Save The World…Or Shop At Wal-Mart?
Gerry Braun, a columnist with the San Diego Union-Tribune, has managed to simplify the Wal-Mart dilemma by asking one very basic question: Would you undermine civilization as we know it in exchange for some cheap groceries?
Braun finds something very satisfying about heading to Wal-Mart and saving $2 on a bag of Starbucks coffee. Yet, between finding parking in Wal-Mart’s mega-sized parking lot and attempting not to get lost in the nearly five football fields worth of retail floor space, Braun also makes some personal observations about a large class of San Diego voters who make the drive out to the Palm Desert supercenter - “folks who won’t buy the argument that higher prices promote a healthier economy, and will welcome Wal-Mart supercenters to the city as long as they go in someone else’s neighborhood.”
Vote to save civilization or a couple of dollars? [San Diego Union-Tribune]
A stimulating after-dinner amusement, popularized in the board game “A Question of Scruples,” is to pose an ethical dilemma to your friends, and then compare answers.
For instance: Would you lie under oath to prevent a heinous killer from going free?
Or: Would you accept a huge pay raise if it meant your co-workers’ salaries would be cut by 15 percent?
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod on Tuesday, July 10, 2007 | Permalink
Florida Site Fight: Wal-Mart Fights Decision
Wal-Mart fights decision [St. Petersburg Times]
BROOKSVILLE - Soon after the county denied Wal-Mart’s request to build a Supercenter on Barclay Avenue, County Commissioner David Russell said he expected the company to challenge the decision.
Not only was Russell right, but the company singled out his comments in a letter informing the county it wants to use a special magistrate to resolve the matter. If this is unsuccessful, the company retains the right to sue the county, said David Theriaque, of Tallahassee, Wal-Mart’s lawyer.
His letter to the county quotes Russell as saying at the May 9 meeting that commissioners are “here to analyze things not only objectively but also subjectively ... . That’s our right.”
This showed Russell was biased when he cast his vote to deny the right to build the store, Theriaque argued in the letter. He also noted that Russell and Commissioner Chris Kingsley had shown their bias by saying publicly, in the Hernando Times and other publications, that they planned to vote against the company’s request before the meeting.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: Lawsuits
Posted by Corey Himrod on Monday, July 09, 2007 | Permalink
Kentucky Site Fight: Wal-Mart Opponents Will Be Ready
August date set for Wal-Mart public Hearing [Cincinnati (Ohio) Enquirer]
Opponents of a planned Wal-Mart Supercenter in Florence say they will be ready when Boone County Planning Commission holds a hearing on the plan Aug. 1.
On Thursday, the commission set the new date after the scheduled hearing was canceled last week.
The hearing will be at 7:30 p.m. at Burlington Elementary School. Anyone for or against the Wal-Mart will be allowed to speak.
Wal-Mart wants to build a second Supercenter in Florence, at the intersection of U.S. 42 and Weaver Road. The store is asking the commission and City Council for a zone change for the 35-acre site, which is zoned industrial.
Rachel Warren, who heads Boone County Residents for Responsible Growth, came to Thursday’s meeting so she could tell the more than 100 members about the new date.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: Kentucky | Community Impact
Posted by Corey Himrod on Monday, July 09, 2007 | Permalink
Cayce, SC. City Wants “Better Class” of Big Box Stores
The city of Cayce, South Carolina, which lies along the Congaree River, includes the site of one of the earliest European settlements in what was then known as the “back country.” Cayce also contains the site of Fort Granby, where several important Revolutionary War battles were fought. Today, Cayce is the home of more than 12,100 people. “Linked to the interstate system at multiple points,” according to the city’s website, “and adjacent to the international airport, Cayce offers quick access to jobs, shopping, entertainment and the world.” Because of Cayce’s convenient location, city officials were worried that big box stores would eventually come there too. According to The Sun News, Cayce has voted to take some very small steps to regulate big boxes. Cayce has amended city zoning aimed at retailers such as Wal-Mart superstores, Target, Kohl’s, Sam’s Club and others. “We are not trying to restrict them from coming into the city,” said the city’s planning and development director. “We are trying to get a better class of development.” The City Council recently voted unanimously to add additional regulations on retail stores with more than 90,000 s.f. and any group of buildings exceeding 175,000 s.f. The ordinance gives the community more say over project aesthetics, like landscaping and lighting. The city’s planning commission spent months discussing the impact future retail development could have on residential and commercial areas. A Wal-Mart spokesman told The Sun News that the retailer is designing stores to fit in with the surrounding community. “We are following along with what already exists in communities.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: Site Fights & Local Ordinances | Zoning Regulations
