A
day after Inglewood voters handed Wal-Mart a high-profile defeat,
the
retail giant vowed Wednesday to continue its drive into Southern
California's
grocery markets, as opponents studied the election for clues on
how to fight the
company in other communities.
Wal-Mart
executives downplayed the significance of the campaign, in which
they outspent the opposition nearly 10 to 1 on an initiative that
would have
allowed the construction of a massive shopping center without
the usual traffic
studies, environmental reviews or public hearings.
"It's
simply one store, one site in the list of hundreds we work on
every
year," said Robert McAdam, Wal-Mart's vice president of state
and local
government relations. "It's not that big of a deal. We're
going to find ways to
build stores and serve customers, and while we would have loved
to have that
location, there are going to be other opportunities."
But
labor leaders and other opponents -- who complain that the nonunion
stores depress wages, drive out existing businesses and create
traffic problems
-- hailed the vote as a pivotal moment in the fight over the Bentonville,
Ark.-based company's expansion into the state.
They
credited the broad coalition of clergy, labor, small businesses
and
grocery workers that fought Wal-Mart in Inglewood as a model that
could be
replicated in other areas, particularly Los Angeles, which is
expected to be
another big battleground.
"It
puts Wal-Mart on notice that L.A. County is not Arkansas,"
said Miguel
Contreras, executive secretary and treasurer of the Los Angeles
County
Federation of Labor, which spent up to $100,000 to fight the initiative.
"Here
in Los Angeles County, they will face opposition. ... The key
here was the
community coalition that was put together."
Wal-Mart
plans to open 40 Supercenters in California. The 200,000-square-foot
stores combine aisles of food with traditional Wal-Mart discount
offerings, and
some analysts say the company could eventually capture 20% of
the state's
grocery market.
Last
fall and winter, the impending arrival of the Supercenters played
a role
in the longest grocery strike in Southern California history,
as supermarkets
pushed for concessions they said they needed to compete.
The
first California Supercenter opened its doors last month in La
Quinta,
southeast of Palm Springs, with others to be unveiled later this
year in
Stockton and Hemet.
Wal-Mart
officials say the Supercenters bring what communities want and
need:
jobs, tax revenue and low prices.
Indeed,
some cities have enthusiastically welcomed the stores.
But
in some places, such as Bakersfield and Hemet, residents have
sued to
block construction. In others, such as Turlock and Oakland, city
and county
leaders enacted laws that would prohibit the centers. Los Angeles
city leaders
are putting the final touches on a law that would effectively
ban Supercenters
in much of the city.
At
the state level, some officials have proposed legislation that
would
require "big-box" stores such as Wal-Mart to reimburse
government for the cost
of providing public healthcare to workers and to pay for expensive
studies on
whether they harm local economies.
But
until Tuesday, Wal-Mart had not lost a Supercenter fight at the
ballot
box. (Residents have, however, voted down proposals for the company's
regular
discount stores.) In Calexico and Contra Costa County, the company
persuaded
voters to repeal prohibitions enacted by local officials. In other
communities,
the company filed lawsuits against cities.
In
Inglewood, Wal-Mart used a new strategy -- one that some said
may have
backfired on it. Instead of pushing to repeal an ordinance in
Inglewood, the
company tried to sell voters on a sweeping initiative that would
have allowed
construction of a shopping center the size of 17 football fields,
which could
have included a Supercenter, without city input.
It
was a hard-fought campaign on both sides. The working-class town
was
flooded with Wal-Mart-sponsored television commercials, and even
free doughnuts
and taxi rides to the polls. Wal-Mart spent more than $1 million
on an election
in which fewer than 12,000 people voted.
On
the other side, clergy, labor leaders, small-business owners and
national
political leaders such as Jesse Jackson hit the streets, telling
voters that the
measure would set a dangerous precedent for cities nationwide
by circumventing
local control of the development process. In the end, 7,000 voted
against
Wal-Mart and 4,500 for it.
"There
were so many rallies and pamphlets," said Robert DeLeon,
29, a
lifetime resident of Inglewood who said he had never seen anything
like the
recent campaign.
"This
was really a broad-based coalition involving almost every sector,"
said
Madeline Janis-Aparicio, executive director of the Los Angeles
Alliance for a
New Economy, which rallied against the initiative.
"Everyone
who was willing to burn some shoe leather was welcome."
Harley
Shaiken, a professor at UC Berkeley who has studied the company,
said Wal-Mart "may have overreached, and that probably caused
a reaction in the community.... I suspect Wal-Mart may not try
this strategy any time soon."
But
McAdam, the Wal-Mart vice president, said the company had little
choice
after the Inglewood City Council tried to block a development
there in 2002.
"We
had to try something like this if we wanted to get it considered
by
voters," McAdam said. "We were told so clearly by city
leaders that over their
dead bodies would they approve such a thing."
After
the vote, McAdam suggested in a written statement that Wal-Mart
had
thrown in the towel on Inglewood.
"It
is a shame that a small number of voters have determined that
more than
100,000 Inglewood residents will have to leave their community
to enjoy the
shopping opportunities that others have close to home," McAdam
wrote.
"We
look forward to serving all of our Inglewood customers at some
other
location in the future."
Los
Angeles officials, who could vote on their own prohibition on
Supercenters as soon as this summer, said what happened in Inglewood
had
strengthened their resolve.
"This
defeat resoundingly says that people care about the type of economic
development that comes into their neighborhoods," said Councilman
Eric Garcetti,
who is pushing the ban along with Councilman Ed Reyes. "This
is going to have
ripple effects, big ripple effects."
Wal-Mart,
however, has no intention of backing down, officials said.
"We
are not going to get pushed around or bullied by unions,"
McAdam said.
"We are here to state our case, and we are not going to go
away quietly."
