Skip to content
  • (413) 834-4284
  • [email protected]
  • 21 Grinnell St, Greenfield, Massachusetts
Sprawl-busters
  • Home
  • About
  • Resources
    • Links
    • Books
    • Movies
    • Home Towns, Not Home Depot
    • The Case Against Sprawl
  • Victories
  • Blog
    • Share Your Battle
  • Contact
  • Home
  • About
  • Resources
    • Links
    • Books
    • Movies
    • Home Towns, Not Home Depot
    • The Case Against Sprawl
  • Victories
  • Blog
    • Share Your Battle
  • Contact
  • Uncategorized

Wal-Mart Loses Lobbying Effort to Gut California Environmental Law

  • Al Norman
  • September 1, 2010
  • No Comments

Despite spending more than $246,750 on a Sacramento, California lobbying firm, Wal-Mart lost a major environmental ‘rollback’ bill in the California legislature this week.

The giant retailer was pushing legislation that came to be known as “the Wal-Mart bill,” a measure which would have exempted big box stores up to 120,000 square feet from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) — one of the few state laws that local citizens depend upon when fighting unwanted retail projects.

According to an analysis by the California Senate Rules Committee, Assembly Bill 1581 would have exempted the alteration of a vacant retail structure from CEQA if the structure existed prior to January 1, 2008, and was not more than 120,000 square feet in area, and met certain other requirements.

Reporter Karen de Sa of the San Jose Mercury News described A.B. 1581 as “the latest example of how outside sponsors have managed to hijack the legislative process.”

But this time the hijacking failed.

The Mercury News quoted one California lawmaker as saying the Wal-Mart bill was “absurd,” sending a message that “CEQA is now for sale, that anyone who can afford to hire a team of lobbyists and grease the wheels in the legislative can have their own special exception to our most important environmental law.”

The Wal-Mart bill was cosponsored by the California Retailers Association, which often shills for big box retailers — to the detriment of smaller merchants. Its sponsor was Assemblywoman Norma Torres, D-Ontario. A.B. 1581, would permit retailers moving into empty space up to 120,000 square feet to completely by-pass the CEQA public review process which big chain stores loath — because it costs them time and money to comply with the impact studies required under the state law.

Under A.B. 1581, projects would only have to meet local zoning laws, which are often weak on environmental concerns. The Wal-Mart bill would have silenced citizens’ groups by closing down any legal appeal rights. In effect, Wal-Mart projects as big as two football fields would have been given special handling. The bill would have lasted for three years — giving companies like Wal-Mart, Home Depot, Target, Lowe’s and Costco plenty of opportunities to saturate markets already choking on retail.

One legislative staffer told the Mercury News the bill would leave local taxpayers stuck with the bill for any environmental damage caused by this projects, because the developers would face no threat of legal action or mitigation requirements.

What Wal-Mart and the Retailers Association did was hover in the background over this bill, until about 10 days before the end of the legislative session. On the final day to amend legislation, the Retailers sprung out of the lobbyist’s woodwork as the new sponsor of the measure, which was totally amended by adding the new exemption language unrelated to the original legislation. This move effectively gave lawmakers no chance to debate the amendment on its merits.

Wal-Mart told the Mercury News it supported the bill because it would “help boost the local economy and create jobs.”

Wal-Mart knows a thing or two about empty buildings. Since 1995, the company has abandoned well over 1,000 of its discount stores, leaving behind what the media refers to as “ghost boxes.” Wal-Mart Realty currently is selling 680,846 s.f. of ghost boxes in 5 California locations.

If lawmakers in Sacramento want to see the wastefulness of this corporation, there are two dark stores right in Sacramento: a 133,613 square foot dead store on Florin Road, and a 134,700 square foot dead store on North Freeway Boulevard. The latter store is 3 years old, the one of Florin Road is 9 years old. Any one who wants to own a dead Wal-Mart can buy the Florin Road building for $7.5 million — but you will have to pass through the CEQA law first.

