The encouraging words spoken by Michigan attorney Jim Olson to conservation-minded citizens in Salida — “this is not over” — sound exceedingly prescient just one week later as Nestlé Waters announced yesterday that it will decline to pursue a controversial bottled-water facility in the California town of McCloud. The facility had been under consideration since 2003.
In a letter to the citizens of McCloud, Nestlé CEO Kim Jeffrey claimed that the McCloud facility was obviated by changing business conditions and the company’s successful establishment of a plant in Sacramento.
The nature and economics of our business require us to continuously evaluate new spring sources and potential project sites. As most of you know, this summer we were able to secure a site for a new bottling facility in the Sacramento area to help supply our customers in Northern California, the bulk of which reside in the Bay Area and Sacramento. The Sacramento plant will allow us to serve our Northern California customers with lower distribution costs and a reduced environmental footprint. As a result, and after conducting a thorough analysis, we have concluded that we no longer have a business need to build a new facility in McCloud and we are withdrawing our proposal to build a bottling facility in your community.
Tom Chandler of the website Stop Nestlé Waters gave more credit to the grassroots opposition engendered by the project:
Here was a predatory multinational preying on a small rural town – as it had in other locations – but this time, not all the local residents were willing to shrug it off and walk away.
Instead, they rallied, formed groups, gained a small amount of financial backing, garnered a significant amount of international media attention, and ultimately forced Nestle to abandon its hugely one-sided contract.
John Graham, co-founder of Chaffee County Citizens for Sustainability, said of the decision that he was “encouraged to see that perseverance by a local community can bring positive results.”
For local activists, though, the McCloud announcement was tempered by the publication of the draft resolution approving Nestlé’s 1041 permit in Chaffee County.
Graham noted that the draft resolution would “almost certainly” be approved by Commissioners at the September 23 BOCC meeting. He said that he couldn’t comment on the document because he was still reading it. The resolution is likely to be discussed at the next CCFS meeting on September 16.
Loading ...
This is HUGE…don’t let it die in Chaffee County…as they say, “It ain’t over til it’s over.” I don’t think anyone wants to look back and have regrets over not trying to make a difference.
McCloud was certainly aided by the rising cost of fuel and a declining bottled water market, but Nestle is already downplaying the role of those who opposed them.
In truth, Nestle’s McCloud project eventually became a monstrous PR nightmare for them, and while I’m sure they wish they still had their hugely one-sided initial contract in hand, in one sense, they’ve gotta be a little happy this is over.
The got caught playing all the usual divisive games in the community, but because opponents like the McCloud Watershed Council, CalTrout and Trout Unlimited exposed Nestle’s inexcusable tactics to the light of day, they got burned a little.
Now – wherever Nestle goes – they’re confronted by locals who know how Nestle acted in Mecosta County, Fryeburg and McCloud.
That residents in Chaffee County – a relative newcomer to the Nestle hit parade – turned Nestle’s behavior into enough of an issue that Nestle was forced to address it speaks volumes about what’s happened.
Good luck to Chaffee County.