GILROY
– An attempt to let voters decide the fate of the city’s
financial incentive deal with a large shopping center – a center
that could feature a controversial new Wal-Mart – is under way. At
least 50 people rallied in front of City Hall Monday evening, then
filed into the City Council meeti
ng as they kicked off an attempt to bring a referendum on the up
to $5.5 million development agreement for Newman Development Corp.
and its Pacheco Pass Shopping Center.
GILROY – An attempt to let voters decide the fate of the city’s financial incentive deal with a large shopping center – a center that could feature a controversial new Wal-Mart – is under way.
At least 50 people rallied in front of City Hall Monday evening, then filed into the City Council meeting as they kicked off an attempt to bring a referendum on the up to $5.5 million development agreement for Newman Development Corp. and its Pacheco Pass Shopping Center.
The occasion was the Council’s procedural final adoption of the development agreement, which follows its 5-2 vote to grant conceptual approval of the deal in March.
With the agreement now official, officials with United Food and Commercial Workers Local 428 said they expected to begin efforts this week to collect the signatures of 1,600 registered Gilroyans they need in the next 30 days to bring the agreement to the voters by this November.
Several speakers took the microphone in the Council Chambers Monday to criticize the agreement and the prospect of a new Wal-Mart superstore in the shopping center at U.S. 101 and state Highway 152.
They complained that the incentives would unfairly affect the playing field with city’s existing businesses and stores and also threaten jobs and wages. They also questioned the need for a new Wal-Mart and the adequacy of environmental studies for the project.
Local merchants and shopping centers are frustrated because they feel the city is using the incentives to bring competition for them, said former Councilwoman Connie Rogers.
“Competition is the American way of life, but let them pull their own weight,” she said.
Carmen Soto, a Nob Hill Foods grocery clerk, said a Wal-Mart grocery store would threaten existing jobs like hers. She called the agreement “corporate welfare.”
Councilman Peter Arellano, who voted against the incentive deal, recalled that Newman had complained about fairness issues when the competing Regency shopping center across state Highway 152 was awarded a similar incentive agreement last year. Newman officials had complained they were asked to perform economic studies not demanded of Regency.
“Do you remember when you came up and said it was not fair competition to you?” he asked Newman’s George Akel to applause.
But Akel defended the agreement, highlighting new tax revenues, jobs and amenities the overall center would bring. He suggested that people with a beef over Wal-Mart should comment when and if specific design permits for the store come up for approval.
“It’s unfortunate that so many people don’t see the difference between the Wal-Mart application and what we’re trying to do,” he said.
City Economic Development Director Bill Lindsteadt said many cities install roads or infrastructure for shopping centers, then invite them in. In this case, the city is asking the center’s revenues to pay for the infrastructure, he said.