If Wal-Mart has such a penchant for used buildings, lawmakers should tell them to stop abandoning their stores that are already in the ground, rather than trying to cut environmental corners elsewhere.

These dead stores become blighted very quickly, and it is in the public interest to see them reoccupied. But Wal-Mart — the all-time retail leader in Dead Stores — is hardly the special interest to be pushing a bill that deals with empty buildings.

It’s not surprising that Wal-Mart would be behind a last minute cabal to slip a bill onto the Governor’s desk through a lobbying intrigue. What is surprising is that they failed, and that Wal-Mart’s environmental rollback was rolled back.

No doubt the bill will be refiled next session, and Wal-Mart will continue its policy of shutting down stores that still have many years of useful life in them. Wal-Mart Realty apparently has not heard about the company’s sustainability marketing campaign.

Readers are urged to write the John Perez, the Speaker of the General Assembly, at: [email protected] with the following message: “Dear Speaker Perez, Please don’t support any effort by Wal-Mart to circumvent existing California environmental laws.

This company currently has 5 dead stores sitting on the California roadsides — two of them right in Sacramento. The stores in the state capitol are 3 and 9 years old — hardly what you would call tired buildings.

Instead of using these facilities, Wal-Mart has been changing stores as casually as you and I change shoes. They should not be rewarded for creating these ghost boxes — many of which they do not want to see reused by their competition.

A.B. 1581 was a bad special interest bill, and I encourage you to leave it sitting empty by the road if Wal-Mart tries to file it again.

Like this article?

Share on Facebook
Share on Twitter
Share on Linkdin
Share on Pinterest
Picture of Al Norman

Al Norman

Al Norman first achieved national attention in October of 1993 when he successfully stopped Wal-Mart from locating in his hometown of Greenfield, Massachusetts. Almost 3 decades later they is still not Wal-Mart in Greenfield. Norman has appeared on 60 Minutes, was featured in three films, wrote 3 books about Wal-Mart, and gained widespread media attention from the Wall Street Journal to Fortune magazine. Al has traveled throughout the U.S., Barbados, Puerto Rico, Ireland, and Japan, helping dozens of local coalitions fight off unwanted sprawl development. 60 Minutes called Al “the guru of the anti-Wal-Mart movement.”

Leave a comment

Find Us

  • 21 Grinnell St, Greenfield, MA
  • (413) 834-4284
  • [email protected]

Helpful Links

  • Terms
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy
  • Terms
  • Privacy Policy
  • Cookie Policy

Recent Posts

Facebook testing encrypted chat backups – CNBC

September 14, 2022

Facebook is shutting down its live shopping feature on October 1 – TechCrunch

September 14, 2022

Introducing Home and Feeds on Facebook – Facebook

September 14, 2022

Facebook to allow up to five profiles tied to one account – Reuters

September 14, 2022

Facebook tells managers to identify low performers in memo – The Washington Post

September 14, 2022

Meta is dumping Facebook logins as its metaverse ID system – TechCrunch

September 14, 2022

Introducing Features to Quickly Find and Connect with Facebook Groups – Facebook

September 14, 2022

Facebook plans ‘discovery engine’ feed change to compete with TikTok – The Verge

September 14, 2022

Wow, Facebook really knows how to give someone a send-off! – TechCrunch

September 14, 2022

Here’s What You Need to Know About Our Updated Privacy Policy and Terms of Service – Facebook

September 14, 2022

Recent Tweets

Ⓒ 2020 - All Rights Are Reserved

Design and Development by Just Peachy Web Design

Download Our Free Guide

Download our Free Guide

Learn How To Stop Big Box Stores And Fulfillment Warehouses In Your Community

The strategies written here were produced by Sprawl-Busters in 2006 at the request of the United Food and Commercial Workers (UFCW), mainly for citizen groups that were fighting Walmart. But the tips for fighting unwanted development apply to any project—whether its fighting Dollar General, an Amazon warehouse, or a Home Depot.

Big projects, or small, these BATTLEMART TIPS will help you better understand what you are up against, and how to win your battle.