Press Room
In the News 2007-08
2006
2005
2004
2003
2002
Union Media Contacts
|
 |
In a nod to small retailers, Los Angeles is planning to make
it much harder for 'big box' stores to expand.
Christian Science Monitor, August 12, 2004
LOS ANGELES – Proponents say it may become a national model
for handling skirmishes over so-called "big box" stores
moving into economically fragile communities.
Opponents call it another thinly veiled attempt by pro-labor legislators
to stand in the way of stores like Wal-Mart and Costco, fearing the
stores' low wages and low costs.
Still others see the new ordinance, given initial approval this week
by the Los Angeles City Council, as more evidence of a deadlock between
America's largest employer, Wal-Mart, and its largest state, California,
over the store's future and its policies.
The ordinance, voted on Wednesday, says simply that developers of
superstores (those over 100,000 square feet) must do cost/benefit
analyses to assess their economic impacts. Beyond the current practice
of "conditional use" permits - which hinge on parking, land,
and pollution impacts - applicants would have to assess a new list
of controversial concerns, using approved but independent consultants.
The key concerns include potential business displacement, housing
and open-space effects, impact on city revenues, job creation or loss,
and access to low-cost goods. Such concerns have been at the heart
of battles nationwide, as Wal-Mart has expanded to more than 1,500
supercenters.
"We don't see this as something that tries to stand in the way
of a train [driven by the incoming stores], but rather a way to divert
the whole procedure to a different track," says City Councilman
Eric Garcetti, chief proponent of the ordinance. That track, he says,
is a straightforward discussion and more formal approval process with
residents' input.
In battles across the state and elsewhere, Mr. Garcetti and others
say that up to now, the first casualty has been the truth.
The ordinance is "a great idea because it would've prevented
the whole ugly campaign here that pitted neighbor against neighbor
in a war of propaganda on both sides," says Eliot Petty, a Los
Angeles resident who lived through a citizen referendum this year.
Barraged by Wal-Mart's TV ads (touting new jobs and tax revenue) and
hordes of activists (claiming the ruination of local retail), Inglewood
residents eventually said "no" to Wal-Mart's proposal. But
the community's polarization remains.
"People here wanted development, but not at the expense of others,"
says Mr. Petty, "and it would've been nice to have a way to make
a more rational decision."
Proponents favor the new measure because, unlike other legislative
attempts, it doesn't attempt an outright ban. In the past, proposed
bans - circumvented by store-backed referendums - never came to fruition.
Supporters also call the new measure a useful planning tool to ensure
responsible development, acknowledging that each community has different
issues at stake - and it offers a means, too, of protecting cities'
own long-term investments in their economic development.
If all goes well, it may be a way to combat outcomes like that in
northern California's Cathedral City, where a new Wal-Mart Supercenter
put several local retailers out of business - and then, when it moved
to a new location, left the city with a vastly depleted retail tax
base.
Even opponents of the ordinance call it a victory of sorts: After
all, it falls short of banning the big-box stores or restricting their
sales of groceries. Still, many balk at the idea of new restrictions.
"This is just additional red tape that will put a cramp on businesses
moving to L.A.," says Wal-Mart spokesman Peter Kanelos. He says
Wal Mart will marshal resources "to make these economic-impact
studies are applied fairly and equitably across the board."
While some fear a new level of statistics battles and survey wars
once reports are completed, others, like Petty, say independent analyses
could help both sides make rational decisions.
"There is some history of both sides making different claims
in situations like these," says Ken Jacobs, author of a just-released
report ("Hidden Cost of Wal-Mart Jobs") for the UC Berkeley
Center for Labor Research and Education. "But the inclusion of
these new reviews really does change the equation.... In the process,
facts come out on both sides which require study. It's the same way
you buy a car, choose a home or school - you ask what are the costs
and benefits are and weigh those. It's good public policy."
|
