypass the entire permitting process.
"Essentially
we're seeking to give communities a voice over developments that happen
in their neighborhoods," said Garcetti. "The Inglewood case
showed loud and clear the perils of ignoring a collaborative approach."
Both
the old and new proposals target retail stores of at least 100,000 square
feet with more than 10 percent of their floor space dedicated to groceries.
Wal-Mart is of particular concern to some politicians, business leaders
find living wage advocates because of the company's business practices
and its plans to open 40 supercenters across the state within four years.
Each one will total 200,000 to 220,000 square feet, with a third of
the space dedicated to groceries.
The original
proposal would have prohibited big box grocery operations from opening
within a mile radius of areas that have received Economic Assistance
Zone money from the city. The measure essentially would have banned
the large grocery stores from most of L.A.
Wal-Mart
officials, who said they have not seen the new proposal, vowed to use
all legal means, including a referendum or legal challenge, to fight
any restrictions the city attempts to impose.
"We've
said all along this is an attempt to limit competition and protect the
market share of the multi-billion-dollar grocery chains by those with
a very narrow political agenda," said Wal-Mart spokesman Peter
Kanelos, referring to city officials and union activists.
Wal-Mart
currently has a lawsuit pending against the city of Turlock, which passed
a restrictive ordinance against supercenters.
The Los
Angeles Planning Commission is expected to review the new language and
make its recommendation next month to the City Council, which will likely
vote on the measure in July.
Part
of the effect of loosening the proposed restrictions will be to create
more unity within the council. Councilman Bernard Parks, who led the
opposition against the first proposal, said the new one is more to his
liking.
He maintains
that Wal-Mart goes into lower-income communities that have difficulty
attracting other large retailers--citing the retailer's move into a
Baldwin Hills Shopping Center in early 2003 that took over space vacant
since Macy's made its exodus five years earlier.
"The
entire shopping center has been revitalized because that anchor store
came in," said Parks. "The high-end retailers and the newer
retailers normally don't go into the poorer communities."
Nevertheless,
Wal-Mart would face challenges garnering community support for any conditional
use permit. The store's low wages, which make it hard for many employees
to pay for health benefits, have become a lightning rod.
"Overall,
the Wal-Mart superstores can have a really negative impact on a community,"
said Roxana Tynan, director of accountable development for the Los Angeles
Alliance for a New Economy. "They can economically displace local
businesses."
In a
May 5 letter City Attorney Rocky Delgadillo, Garcetti and Reyes cited
a Community Development Department-commissioned report that concluded
1 1/2 to two jobs are lost for every job Wal-Mart creates. The letter
also referenced an Orange County Business Council study that estimates
supercenters would create more than a $ 2 billion loss to the regional
economy.
Garcetti
says he would welcome Wal-Mart if the company would pay better wages
and help reduce economic blight.
"If
they are confident that with the low wages they pay that there's going
to be no negative economic impact, they should sail through the process,"
said Garcetti. "But it's our strong suspicion that what works in
rural Arkansas probably has to change in Los Angeles."
