Ventura, CA. Wal-Mart Shows Interest In Smaller Store Rules

When City officials in Ventura, California found out two years ago that Wal-Mart was scouting the area for possible store locations, they began stepping up efforts to develop growth guidelines that prevent standard “big box” stores in their community.

In January, 2007, the City Council adopted a 20-year “smart growth” plan for a seven-block area along Victoria Avenue that calls for more offices and pedestrian-friendly development. Last week, the council passed an “urgency” ordinance on Victoria Avenue that requires a building greater than 50,000 s.f. to undergo a special review and a use permit.

City planners tell the Ventura County Star that Wal-Mart Stores appears to be willing to meet the city’s new development guidelines, which are still in the drafing stage. The guidelines would force Wal-Mart to reduce the size of its store to a 60,000 s.f. maximum, and build it on two stories. The giant retailer apparently has its sights set on a Kmart property that is about to close.

“We are going to continue to work with the city to come to an agreement that is best for the community and the company,” a Wal-Mart spokeswoman told the newspaper. Big box opponents in Ventura have made it clear that a huge store will provoke a confrontation because of the increased traffic, low-paying jobs and impact on independent business owners.

“We want to make sure that what replaces the Kmart — or any other property on Victoria — will be a high-quality design,” said one city Councilor. The Wal-Mart spokesman said she could not name a Wal-Mart store around 60,000 s.f., but she would not rule out the possibility of a first in Ventura. “We will consider all opportunities. We would love to serve our customers in that market.”

Ventura City Manager Rick Cole told the newspaper, “We have made it perfectly clear that Wal-Mart is welcome if they follow the rules.”

Read the rest of this story ...

Posted by Al Norman on Monday, March 12 | 0 comments | Permalink

Heber City, UT. Voters May Put Size Cap On Ballot After Council Loosens Cap

Heber City, Utah voted in 2005 for a cap on the size of retail stores - but city officials recently voted to give them a looser one - loose enough that it’s really no cap at all.

On June 8, 2005, Sprawl-Busters reported that the City Council in Heber City had voted unanimously to set a size limitation of 60,000 s.f on stores that will keep retailers from building huge outlets in the city. During the two-hour public hearing in 2005, a majority of speakers urged the council not to jeopardize the small-town character of Heber City.

“We need to have a cap [on retail floor space] to preserve our lifestyle,” one resident told the Salt Lake Tribune. “As soon as we bring in big-box, we’ll lose our tourist dollars. Who will want to come here if we’re just like Salt Lake?” But that wasn’t the end of the story.

Read the rest of this story ...

Posted by Al Norman on Monday, March 12 | 0 comments | Permalink

Prescott Valley, AZ. Wal-Mart “Citizen’s” Group Faces $70,000 Fine

On September 15, 2004, Sprawl-Busters reported that Wal-Mart wanted to locate on a parcel of land in Prescott Valley, Arizona - a parcel which was not properly zoned.

The Daily Courier newspaper quoted local residents opposed to Wal-Mart as saying, “We don’t want it rezoned and we don’t want them in. They threaten the jobs of all the small stores here… They do not pay their employees enough to make a living, so we end up paying as taxpayers.” The area already has a Wal-Mart roughly six miles away.

The economic development manager for the town admitted at a public hearing, “I have been talking to Wal-Mart for a couple of years and it is no secret. I think they are a ways off from a deal here. I do not think there is anything imminent. It is good that people are taking an interest.”

Prescott Valley was the fastest-growing community in Arizona during the 1990s, and according to local sources, is emerging as the state’s primary regional center north of metro Phoenix. The Prescott Valley Town Council voted recently to rezone 19.5 acres to allow the Wal-Mart to build, but local residents have challenged that vote on the ballot.

In response, Wal-Mart hired a PR firm and created an “astro-roots” group to overwhelm the grassroots efforts to block their store. The measure is called Proposition 400, and a No vote would kill the rezoning.

Read the rest of this story ...

Posted by Al Norman on Friday, March 09 | 0 comments | Permalink

Concord, CA. Petition Fails To Save Wal-Mart

Over the years, Wal-Mart has learned to mimic citizen’s groups when approaching city hall for a building permit.

They hire PR firms to organize “customers” through direct mail, telemarketing, in-store, petitions, dinner events before hearings - whatever it takes to turn out shoppers. But when Wal-Mart plans for a huge superstore were being considered in Concord, California this week, the retailer was pinning its hopes on residents, who presented a petition with 3,100-signature in support of their supercenter.

But it didn’t turn the tide. Concord Councilwoman Helen Allen said at the hearing: “I don’t want to slam Wal-Mart, but we’ve worked very hard to improve the image of the city. I don’t want people to think ‘Wal-Mart’ when they think of Concord,” she said. Allen said she would invite the proposal to come forward again - but this time minus the Wal-Mart.

Three council members voted against the proposed Jones Ranch project, which also would have included a Lowe’s home improvement store and a fast food restaurant. Two councilors voted for the project.

