Something about oil not meeting viscosity levels? The report doesn’t pack a ton of information, however, it appears that Wal-Mart has been selling low-quality gear oil in violation of California law. You can check out the whole article below...In total, Wal-Mart has agreed to pay over $350,000 in civil penalties and attorney fees.
DA settles consumer protection lawsuit [Vacaville Reporter]
The Solano County District Attorney’s Office joined with DA’s in Napa, Monterey, Shasta and Sonoma counties to settle a consumer protection action against Wal-Mart and Warren Oil.
According to District Attorney Dave Paulson, the complaint alleged Wal-Mart and Warren Oil—the manufacturer of Wal-Mart SuperTech Gear Oil—sold gear oil that did not meet advertised viscosity levels, a violation of California law.
“Wal-Mart and Warren cooperated with prosecutors during the investigation and agreed to undertake additional testing procedures in order to comply with law,” Paulson announced Monday.
Some 5,000 bottles of the non-compliant gear oil were sold in California.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
After a stinging loss to the Chicago Bears in 2006, coach Dennis Green flipped out at a post game press conference and uttered the now famous phrase “we are who we thought they were!” In other words, the Arizona Cardinals were prepared for the game and understood the other team’s flaws, but failed to capitalize on them. This quote reminds me of the many site fights around the country. Residents understand what Wal-Mart brings to the table before they get a store, yet are still surprised by some of the negative aspects after they get it. Despite what Wal-Mart says during the planning process, a supercenter will bring more traffic, more crime, and small business destruction.
Wal-Mart did not have an easy time building a supercenter in American Canyon. Finally, in late September 2007, a Wal-Mart supercenter opened, replacing another location in Vallejo, which had been open for 16 years. After one year of service at the new location, the supercenter is getting mixed reviews according to the Times-Herald. While Wal-Mart supporters and some local business leaders welcome the creation of good jobs and tax revenue, Wal-Mart critics feel the store
“...has hurt the area in the last year mostly by increasing already heavy traffic, and boosting crime.” Joel Feller, who also fought a Wal-Mart super store in Vallejo, goes on to say that “The store has had a profoundly negative impact on the regional economy for a couple hundred in sales tax revenues.”
To be fair, some residents are happy with the new Wal-Mart supercenter. They point to sales tax figures and the convenience of one-stop shopping; however, Wal-Mart’s growth is not without consequences. As Stacy Mitchell points out in her paper “Major Flaws Uncovered in Study Claiming Wal-Mart Has Not Harmed Small Business,” Wal-Mart will do more harm than good to a community in the long run. Also, don’t forget Wal-Mart’s use of subsidies and Medicaid as a way to drain funds from a local community.
For the latest story, see the Times-Herald:
Posted by Research Team | Permalink
New York’s Governor called for a host of new fees and taxes yesterday, including an “iPod tax” that taxes the sale of downloaded music and other “digitally delivered entertainment services.”
The Governor’s new budget for 2009 includes 88 new fees plus a bunch of other new taxes on anything from soda, beer, wine and cigars to movie tickets, taxi rides, and massages. According to the NY Daily News, It would also extend sales taxes to cable and satellite TV services and remove the tax exemption for clothes costing less than $110. So no more grabbing a box of stogies and hitting the local cinaplex for me, I guess...well, assuming I lived in New York. Which I don’t.
That the “iPod tax” actually refers to Apple’s popular product by name would cause one to infer that Governor Paterson has it out for frequenters of the iStore. In actuality, however, MacWorld points out that the title is a little misleading.
It’s not a tax on iPods, but rather the levying of state and local sales taxes for “digitally delivered entertainment services.” The iTunes Store would seem to be a prime target there, but Amazon, Wal-mart, and other retailers would take a hit from the proposed tax as well.
We’ll see if Wal-Mart and the rest flex their mighty lobbying muscles on this. While at least 16 states plus DC already have taxes of this nature, California shot down a similar proposal earlier this year.
New York governor proposes digital download tax [MacWorld]
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
We’ve covered Wal-Mart’s wage and hour (and overtime) issues many times over, culminating with last week’s $54 million settlement in Minnesota. We all get that Wal-Mart would prefer its employees work through breaks. And we certainly know that when it comes to paying employees for overtime, well, Wal-Mart would prefer that be optional.
