CHICAGO, IL
Divide And Conquer
Dirty tricks gain Wal-Mart entry into America’s third largest city
AFTER RAPID EXPANSION IN NORTHERN ILLINOIS and giving $75,0001 to state politicians, Wal-Mart set its sights on Chicago in the summer of 2002. Not deterred by early opposition from the mayor and residents, Wal-Mart renewed its efforts in July 2003 with a deceptive and heavy-handed campaign to gain approval for stores in two Chicago neighborhoods.
In its first attempt, Wal-Mart brazenly asked for $18 million in subsidies. “Am I buying the company?,” Mayor Richard M. Daley quipped in response.2
To repair the company’s battered image in the community, Wal-Mart hired public relations firm Serafin and Associates, Inc. for its second campaign.3 In addition, Wal-Mart deployed three full-time employees to lobby the City Council. John Bisio, Mia Masten and Roderick Scott were listed for Wal-Mart on the Chicago Board of Ethics’ 2004 and 2005 lobbying list.4
Wal-Mart planned its campaign carefully, and courted key black leaders, like Alderwoman Emma Mitts, who represented the West Side ward set to house one of the proposed stores. When the company issued a press release in July 2003 announcing the location of the proposed store, it included a quote from Alderwoman Mitts touting the benefits of Wal-Mart.5
Company representatives appeared in churches, recreational centers and community forums to drum up support.6 John Bisio enticed residents by promising local groups would have a say about which banks and contractors would be used.7
Alderwoman Mitts praised Wal-Mart for donating 50 calculators to Austin High School and $1,000 for toys and clothes for poor children in her ward. Opponents saw the gifts differently.8
“The peanut gifts don’t mitigate treating people wrong,” said Rev. Reginald Williams Jr. of the South Side Trinity United Church of Christ.9
Alderwoman Mitts campaigned hard to have the company brought in to the community. In return, she received $1,00010 from Wal-Mart in December 2003 and after the fight, $5,000 in November 2004.11
African-American community leaders say Wal-Mart played the “race card.” James Thindwa, who heads Chicago’s Jobs with Justice and Elce Redmond of the South Austin Coalition, felt Wal-Mart drove a wedge between unions and the black community. “The company told the city’s black leaders that the unions fighting the retailer were racist, effectively exploiting existing racial tensions in the city…But it is service unions like the Service Employees International that are speaking out the most against Wal-Mart, and in cities, their membership is mostly people of color.”12
Leaving nothing to chance, Wal-Mart relied on dirty tricks to ensure success. Notably, a phone bank run by Serafin was used to harass Wal-Mart’s foes on the city council. Callers from the phone bank telephoned Chicago residents asking them if they wanted new jobs to come to their community. Those who answered yes were re-routed to the City Council, which was inundated with calls from confused and angry residents.13
After receiving numerous calls to her Fifth Ward office, Alderwoman Leslie Hairston said, “This is obviously going to affect my vote…I resent them misleading the public.” Even Alderwoman Mitts was displeased with the company’s tactics. She contacted a Wal-Mart official and demanded that the calls cease. “I told them that was unacceptable,” Mitts said.14
Eventually, Wal-Mart’s hardball tactics won out. On May 26, 2004, the City Council voted to approve the Austin site on the West Side of Chicago, but denied approval for Chatham on the South Side.15 Time Magazine’s recent account of Wal-Mart’s efforts in urban areas profiled the Chicago’s imminent Wal-Mart opening, but failed to describe the full spectrum of the company’s heavy-handed politicking.16
