GILROY
– Union workers disgruntled over the arrival of Northern
California’s first Super Wal-Mart are suing the City of Gilroy for
allowing the retail giant take up shop here.
The lawsuit, which was filed in Santa Clara County Superior
Court early last week, is challenging the city’s adherence to
California’s stringent environmental laws.
GILROY – Union workers disgruntled over the arrival of Northern California’s first Super Wal-Mart are suing the City of Gilroy for allowing the retail giant take up shop here.
The lawsuit, which was filed in Santa Clara County Superior Court early last week, is challenging the city’s adherence to California’s stringent environmental laws.
Anti-Wal-Mart activists have alleged the city neglected to adequately study the impacts a Wal-Mart Supercenter would have on the local economy and environment.
“In approving the project and certifying its (Environmental Impact Report), the City violated CEQA (California Environmental Quality Act) in various ways among which include, but are not limited to, the failure to conduct a study of the new Supercenter’s economic impacts capapble of causing blight-like conditions …,” the lawsuit states.
City Hall brass is staunchly defending Gilroy’s environmental track record on the project.
“If a group doesn’t like the ultimate decision on a project, then they attack the city on CEQA issues,” Baksa said. “On the technical side of things, I feel very comfortable.”
Baksa said city staff “thoroughly and professionally” reviewed the Supercenter’s potential impacts.
This is not the first time the city has been sued over a project, Baksa said. A ritzy west side development known as Eagle Ridge and the city’s sewer plant expansion both triggered lawsuits.
“Frankly, this is nothing new.”
However, Baksa said he could not recall the city ever being sued by a union.
William Kopper, a lawyer for the local arm of the United Food and Commercial Workers union, filed the lawsuit on behalf of Gilroy Citizens for Responsible Planning, which consists of local union members Steve Jones, Lenny Ortega and Carmen Soto.
The City of Gilroy, Wal-Mart Stores and the Newman Development Group – the company developing the retail complex that will include the Supercenter – are named as defendants.
Two of the plaintiffs could not be reached before press time Monday. Ortega declined to comment for this story.
Councilman Paul Correa, who opposed the Supercenter, declined to comment in detail. He said Mayor Al Pinheiro had been made the spokesperson for the Council on this issue. The mayor did not return phone calls before press time Monday.
However, Correa, who was supported heavily by union money in the November 2003 election, acknowledged the city may have overlooked certain issues when reviewing the project proposal.
“The lawsuit could potentially show we might have failed to address some critical issues regarding the environment and economic blight issues,” Correa said.
Unlike regular Wal-Mart stores, Supercenters sell a full array of groceries at low prices. Unions have long said the low prices are possible because Wal-Mart workers – whom are nonunion – are underpaid and overworked.
In March, Council sifted through nearly three hours of economic, environmental and ethical arguments before voting 5-2 to allow Wal-Mart to move from its existing Wal-Mart store on Arroyo Circle to the big-box enclave at Pacheco Pass Center off Highway 152 and U.S. 101.
When Council approved the Supercenter in March, it did so with a list of 10 conditions the store would have to meet. The conditions ranged from providing a children’s play room with information on protecting the environment to sponsoring seminars that teach small business owners how to compete with the retail giant.
But when Council approved the store, it overlooked the Supercenter’s impact on air quality. Environmental studies showed the store will generate enough traffic to add to the area’s already unhealthy air quality levels.
Wal-Mart opponents also said the Council made its decision without full knowledge of the store’s economic impact.
Three economic studies had been conducted. However, one study was 12 years old and did not take the Supercenter into account. Another favorable study was paid for by Wal-Mart. And a third study, less favorable to Wal-Mart, was paid for by union interests.
Gilroy’s business-friendly Council had ample opportunity to commission an independent economic analysis. However, a motion made months ago to do so had failed by one vote. Councilmen Paul Correa, Charlie Morales and Roland Velasco voted in favor of an economic study.
“We could have gotten five economic studies and it wouldn’t have made any difference,” Councilman Bob Dillon said. “There would always have been a study that would have said whatever the person who paid for it wanted it to say.”
Dillon said if Council commissioned its own economic impact study, preventing this lawsuit would have been “unlikely.”