California wage laws are, not surprisingly, fairly strict. And now, with that state facing a financial shortfall, the LA Times is reporting that business groups and GOP lawmakers are using wage and hour law as a bargaining chip in negotiations over how to fix a $14.8-billion hole in the state budget. The argument is that state laws like those in California - the ones mandating breaks for workers working at least 6 hours in succession, and requiring an employer to pay time-and-a-half once a worker has worked more than 8 hours in day - are expensive for employers to follow and force them to flee the state for friendlier confines. Places where breaks are voluntary [for the employer] and overtime exists only in a fantasy dreamland.
Not surprisingly, California Democrats and labor officials in the state disagree.
Employers’ latest efforts to tie both the meal break and overtime issue to contentious budget negotiations are aimed at reversing basic worker rights, said Art Pulaski, executive secretary-treasurer of the California Labor Federation.
“It’s about trying to help Wal-Mart and other big corporations get away from the long-established understanding that people should get a meal break at work” or be paid extra for extra hours, Pulasksi said.
“This has nothing to do with the budget or stimulating the economy,” said Barry Broad, a lobbyist for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters and other labor unions. “It doesn’t help the economy to lower 20 million people’s wages during a recession.”
It has been suggested that if state lawmakers can’t come to a consensus and close out these budget negotiations, a state government shutdown in the spring is a distinct possibility.
Overtime pay, rest breaks become bargaining chips in state budget crisis [LA Times]
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
From time to time, Wal-Mart funds studies of questionable merit to justify its continued expansion around the United States. Wal-Mart claims to save people money at the register, boost local job numbers, and contribute hefty sales taxes revenue to support the community. While the media eats these studies up, others are skeptical of the findings. In 2005, Wal-Mart, trying to quell an upwelling of criticism, sponsored the Global Insight conference in Washington, DC and allowed authors and academics a chance to highlight their studies regardless of the findings. At the time, it appeared Wal-Mart might be entering into a new age of transparency and sophistication. We were wrong. What ever happened to Global Insight conference part deux? Apparently, Wal-Mart feels it wasn’t such a great idea to showcase opposing studies.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Research Team | Permalink
Falling sales-tax revenues. An onslaught of vacant storefronts. When your state economy is based on growth, and the national economy goes in the tank, these are the dangers. According to yesterday’s Arizona Republic:
By late next year, more than 75 stores are expected to close, resulting in a loss of nearly 2,000 Arizona retail jobs. The turnover likely will offer shoppers bargains at various going-out-of-business sales and could eventually inspire an influx of newer, trendier stores. But the closures also have city officials scrambling to cover revenue shortfalls and deter commercial blight.
While Wal-Mart may be able to absorb the cost of closed stores and their leases, cities and towns are left dealing with empty buildings that can lead to a rise in crime and vandalism, the lowering of property values, and depressed sales for neighboring retailers when the closed store is the anchor for a strip mall. And for states like Arizona, a drop in sales tax revenue. The Institute for Local Self-Reliance has pointed out that some cities, such as Oakdale, California, or Wauwatosa, Wisconsin, require retail developers set aside money that can be used by the city to either demolish or maintain the site should the store or shopping center become vacant.
Some cities, like Mesa, Arizona, aren’t so lucky.
The shell of a former Walmart sits 2 miles from a Kmart that will close in January. A Mervyn’s and Circuit City will soon depart the area. Such losses this year contributed to Mesa’s $62 million budget shortfall. The city announced 315 layoffs last month.
Cities try to cope with shortfalls in sales taxes, blight left by shut stores [Arizona Republic]
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
California Attorney General Jerry Brown - a former California Governor, CA Secretary of State, Mayor of Oakland, and President of the Patrick Stewart fan club - announced a settlement with Wal-Mart today in which the retailer was fined $1.4 million and ordered to implement a “get it free” program for California consumers. This after an investigation found that the store overcharged for numerous items at checkout.
Actually, the investigation and settlement announcement was a joint venture with San Diego County District Attorney Bonnie Dumanis, who has a much shorter but waaaaayyyyy more interesting Wikipedia entry than AG Brown. In fact, Dumanis, a Republican, is the first openly gay or lesbian District Attorney in the county, and the first Jewish woman to hold the post. Fancy that.
Anyway, back to the story we’re here to tell. Apparently, Investigators conducting random price-checking across the state found that 164 Wal-Mart Stores in 30 counties had made scanning errors. On average, customers who were overcharged paid an extra $8.40 at checkout.
