Those article links expire, so I'm posting this from a search of Factiva (Dow-Jones). From the New York Times here are the first few paragraphs.

Factiva (R) Dow Jones & Reuters
---------------------------------------------------------------

Voters in Los Angeles Suburb Say No to a Big Wal-Mart

By JOHN M. BRODER
1158 Words
08 April 2004
The New York Times

INGLEWOOD, Calif., April 7 -- Voters in Inglewood, a racially diverse working-class suburb of Los Angeles, have soundly rejected a ballot initiative to permit the building of a 60-acre Wal-Mart shopping complex exempt from virtually all state and local regulation.

Its defeat at the polls on Tuesday may portend difficult battles ahead for Wal-Mart as it moves forward with plans to build 40 so-called supercenters in California, combining Wal-Mart's usual assortment of goods with large grocery departments on as much as 200,000 square feet of floor space. The Los Angeles City Council is preparing an ordinance that would in essence outlaw the building of such retail behemoths within the city limits, and several other California cities, including San Diego, are considering measures.

The Inglewood vote against Wal-Mart, 60 percent to 40 percent, was a victory for a coalition of unions, churches and community groups who said the development would have driven local retailers out of business and gutted the city's legal, environmental and planning powers.

Wal-Mart spent more than $1 million to promote the initiative, which the company put on the ballot after local officials rejected the proposed development last year. The vote was closely watched around the nation as a test of Wal-Mart's ability to sway public opinion and influence political bodies as the company continues its move from rural and small-town America into its largest cities.

Opponents cheered their victory, depicting it as a triumph of David over Goliath. Wal-Mart, with annual sales of more than $250 billion and more than 1.3 million employees, is the world's largest retailer. Inglewood is a city of about 113,000 people, roughly half black and half Latino. An estimated 10,000 households are headed by union members.

"I think that it means that Wal-Mart has to go through the front door and deal with cities and communities as equals," said Madeline Janis-Aparicio, leader of the Coalition for a Better Inglewood, a group formed to fight the Wal-Mart project. "They can't trick cities and communities into giving away the store, getting everything they want without any oversight. They're going to have to do business differently if they want to do business in California."

The Rev. Altagracia Perez, rector of the Holy Faith Episcopal Church in Inglewood, said that while many of her parishioners did not oppose the building of a Wal-Mart store in their neighborhood, they objected to the way the company tried to circumvent local officials by taking the matter directly to the ballot.

"They voted no because they didn't want to give up their property, their rights and their processes," Ms. Perez said.

Bob McAdam, vice president of corporate affairs at Wal-Mart, said the company regretted the outcome of the vote but said it would not deter the company from pursuing its expansion plans in California and elsewhere. Mr. McAdam said that Inglewood's opposition to the development was largely inspired and financed by organized labor, which opposes the company's anti-union policies and relatively low wages. Inglewood's four city council members all opposed the Wal-Mart plan and were among the leaders of the drive to stop it. The Los Angeles affiliate of the A.F.L.-C.I.O. spent about $110,000 to defeat Wal-Mart at the polls.

"We are disappointed that a small group of Inglewood leaders together with representatives of outside special interests were able to convince a majority of Inglewood voters that they don't deserve the job opportunities and shopping choices that others in the L.A. area enjoy," Mr. McAdam said.