Wal-Mart, labor massing troops.

Wal-Mart Stores Inc., intent on developing as many as 40 massive supercenters in the state over the next four years, is battling with its labor-led opposition for the hearts and minds of Californians.

The world's largest retailer has no supercenters in the nation's most populous state, and both sides have been using their legal and financial muscle to lobby municipalities on whether or not there is a place for the 200,000-square-foot behemoths that combine big-box retailing with-supermarkets.

Elected officials, meanwhile, are caught between workers seeking to protect better-wage jobs at smaller retailers and shoppers seeking the savings that Wal-Mart's buying power can offer.

Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart, facing ordinances in Los Angeles, San Diego and Oakland that would prohibit construction of supercenters, has been playing tough in Inglewood, which last year enacted an ordinance essentially banning big box retailers. Under threat of litigation by Wal-Mart over the ordinance's wording, the city rescinded the regulations.

Wal-Mart officials then went directly to the voters. In less than 20 days it gathered 22,000 signatures, more than twice the number required to get an initiative on a ballot, that forced the city council last week to schedule the initiative for a special March 16 election.

"This initiative could bypass the city's planning commission and the city council," said Inglewood City Councilman Ralph Franklin.

Franklin is also a vice president and business agent at the United Food and Commercial Workers union, a staunch Wal-Mart opponent whose 70,000 members are engaged in a job action against the region's three major unionized grocery chains. "They are trying to bypass the entire democratic system," he said.

Leveling the playing field

Peter Kanelos, Wal-Mart's community affairs manager for Central and Southern California, said the company is simply trying to overcome the grip held by unions in Southern California.

"This is a very competitive market and it shouldn't be the responsibility of government to take sides, choosing one company over another.

"We're going straight to the people and letting them make the decision," he said of Inglewood. "Besides, there will be much more public discourse about it this way than if the plans had gone before the city council."

Wal-Mart has rallied shoppers at its 16 regular L.A. County stores into "Wal-Mart Customer Action Networks." Members receive newsletters about proposed ordinances and ballot initiatives that would prevent the chain from opening stores in their community.

"It will allow us to keep customers informed of issues that affect their ability to shop at Wal-Mart," Kanelos said. "They have been very helpful to us in other areas of California."

The stakes, even for a business that posted $62 billion in sales in the third quarter, are significant. Each supercenter is said to generate $80 million in annual sales, meaning that the California additions could add another $3.2 billion to its top line.

The UFCW has been leading the charge to keep Wal-Mart superstores out of California's most densely populated areas, and it has been joined by the local branch of the AFL-CIO and the Los Angeles Alliance for a New Economy.

In Oakland, labor succeeded in achieving an outright ban on superstores in October. Kanelos said the company had not decided what tack to take in response to that new law.

In San Diego, small retailers, supermarkets, the UFCW and smart growth activists have banded together to prevent supercenters from being developed. The San Diego City Council is expected to debate a so-called "big box" ordinance in early 2004.

In Los Angeles, the city attorney's office is drafting an ordinance expected to ban or severely limit development of supercenters, which could be introduced before the city council next month.

The company is not expected to get a favorable hearing before a council with longstanding ties to labor.

Wal-Mart's lone campaign contribution to the council was $500 to 12th District Councilman Greig Smith's primary election earlier this year.

L.A. proposal

The UFCW, meanwhile, gave $500 to 10th District Councilman Martin Ludlow on June 19 and two $500 contributions and a $250 contribution to 6th District Councilman Tony Cardenas between June and October 2002. It also gave $1,000 to 14th District Councilman Antonio Villaraigosa's 2001 mayoral run. (City ordinances prohibit an individual or company from donating more than $500 to council candidates in both primary and general elections and $1,000 to candidates for citywide office in each election.)

The groundwork for the proposed L.A. ordinance is based on a report commissioned by Eric Garcetti, the councilman representing the 13th District, and 1st District Councilman Ed Reyes.

Based on that report, the new regulations are likely to require retailers planning to build stores larger than 75,000 square feet to pay for an independent analysis of the impact on employment, compensation, municipal revenues, other neighborhood retailers, nearby commercial property values and land use and urban design. It would also impose wage and benefits standards equal to those at the city's unionized supermarkets, require stores to hire locally and mandate that they pay for continuous promotional campaigns for competing neighborhood retailers.

Kanelos, whose office is in San Diego, called the report biased for focusing "only on the negatives."

He said Wal-Mart would respond to L.A.'s proposed ordinance once it has been introduced before the council, and did not rule out using a ballot initiative if necessary.

Garcetti, for one, expects a fierce fight.

"So far we've only heard complaints from Wal-Mart," he said. "I hope I'm wrong, but it seems Wal-Mart is going to use the full weight of being the largest company in the world to fight this tooth and nail."

While Kanelos wouldn't comment on Wal-Mart's wages, the report commissioned by the council said that an average UFCW worker. makes $12.87 per hour, while the average Wal-Mart associate is paid $8 per hour.

"It's the union's position that Wal-Mart as an employer is not good for our economy or our communities," said Barbara Maynard, a labor consultant to the UFCW. "They employ people at poverty wages and offer a health insurance plan that's so expensive (employees) can't afford it."

But Councilman Bernard Parks said that a newly opened Wal-Mart in his South Los Angeles district has added more than 500 jobs, mostly for local residents, and that the increased traffic has revitalized the nearby commercial district and attracted new restaurants.

"For years the complaint has been that many small mom-and-pop stores often provide poor quality at high prices and in many instances with service that is not acceptable," he said. "But you go into Wal-Mart and you find the prices are good, the service is great and store is spotlessly clean. I think the Wal-Mart has been very positive for the community."