Christine Gasparac, a spokeswoman for Brown, said state investigators concluded that “these were systemic problems,” not just run-of-the-mill mistakes.
“Systemic problems” might sounds bad to some, but one person’s systemic problems are another person’s financial opportunity. As the LA Times blog puts it - if Wal-Mart’s price scanners are wrong, you can make a quick $3. So the moral to this story - and every blog post I write today will have a moral - is to shop at Wal-Mart, cross your fingers that their registers go insane, and then collect a cool handful of George Washingtons.
Wal-Mart now promises to give back $3 to customers any time a pricing mistake is discovered. If the mispriced item sells for less than $3, you get it free. The refund program begins immediately and will last for four years, but it’s up to shoppers to spot any disparity between what a product is listed for on the shelf and what’s rung up by the price scanner.
The company was also ordered to pay $1.2 million in penalties; $190,621 to reimburse costs to numerous state agencies and prosecutors’ offices; and $50,000 to a consumer-protection prosecution trust fund.
Wal-Mart to pay $3 if price-scanning errors occur [Sacramento Bee]
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
Check out this week’s issue of the Wal-Mart Watch Weekly Update for Elected Officials – a compilation of Wal-Mart news from across the country and beyond.
This week’s issue begins on Wal-Mart and the economy, and whether Wal-Mart sales statistics can be used as a new barometer for the U.S. economy. You’ll also find stories on changes in shopper behavior, now that consumers are faced with less disposable income. And, you’ll find stories on Wal-Mart’s slowed growth, and the switch to smaller store formats by retailers across the country.
In addition to the economy, you’ll find stories related to next week’s election. Barack Obama highlighted the story of a 72-year-old man forced to go back to work for Wal-Mart in his half-hour special this past Wednesday night. Meanwhile, according to Reuters Wal-Mart vows to remain non-partisan in the 2008 election season, while the Financial Times reports on the candidates attempting to woo the so-called “Wal-Mart Moms.” Plus, there are suspicions that Wal-Mart is behind a new grassroots group recently set up to fight the Employee Free Choice Act, as reported in The National Journal.
Also: Find out whether a Wal-Mart case in Montana could lead to changes in that state’s campaign finance law.
And finally, check out our “Stateside” and “Wal-Mart International” sections to find out what’s going on with Wal-Mart around the country and across the globe. A California ballot measure could lead to increased demand for more humane animal products, while citizens in Virginia continue to fight Wal-Mart’s attempt to build near an historic Civil War battlefield.
Wal-Mart Watch Weekly Update for Elected Officials [October 31, 2008]
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
Thanks to reader Jason for sending us along these pics.
A Wal-Mart in Southern California is selling $1.00 face paint - “No Smear Makeup Crayons” - for kids’ Halloween costumes. And they’re not even trying to hide it - the front of the package states that the product that is a “choking hazard”, and CONTAINS LEAD! which is “known to the state of California to cause birth defects.”
Let’s see how fast we can get these pulled from shelves.
Posted by Media Team | Permalink
Remember back in June, when the FDA warned consumers about eating certain kinds of tomatoes coming out of Mexico due to potential salmonella contamination? And then expanded that warning to include certain peppers as well? All vendors of these products, including Wal-Mart were to halt the sale of such items.
Cheryl Grubbs is filing suit against Wal-Mart Stores, Inc, alleging that her husband, Brian Grubbs came close to death after eating several jalapeno peppers that were purchased at a Wal-Mart and tainted with salmonella in an article published today in LawyersandSettlements.com.
[An earlier version of this blog post mentioned that the FDA recall in question occured on June 25, 2008. This was incorrect: we apologize for the mistake.]
Tomato-Pepper Salmonella: Why the Grubbs are Suing Wal-Mart
Dolores, CO: “Truckloads of contaminated jalapenos were turned back at the border before we bought them at Wal-Mart,” says Cheryl Grubbs, “so why did Wal-Mart still have them in their store?” Her husband, Brian Grubbs, almost died from the tomato/pepper salmonella outbreak, and Cheryl is furious because his illness could have been avoided.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Luke West | Permalink
Proposed Roseland Wal-Mart hits snag [Press Democrat (Calif.)]
A Sonoma County judge has sided with opponents of a proposed Wal-Mart in Santa Rosa, tentatively ruling that the environmental study for the proposed store is flawed.