Posted by Al Norman on Monday, July 09, 2007 | Permalink
Tucson, AZ. City Officials Reject Wal-Mart’s Ballot Question
On July 3, Sprawl-Busters updated a story from Tucson, Arizona about Wal-Mart’s funding of a ballot campaign to overturn the city’s big box ordinance that limits store size. Tucson has had a big box law since 1999, and Wal-Mart filed a lawsuit several years ago to have it declared unconstitutional---but lost. Wal-Mart hired a local consultant to pay signature gatherers to put the initiative petition on this November’s ballot. In that story, we suggested that city officials might reject Wal-Mart’s petition on legal grounds---and that’s exactly what the city did. Yesterday afternoon the petition was rejected by Tucson city Clerk Kathleen Detrick, who explained that Arizona law prevents initiatives from targeting land-use code such as the big-box ordinance. The city law that Wal-Mart says limits “consumer choice” is a zoning ordinance that limits the space dedicated to grocery sales in retail stores greater than or equal to 100,000 s.f. to no more than 10% of floor space. The law is similar to those passed in other states, most notably California.
Wal-Mart’s hired signature gatherers collected 21,934 signatures, twice as many as the 11,615 required for a ballot question. Tucson’s city lawyer communicated with Wal-Mart’s lawyers, and told The Tucson Citizen that he expects Wal-Mart to go to court to get their question on the ballot. The city asserts that state law prohibits ballot initiatives from targeting zoning ordinances because it circumvents the zoning process, including public hearings required by state law. Arizona law allows citizens to challenge a zoning ordinance on the ballot---but it must be done a month before the code goes into effect, not after. Wal-Mart is expected to take legal action promptly now that the city has rejected its petition.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: Site Fights & Local Ordinances | Ballot Measures | Lawsuits | Zoning Regulations
Posted by Al Norman on Monday, July 09, 2007 | Permalink
Nashville, NC. Town Builds A Welfare Road To Wal-Mart
Imagine a world where taxpayers in every small town build new roads to every business that wants one. That’s the world Wal-Mart inhabits—a world where public subsidies literally carry people to their front door. The tiny town of Nashville, North Carolina is only 3 square miles, and has a population of just 4,501 residents. It has 38 retail stores, including 5 grocery stores, 3 general merchandise stores, and 10 gas stations. The town calls itself the “original” Nashville. It’s the county seat of Nash County. It’s also the site of a new Wal-Mart supercenter. The road to that Wal-Mart supercenter is being built with public welfare. The world’s richest retailer just can’t get enough of that good,old corporate welfare.
Somehow Wal-Mart convinces local officials that unless they put out the cash to build a road, or lay down water and sewer pipes, that the giant retailer just won’t be able to locate in their city or town. Officials fall over themselves to put Wal-Mart on the dole, giving the corporation millions of dollars in tax supported infrastructure. These subsidies, which are not offered to smaller merchants, help Wal-Mart bury the competition. According to the Rocky Mount Telegram, town officials in Nashville are building a 5 lane road “to provide access to Wal-Mart” on Eastern Avenue. The supercenter will be located next to the State Employees’ Credit Union near the Nashville Commons Shopping Center. Town Manager Preston Mitchell said the new road will be named EastPointe Avenue. Land preparation for the project began about a month ago. Mitchell told the newspaper that Wal-Mart will retain local sales tax in the Nashville economy, as opposed to it being spent outside the area. The supercenter will be 153,430 s.f. and include a garden center. The store is expected to be finished by April of 2008. It takes about nine months to finish a supercenter once building starts, Mitchell said.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: Community Impact | Economic/Small Business
Posted by Al Norman on Monday, July 09, 2007 | Permalink
Brooksville, FL. Commissioner Stands Up To Wal-Mart’s Legal Threats
On May 12, 2007, Sprawl-Busters reported that Wal-Mart had run into a Wal of opposition in Brooksville, Florida. The Hernando County Commission voted unanimously on May 9th to turn down a Wal-Mart’s proposal for a 4th supercenter in the county, this one on Barclay Avenue in Brooksville. The Commissioners ruled that the site plan was too close to nearby residential subdivisions, and only 1,500 feet from a Middle School. Commissioner David Russell was quoted by the St. Petersburg Times as saying, “We’re here to make subjective decisions based on the facts we heard today.” That comment has prompted Wal-Mart to make a decision of its own. Wal-Mart announced today that it will appeal the County’s decision to a Special Magistrate. And if they do not prevail before the Magistrate, the retailer is prepared to sue the county in court, Wal-Mart’s lawyer said. Wal-Mart sent a letter to the county, quoting Russell’s full comment, “we’re here to analyze things not only objectively but also subjectively...That’s our right.”
