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 ...
Posted by Al Norman on Tuesday, July 03 | 0 comments | Permalink
Waxhaw, NC. Second Wal-Mart Battle Now in Fifth Year
On January 10, 2007, Sprawl-Busters reported that the Union County, North Carolina Board of Commissioners had rejected the Conditional Use Permit for a 196,000 s.f. Wal-Mart superstore in the town of Waxhaw. After Wal-Mart applied, a change was made in the zoning to limit retail buildings in Waxhaw to 62,500 sq. ft. The decision to reject Wal-Mart was by a unanimous 5-0 vote. The Charlotte Observer said the vote ended the “bitter debate over whether the retailer would shatter Waxhaw’s identity as a small-town enclave of antique stores and horseback-supply shops.” Wal-Mart responded to their loss by suggesting that they would simply look for another site in the area, but that they were not considering any other sites with Waxhaw. The parcel they chose on Route 16 was just half a mile north of the quaint Waxhaw downtown. The Commissioners said that the store was not compatible with the character of the surrounding area.
Yet this week, Sprawl-Busters received an email from residents in Waxhaw about another long-standing Wal-Mart battle. According to residents, “We have been fighting Wal-Mart for over 5 years. The potential Wal-Mart would be a 24-hour SuperCenter within 50 feet of a residential neighborhood, and would have a direct access road from the Wal-Mart SuperCenter into a residential neighborhood.” The email was followed by a 5 year chronology of their fight with the world’s largest retailer: “Wal-Mart bought property at the corner of Rea Road and Tom Short Road in Waxhaw in 2001. In the spring of 2002, Wal-Mart filed site plans and a permit application for a 200,000+ sq. ft. supercenter with gas station and several outparcels. There is one Wal-Mart within 7 miles of Waxhaw and another one under construction within 5 miles of Waxhaw. The road from the Wal-Mart parking lot would pass by the neighborhood playground putting children and their families at an extreme safety risk.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Al Norman on Monday, July 02 | 0 comments | Permalink
Duluth, GA. Pitched Roof Could Make Wal-Mart Too High
Unless Wal-Mart can get a special ruling to have a flat roof, its store in Duluth, Georgia may be too high to fly. In early June, Sprawl-Busters received the following email from Georgia:
“The purpose of my email is to seek advice on first steps in preventing the development of a supercenter in Duluth Georgia. We found out about this proposal a few days ago and we feel we need to mobilize our community and the surrounding community to do something about the situation quickly. Here are the facts: Wal-Mart has proposed a super store in Duluth, Georgia. The proposed site is zoned general commercial (C-2) meaning a retail store is an allowed use within this zoning district. Wal-mart’s engineering company (Wolverton & Associates) have applied for several variances and the zoning board of appeals meets on 27 June, 2007 to address these variances. We understand the zoning board of appeals does not have the authority to approve or disapprove Wal-Mart locating here; just on the variances. Development plans have not been submitted, according to the Director of the City Planning and Development Department. We are one of about 10 subdivisions in the immediate area of the possible development and we are looking for initial guidance from someone that has a proven track record in these situations.”
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Al Norman on Monday, July 02 | 0 comments | Permalink
Austin, TX. Residents File Suit To Stop Wal-Mart Supercenter
Sprawl-Busters reported on May 12, 2007 that Wal-Mart was trying to force neighbors in Austin, Texas to accept a 225,000 s.f. superstore. But even in Texas, some things can be too big. Public pressure against the superstore forced the developer to come back in with a “smaller” plan---but not quite small enough to please opponents. Wal-Mart offered to cut the store in the Northcross Mall by 15%---from 219,000 s.f. to 186,500 s.f. But on June 26th the city approved Wal-Mart’s plan, settling on a 198,000 s.f. footprint. The citizen’s group that has been fighting this project, vowed to take their case to court, and did so on June 28th.
Responsible Growth For Northcross (R4GN) filed their lawsuit was in district court to stop the North Austin Wal-Mart proposal. The suit named the city of Austin and Lincoln Property Company as defendants. The suit charges the development violates city code because the increased traffic would endanger public safety and slow down Emergency medical vehicles. It also alleges that the development would cut down several live oak trees which are protected by city ordinance and increase rain runoff into Shoal Creek. “We’re actually involved in some discussions with the opposing party at this point to try to get an agreement that would freeze at least some of the activity going on—until we get some resolutions from the courts on this,” Brad Rockwell, RG4N attorney, told KVUE News. The suit also claims that a conditional use permit process should have been followed.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Al Norman on Monday, July 02 | 0 comments | Permalink
Broomfield, CO. City Gives Wal-Mart $7.35 Million In Welfare
On September 21, 2006, Sprawl-Busters reported that city officials in Broomfield, Colorado had offered to pay for 49% of the cost of site acquisition for a Wal-Mart supercenter---a deal that will save Wal-Mart $7.85 million, funded by taxpayers. The funding will come in the form of a sales tax to pay off the landowner, since Wal-Mart did not offer enough money to entice the existing poultry processing plant to relocate. So the city offered them welfare to cover the shortfall. A group, called Broomfield First, was quickly formed to oppose this tax giveaway, and their first order of business was to get the City Council to delay accepting a bid from Wal-Mart for the land deal. In October, 2006, the city council rejected the Wal-Mart offer on a 5-4 vote, and sent the landowner and the retailer back to the drawing board. But this week, according to the Rocky Mountain News, the Broomfield City Council approved the site development plan for a Wal-Mart Supercenter on the Barber’s Poultry property on 120th Avenue. The 7-3 vote came just before midnight on June 25th. The Council was wearing two hats: the Broomfield Urban Renewal Authority (BURA) and the City Council. The agreement calls for Wal-Mart to pay the Barber family $10.5 million, and the BURA will pay $4.85 million for relocation costs. The city also agreed to subsidize $2.5 million to the developer to pay for roadwork and infrastructure being built by Wal-Mart. The money to pay for the relocation costs and infrastructure will be generated from sales and use tax revenues from the Wal-Mart property, which includes the supercenter and four smaller pad sites. The city has justified its subsidization of Wal-Mart by saying that the project will generate an estimated $69.5 million in sales tax over the