Superior Court Judge Robert Boyd said the analysis of parking and noise for the Wal-Mart in southwest Santa Rosa is “especially problematic.”
Boyd’s ruling is not final, and on Friday he gave attorneys on both sides another chance to present arguments before he completes his decision.
After hearing from opponents of the store and attorneys for both Wal-Mart and the city of Santa Rosa, Boyd said he would take the matter under submission.
He noted the environmental document for the store makes it “hard for the public to determine what is being proposed.”
It was not immediately clear what impact Boyd’s ruling would have if it becomes final.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt | Permalink
Attorney sues Barstow over Wal-Mart distribution site plans [The Press-Enterprise (Calif.)]
An Upland lawyer has sued the city of Barstow, alleging the City Council erred when it approved an environmental impact report regarding a planned Wal-Mart distribution center.
That report was prepared inadequately and failed to take into full account all of the environmental problems the proposed logistics facility could create for the city, according to attorney Cory J. Briggs.
The lawsuit, which was filed Aug. 8 in the Barstow division of San Bernardino Superior Court, also alleges that city officials have failed to respond to public complaints about their environmental report, a possible violation of the California Environmental Quality Act.
City Council members approved the report July 21.
That $60 million facility, which would serve Wal-Mart Supercenters, could create up to 700 jobs within two to three years of its opening, Wal-Mart officials said.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt | Permalink
Lodi, California, is probably known by most people for its Zinfandel and a Creedence Clearwater Revival song. But its quickly earning a reputation for one of the nation’s longest Wal-Mart site fights. After six years of back-and-forth debate and on-and-off plans, Wal-Mart is pushing forward again in Lodi.
From the Stockton Record:
Aaron Rios, a spokesman for the retailer, said the worsening economy forced executives to re-evaluate the Lodi project. “After conducting a careful and thorough review we believe that this is a financially viable project and we are looking forward to obtaining the necessary approvals from the city’s Planning Commission and City Council,” Rios said in a statement.
Lodi already has a Wal-Mart, which the company has said is doing fine. The Record also tells us that there are already 20 Wal-Marts within 44 miles of downtown Stockton, which is several miles south of Lodi. Residents are fighting to keep the 21st out of downtown Lodi.
Outside of the normal concerns that Wal-Mart will force out local businesses and bring only low-wage, low-benefit jobs, one of the primary concerns, just like it has been elsewhere in Central California - is environmental. Residents have been extremely concerned with the amount of noise, crime, traffic and air and water pollution that a new Wal-Mart supercenter will bring.
Al Norman tells how the Lodi city government has not yet made public its draft of the environmental report, and is asking readers to email the Mayor and urge that it be released immediately so that citizens can review it and have their voices heard before the planning commission make its final decision next month.
(Al Norman also has a great archive of posts on the Lodi site fight, going back to 2004.)
TAKE ACTION NOW!
Email the Lodi Mayor, City Council and Planning Commission - and urge them to release the draft of the environmental report, and to end the Wal-Mart debate once and for all with a “no” vote next month.
Posted by Eric Bull | Permalink
Judge faults study on Wal-Mart Supercenter [Fresno Bee (Calif.)]
A proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter in north Clovis is being delayed again after a Fresno County Superior Court judge ruled the city did not meet state guidelines in studying water impacts and urban decay.
In a ruling last week, Judge Wayne Ellison said the city of Clovis complied with state guidelines on a host of other issues raised by opponents of the 491,000-square-foot retail center, which includes Wal-Mart and other stores.
But the city needs a revised environmental document that addresses the cumulative effects of urban decay and water availability across a wider area than just Clovis, Ellison ruled.
Ellison will now have to decide whether Clovis can make limited revisions to its environmental report, or will be required to prepare a completely new assessment.
Despite the delays, the project’s developer said the center, at the northeast corner of Herndon and Clovis avenues, will be built.
David Paynter said his company is “committed to the project no matter how long it may take.”
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Joel Nezianya | Permalink
Firm Sues Over Wal-Mart DC [Traffic World]
A law firm claiming to represent environmental groups is suing the city of Barstow, Calif., over a huge Wal-Mart distribution center planned for the city.
Briggs Law charges in the suit that the Southern California city did not properly prepare an environmental impact statement on the distribution center. The firm says it represents a group called Build Barstow Smart.