Read the rest of this story ...

Posted by Al Norman on Thursday, March 08 | 0 comments | Permalink

Livermore, CA. Wal-Mart Drops Out, City Consider Size Limit

In 2006, at least 50 or more Wal-Mart superstore projects were defeated by citizens, or withdrawn by the retailer. Add another California town to the growing list. Wal-Mart has folded its tent in the city of Livermore, California. After wasting almost a year in the permitting process, a Wal-Mart supercenter won’t be darkening Livermore’s door.

According to the Contra Costa Times, the city’s Planning Commission wants to go even further and make sure such stores never come back again. The Commission recommended last month that the city council review a zoning ordinance to limit the size of retail buildings, as many other communities nationwide have done.

Residents in Livermore argued that the proposed supercenter would change the city’s small community feel, and set back progress on the downtown. Livermore residents realized that if a Wal-Mart supercenter were built, the already existing Wal-Mart discount store would be shut down, leaving them with an empty eyesore.

Read the rest of this story ...

Posted by Al Norman on Thursday, March 08 | 0 comments | Permalink

Richard In South Dakota Asks Al…

Richard in South Dakota asks Al:

I am located in south central South Dakota. I think there might be a Wal-Mart in the planning stages in Winner, South Dakota. They are having a planning meeting and using the word as “a new discount chain is coming in.”

Does anyone know if it is Wal-Mart? Is there any list on where new Wal-Marts are to be built in South Dakota?

Thanks, Richard

None of the big box retailers want you, or their competitors, to know where they are going to locate. If the word gets out that Wal-Mart wants a particular parcel too soon, the cost of the land could go up.

Once Wal-Mart has an option to buy land, they don’t have to be so concerned about that. So they are not going to reveal their hand. But there is another reason as well: they don’t want people in Winner, South Dakota to start organizing against them.

Read the rest of this story ...

Posted by Al Norman on Wednesday, March 07 | 0 comments | Permalink

States Move To Close Wal-Mart Tax Shelters

From the Wall Street Journal:

State officials in Maryland and Connecticut said they would take measures to close a popular state corporate income-tax shelter used by companies including Wal-Mart Stores Inc.

Maryland State Comptroller Peter Franchot announced that the state would no longer let payments to so-called captive real-estate investment trusts be deducted from state corporate taxable income. Meanwhile, Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal said in an interview that his office has begun investigating the use of captive REITs for tax avoidance purposes.

In both states, officials said the moves were prompted by a page-one article in The Wall Street Journal last month that detailed how Wal-Mart and others have used the structure to lower their state tax burdens.

From the Houston Chronicle:

Plans are in the works to set 150 state auditors combing through corporate filings in search of types of real-estate investment trusts, called REITs, used to reduce taxes, Franchot said. He wasn’t sure how much the state could recoup from the search, but he said it could be substantial.

“Maryland is losing tens of millions of dollars a year on these schemes,” Franchot said. “This is fundamentally wrong.”

Companies can set up a “captive” REIT, then require its stores in Maryland to pay rent to its own subsidiary. That “rent” money is tax deductible, even though the company is simply paying itself to shelter some profits from taxes.

Other states are looking to clamp down on REITs, as the federal government has. North Carolina billed Wal-Mart Stores Inc. $30 million for unpaid corporate income taxes in 2005, though Wal-Mart later sued and the matter has not yet been resolved. New York Gov. Eliot Spitzer has pledged to seek $449 million for his state by closing corporate tax loopholes, including REITs.

Posted by Russ Fagaly on Wednesday, March 07 | 0 comments | Permalink

Oro Valley, AZ. Town Pays $23 Million To Get A Wal-Mart

This has to be one of the biggest corporate welfare subsidies in America.

This week, Sprawl-Busters received the following email from an Arizona community that is giving a Wal-Mart developer a gold-plated invitation into town:

We are trying to stop a developer from bringing in a Wal-Mart that he knows we do not want! Our town, Oro Valley (North of Tucson, AZ) signed an Economic Development Agreement with the developer, Vestar, in which the developer was given half of the sales tax revenue from the projected mall for 10 years, or up to $23.2 million dollars.

For that he was supposed to bring us quality, upscale stores, an extraordinary shopping experience and a destination shopping center. Quite a few people were against this shopping center from Day 1 - and I was one of them - because it is to be built on our beautiful scenic corridor near the Catalina mountains and a State Park. However, the Oro Valley Town Council has never met a developer they didn’t like!

Some of us formed an opposition group calling itself SOVOG or Stop Oro Valley’s Outrageous Give-aways. We got up a referendum so that the people could vote on the matter. Vestar and the Town Council banded together to sue our organization. Some of the local food stores supported SOVOG financially for awhile.

Read the rest of this story ...

Posted by Al Norman on Tuesday, March 06 | 0 comments | Permalink

Page 126 of 129 pages « First  <  124 125 126 127 128 >  Last »