15 years. Council members described Wal-Mart as part of their “urban renewal” of the 120th Avenue corridor. “This is about more than Wal-Mart,” one Councilman told the Rocky Mountain News. “It’s the removal of the Barber facility. It’s the redevelopment of 120th Avenue. While this may not be perfect in the eyes of many, it’s far superior to the alternative, which is do nothing and leave things as is. ... It is about economic redevelopment of 120th, and we need to move forward with that.” Neighbors complained that the project will generate too much noise. All they asked for was restrictions on Wal-Mart’s delivery times.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Al Norman on Friday, June 29 | 0 comments | Permalink
Wal-Mart Watch Report: “Work at Your Own Risk”
Wal-Mart Watch today released a new report on the retail giant’s workers’ inadequate workers’ compensation program that exposes serious risks to both its workers and the public. The report, titled “Work At Your Own Risk,” highlights ways Wal-Mart puts the health of their employees as risk while shifting the burden of caring for its on-the-job injured employees onto the taxpayer. It explains how Wal-Mart, the United States’ largest private employer, has a track record of difficulty in complying with state workers’ compensation laws, while putting its employees’ health in jeopardy. The study examines seven state case studies that have ramifications for the company’s operations in all 50 states. Key examples include:
- In 2001, the State of Washington Department of Labor and Industries made the unprecedented move of threatening to seize control of Wal-Mart’s entire injured worker program, after the company showed itself “unwilling or unable to manage its workers’ compensation program as required by law.” A decertification case ultimately was settled, but Wal-Mart is prohibited from self-administering its workers’ compensation program claims in Washington until 2010.
- In 2004, Maine amended the state’s Workers’ Compensation Act and began tracking workers’ compensation payments and claims challenges, finding Wal-Mart’s challenging of workers’ compensation claims was “off the charts.”
- Class action was filed in 2007 in Oklahoma for retaliation against employees who filed workers’ compensation claims. The charges include cutting hours, transferring employees to less desirable positions, and termination. There are over 30,000 people employed by Wal-Mart in Oklahoma.
- Individual stories reflect a policy, whether formal or informal, of fighting claims regardless of validity, and delaying payments as long as possible. The result is an increase in the number of employees forced onto federal and state programs to pay for treatment and subsidize lost wages, effectively shifting the cost of compensation workers away from Wal-Mart and onto taxpayers.
Click here to read the full report.
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt on Thursday, June 28 | 19 comments | Permalink
Illinois Comptroller Calls for Wal-Mart Investigation
Illinois State Comptroller William Atwood joins the call for Wal-Mart to release documents regarding the company’s surveillance pratices.
The head of Illinois’ state employee pension fund on Tuesday joined New York City’s comptroller in saying Wal-Mart Stores Inc. should turn over records dating to 2002 to show whether it spied on shareholders who wanted annual meetings to adopt policies opposed by management.
Wal-Mart has denied allegations by a fired former security operative that it snooped on investors. But New York City Comptroller William Thompson said he has “a credible basis” to believe the company conducted surveillance and investigations of shareholders.
William Atwood, executive director of the Illinois State Board of Investment, said Wal-Mart’s denials are not enough to lay the issue to rest.
“This isn’t going away,” Atwood said. “Let’s open up the files and let an external set of eyes look at it.”
A Wal-Mart spokesman said the company received a letter from Thompson last week. “We are studying the letter and will respond appropriately,” he said.
The Illinois state fund has total assets of $12.6 billion. Thompson oversees five pension funds for New York City worth a total of about $105 billion.
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt on Wednesday, June 27 | 7 comments | Permalink
Wal-Mart Stores’ Size Works Against Them
Wal-Mart’s store redesigns are meant to boost sales, by making products both more enticing and easier to find. As today’s article from the Wall Street Journal states, Wal-Mart (among others) has found that building as big a store as possible is not always the best way to sell merchandise. Wal-Mart can try to make its stores “more convenient” with a new coat of paint and parquet floors, but perhaps the most effective way to meet this end would be to keep stores fully staffed with knowledgable full-time employees.
Big Boxes Aim to Speed Up Shopping [Wall Street Journal]
The average shopper at a Wal-Mart supercenter spends 21 minutes in the store but finds only seven of the 10 items on his or her shopping list.
As Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world’s largest retailer, tries to boost flagging sales growth, one key is helping customers find and buy those eighth, ninth and 10th items before they rush off to their kid’s soccer game. So the chain is attempting to make its sprawling stores easier to navigate. Among the changes: better signs to help shoppers find merchandise, more convenient placement of hot-selling items and staffing changes to speed up checkout times.
“We don’t decide how long the people are in the store,” Wal-Mart marketing chief Stephen Quinn explains. “What we decide is how easy it is for you within the 21 minutes you’ve allocated to get what you want.”
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt on Wednesday, June 27 | 1 comments | Permalink
Page 109 of 129 pages « First < 107 108 109 110 111 > Last »
View Wal-Mart Watch's videos on YouTube