Wal-Mart plans to build a facility of greater than a million square feet on the outskirts of the town, which sits at a key road and rail junction about 125 miles northeast of the ports of Los Angeles and Long Beach.
An attorney at the firm told the Victorville, Calif., Daily Press that the group is most concerned about emissions and water use at the high desert site. Wal-Mart has said there is enough water in the area for the center.
Officials in Barstow have decried the suit and have said there is no coalition behind the law firm, which the newspaper said has sued Wal-Mart and other developers in the region repeatedly in recent years.
Posted by Joel Nezianya | Permalink
Idea of new Wal-Mart Supercenter in Redlands raises concerns [Press Enterprise (Calif.)]
If all the pieces fall into place, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. could open a new Supercenter in north Redlands by 2010.
Longtime San Bernardino Wal-Mart shopper John Gibson plans to be among the first to visit the 215,000-square-foot store stocked with 150,000 items and featuring a full-service supermarket. Gibson talked during a recent visit to Redlands’ 17-year-old Wal-Mart at 2050 W. Redlands Blvd.
Opponents, on the other hand, say the project will result in increased traffic in the area and harm existing mom-and-pop stores, among other concerns.
“Why can’t the great Wal-Mart remodel the (store) we now have?” asked Redlands resident Robby Robinson. “If they sell the (existing) store, who’s going to buy it? Some swap-meet outfit like the one in San Bernardino? That should make Redlands look good.”
A battle could be brewing despite the fact that the Bentonville, Ark.-based retailer has yet to submit an application to build the new Supercenter in Redlands. But there’s no doubt Wal-Mart is interested in a 40-acre tract at the southeast corner of Tennessee Street and San Bernardino Avenue.
Wal-Mart recently agreed to pay $450,000 for an environmental impact study on the property, according to an amended agreement approved at Redlands City Council’s most recent meeting.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Joel Nezianya | Permalink
Law firm, advocacy group sues city over Wal-Mart distribution center [Desert Dispatch (Calif.)]
A law firm has taken the city and its plans to build a Wal-Mart distribution center to court over environmental concerns with the project’s plans.
Briggs Law Corporation, on behalf of an advocacy group named Build Barstow Smart, filed a lawsuit on August 8 at the Barstow courthouse alleging that the city had not properly prepared an environmental impact report for the more-than-1-million-square-foot distribution center proposed along Lenwood Road north of Jasper Road and southeast of the High Desert Estates housing area.
According to the suit, Build Barstow Smart opposes the distribution center and certain actions taken by the city and Wal-Mart and is seeking to void the certification of the environmental impact report and the approval of the center. The City Council approved the report and the project by a unanimous vote at the July 21 meeting.
The suit claims that the environmental impact report failed to address several significant adverse effects the distribution center would have on the area, that alternatives to the project and mitigations to the impacts were not thoroughly studied, that California Environmental Quality Act guidelines were not followed and that the city violated subdivision and zoning laws.
While the suit mentions many negative impacts from the distribution center, Cory Briggs, the San Diego- and Upland-based attorney for Build Barstow Smart, said that he is most concerned about the greenhouse emissions from the center and the center’s water use. Briggs is concerned the facility will suck dry the already scarce supply of water in the area, and in a previous letter to the city, Briggs asked Wal-Mart to consider installing solar panels to offset emissions from the facility.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Tony Calero | Permalink
County sides with Wal-Mart [The Daily Triplicate (Calif.)]
The Del Norte County Board of Supervisors decided to move forward Tuesday with Wal-Mart’s expansion into a Supercenter.
Supervisors heard passionate comments on both sides of the issue during a public hearing on an appeal of the county Planning Commission’s decision to certify the Environmental Impact Review for the expansion.
In a 3-1 vote (Supervisor Leslie McNamer was absent), the board denied the appeal.
The appellant, the Crescent Heritage Coalition, still has 30 days to challenge the ruling in court. Its attorney, Paul Hagen, said a legal challenge probably would be filed, which could at least stall the expansion.
The expansion would almost double the size of the current store to include groceries and other merchandise.
Hagen told The Triplicate that there are multiple legal problems with the EIR, which he said should be thrown out or re-evaluated.
Local resident Ron Cole, on behalf of the coalition, appealed the planning commission’s decision. He said at the meeting Tuesday the two main issues that are not fully researched in the EIR are urban decay—basically the effects of business closures—and water runoff into Elk Creek.
