The CVS/Chase issue raises a possibility for a more lasting approach to how people in Sebastopol, and potentially any where else for that matter, keeping a better handle over future development in their community.
Simply add one more step to the city’s process approving any development proposal: that for a period of time after the proposal is approved, opponents have several weeks to get an initiative on the ballot that, if it passes, vetoes the decision. This measure could itself be added by initiative, if California law enables local communities to exercise this kind of authority, which I do not know.
Large corporations like centralization of power because when there is a high concentration of it they can bring their resources to bear far more easily than if power is dispersed. This is one reason why, conservative and libertarian mythology to the contrary, large companies promote centralization. One national ‘organic’ standard is easier to manipulate that 50 state ones, for example.
Decentralizing power can make their job harder while simultaneously leveling the playing field to a greater degree for local people. Buying local and paying cash or check so the financial industry gets no spin-off is great and I do it a lot, but making sure that governance is resistant to outside pressures is equally important.
This proposal or approaches like it does not guarantee that projects like CVS/Chase will always be rejected. It is a community decision. It depends on the issue and who is involved. It also depends on available alternatives. But the existence of such a measure would guarantee that those pushing for developments will really listen to those who are skeptical or even have suggestions, and seek to bring them on board.