WAL-MART’S RELENTLESS LEGAL ASSAULT ON ZIONSVILLE, IN

Wal-Mart fires next barrage with suit against Zionsville [Indianapolis Star]

Zionsville residents are bracing themselves for another protracted court battle between the town and retail giant Wal-Mart, and some aren’t optimistic about the outcome.

The store filed suit against Zionsville June 18, nearly a month after the town turned down its plan to build a 185,000-square-foot superstore on U.S. 421. It’s a battle that’s been waging since 2006.

Local residents Martin and Anna Baker dread the thought of Wal-Mart coming to town, but Kathleen Rivers looks forward to seeing the familiar blue and grey box store on the town’s outskirts. All three believe a Zionsville Wal-Mart is inevitable.

“The whole thing is a big waste of town money,” Rivers said. “Wal-Mart is such a big company, they can win out easy against a small town. We could put the money to better use than trying to fight off some big corporation.”

The Bakers echoed Rivers’ sentiments, but hoped the Arkansas-based retailer would heed the town’s wishes and go elsewhere.

“If Wal-Mart thinks this would be a good area for them, there are better places for them than (U.S.) 421,” Martin Baker said. “Maybe they could look around the Anson area where the population would be more welcoming.”

He feared Wal-Mart would close its nearby store at 86th Street and Michigan Road, bringing an increasing amount of traffic and crime to the Zionsville area.

Alan Townsend, attorney for Wal-Mart, said the retailer is challenging a unanimous May 19 decision by Zionsville Plan Commission to deny its plat and development plan for its property at 11000 Michigan Road.

The Plan Commission issued the denial because of issues related to traffic, drainage, aesthetic and crime.

Neither Wal-Mart or the town has requested a special judge to hear the case, Boone County Superior Court 2 court clerk Tammy King said Tuesday. She didn’t expect an initial court date for at least two to three months.

The town must file a written response to the lawsuit by mid-July.

Wal-Mart contends the Plan Commission’s decision is “unsupported by substantial evidence, constitutes an abuse of discretion or is illegal, arbitrary or capricious . . .” and asks the court to reverse the decision.

Jason Wetzel, a public affairs manager for Wal-Mart, said the lawsuit was a procedural matter to protect Wal-Mart’s interests.

“They (the Plan Commission) made a decision, which is their prerogative,” he said. “They’ve got to do what they think is best for their community, and we’ve go to do what’s best for the communities we serve and for our company.”

Zionsville Town Manager Ed Mitro, who’s also a commission member, said the town would issue a response to the lawsuit but he didn’t know when it would be filed.

This is the second time Wal-Mart has filed suit against the town. In June 2006, the store challenged the commission’s ruling that it didn’t have jurisdiction because some of the property was in Hamilton County. A special judge ruled in Wal-Mart’s favor in March and sent it back to the Plan Commission.

Mitro said the Plan Commission followed Special Judge Steve Nation’s orders to consider Wal-Mart’s petitions as they were presented before the commission’s initial ruling.

“We did what the judge said,” Mitro said. “We decided the case on its merits. The public hearing had been closed at that time, all the purported noncompliances had been put on the table and Wal-Mart wanted a decision on that date. So we picked it back up and gave them a response . . .”