Wal-Mart claims this remark demonstrates that Russell was biased when he voted to reject the store. Wal-Mart argues that Russell and fellow Commissioner Chris Kingsley revealed their bias when they were quoted in newspapers as saying they planned to vote against the company’s request before the meeting took place. Wal-Mart concludes that the Commissioners’ decision was “unreasonable, capricious and contrary to the established Florida law.” Wal-Mart claims it has a right to build the 185,000-s.f. store, because it is zoned for commercial use. The property was part of a larger development approved in 1982—before the county created a comprehensive plan. Wal-Mart says the property is exempt therefore from comp plan requirements. Neighbors testified that the site was too close to residential areas and schools, and that it would cause major traffic congestion on Barclay Avenue. By turning to a Magistrate, Wal-Mart has indicated it wants to work out a solution that prevents further litigation. “The special magistrate will explore whether we can come up with approach to resolve the matter,” Wal-Mart’s lawyer said. “Our hope is to not go to court.” The Magistrate’s job is to produce a report analyzing the arguments from both sides. The Commission would then vote on accepting or rejecting the report. Wal-Mart could then use the Magistrate’s report as evidence in court if it decided to sue the county.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: Site Fights & Local Ordinances
Posted by Al Norman on Monday, July 09, 2007 | Permalink
Tumwater, WA. Wal-Mart’s Environmental Report Appealed by Citizens
Wal-Mart must be weary of the lukewarm reception they have received in the shadow of beautiful Mount Rainier. On December 8, 2004, Sprawl-Busters reported that Wal-Mart rushed a zoning proposal to the city offices in Tumwater, Washington just three hours before the Council voted to put into place a moratorium on large scale retail developments. Tumwater Council members approved the ordinance, which prohibits permits for retail stores larger than 125,000 square feet. The Olympian newspaper described city officials as “stunned” by the Wal-Mart proposal. The retailer wanted to build a 207,000 s.f supercenter on 21 acres between a Costco and Home Depot on Littlerock Road. One Council member said Wal-Mart “must have scrambled pretty darn hard to get their application in,” given the short notice time. But now, more than two and a half year later, Wal-Mart is still waiting to build a store in Tumwater. The city council did issue a site plan approval last week for a superstore that is now slightly reduced at 187,054 s.f. The scaled-down site plan was approved with conditions and changes.The city said it would approve two versions of the smaller store, with some roadway conditions changed. “This is an allowed use for that zoning district,” the city’s development services director told the newspaper. “We don’t regulate the size of the building, but we do regulate tree preservation and minimums and maximums for parking spaces.” The Olympian reports that The Tumwater Liveable Community (TLC), a local citizen’s group, and Local 367 of the United Food & Commercial Workers have filed appeals of Wal-Mart’s Final Environmental Impact Statement (FEIS) for the project on Littlerock Road. According to the appeal, Wal-Mart’s FEIS “contains inadequate, incomplete, and, at times, inaccurate information on the probable significant adverse impacts of the Wal-Mart proposal and alternatives.” The Seattle law firm of Bricklin Newman Dold is representing the group. The appeal charges that the FEIS “fails to comply with the policies and requirements of the State Environmental Policy Act…(and) fails to protect the right of the citizens of Tumwater to a safe and healthful environment.” The groups are asking that Wal-Mart be required to submit a revised environmental report that eliminates negative impacts on the environment. What began in a great rush by Wal-Mart, has now turned into a costly waiting game for the retailer.
Read the rest of this story ...
Topics: Site Fights & Local Ordinances | Lawsuits | Zoning Regulations
Posted by Al Norman on Tuesday, July 03, 2007 | Permalink
Page 152 of 208 pages « First < 150 151 152 153 154 > Last »