“Del Norte residents cannot afford to rely on an inadequate (EIR),” he said, adding that it risks the county’s economic development and environment.
Several people said that Wal-Mart has hurt small businesses since it opened in 1992. Patti Pearcey, the owner of the Bookcomber bookstore downtown, said businesses “went down like dominos.”
“We can’t turn back the clock, but expansion is not necessary,” Pearcey said. “We need to support each other. I haven’t seen local government support us.”
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Tony Calero | Permalink
Hearing set on appeal of Wal-Mart expansion [Daily Triplicate (Calif.)]
An appeal of Planning Commission approval of Wal-Mart expansion will be the subject of a public hearing before the Del Norte County Board of Supervisors on Tuesday.
Ron Cole, on behalf of the Crescent City Heritage Coalition, appealed the Planning Commission’s June 4 decision to adopt an Environmental Impact Report for Wal-Mart’s expansion to a Supercenter.
The county planning department has recommended that the board deny the appeal and uphold the Planning Commission’s decision.
In Cole’s appeal letter, he stated the public brought up several issues, such as environmental concerns, traffic, global warming and urban decay, that were not fully addressed in the EIR.
“The level of detail in an EIR’s analysis must correspond to an impact’s severity and likelihood of occurrence,” Cole wrote.
He requested that supervisors decertify the EIR and send it back to the Planning Commission to have these issues further studied.
“Specifically, the EIR needs to trace cause and effect through anticipated economic and/or social changes from the Project to physical changes in the environment,” Cole wrote.
He also stated that because possible changes in the environment from the expansion were not adequately addressed in the EIR, it is not in compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Tony Calero | Permalink
Open a superstore, close a grocery store. That pretty much sums up the valueless addition of a Wal-Mart superstore in the county of Del Norte, California. Wal-Mart is in the middle of a controversial plan to expand its existing discount store into a superstore. The 14.25-acre project site is located in the western portion of unincorporated Del Norte County, just north of the limits of the City of Crescent City.
The proposed project consists of expanding the existing 83,902 s.f. Wal-Mart store to a maximum of 170,126 s.f. and upgrading the store to a “Supercenter.” The store would be expanded on the west, north, and east sides, and new loading facility would be developed in the rear of the store. Additional parking areas would be provided. The Wal-Mart Supercenter would sell groceries and general merchandise and operate 24 hours a day.
In the Environmental Impact Review (EIR) report on this project, the consultants for the county examined a “30% Reduction Alternative” which the consultant said “is the environmentally superior alternative.” It reduces the store to 119,000 s.f. In the EIR, the following issue were identified as controversial: Aesthetics and Visual Character; Construction and Operational Air Emissions; Greenhouse Gas Emissions; Construction and Operational Noise; Parking; Public Services; Traffic Congestion; Urban Decay; Wastewater; Water Supply.
The draft EIR was reviewed for 45 days, from February 20, until April 4, 2008. An economic impact report done on the project by Bay Area Economics of Emeryville, California in September of 2007 concluded:
“The Proposed Project may lead to the closure of one of the three existing major supermarkets in Crescent City. However, because of a variety of factors, including different ‘break-even’ and profit thresholds for different operators, as well as different levels of sales currently, it is not possible to state with reasonable certainty which of these stores is most likely to be impacted to the point of closure by the Proposed Project. The Trade Area is characterized by isolation, weak economic conditions, and very slow household population increases, limiting the prospects for future retail growth.
“As a result, a vacated space such as a supermarket may prove difficult to retenant. Cumulatively, the only other sizable proposed retail project in the Trade Area is a Walgreen’s in Crescent City. In combination with the proposed Wal-Mart expansion, this project puts an existing drug store at risk of closure. A vacated space may also be difficult to re-tenant, although as a smaller space it might not face as much difficulty as a vacated supermarket.”
Despite this gloomy economic picture, the Del Norte County Planning Commission approved the Wal-Mart expansion on June 4th . But that decision is being appealed to the Del Norte Del Norte County Board of Supervisors on August 12th. The approval was appealed by the Crescent City Heritage Coalition, which states that the public brought up several issues, such as environmental concerns, traffic, global warming and urban decay, that were not fully addressed in the EIR. “The level of detail in an EIR’s analysis must correspond to an impact’s severity and likelihood of occurrence,” the Coalition wrote. The group has asked the supervisors to decertify the EIR and send it back to the Planning Commission for further review.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Al Norman | Permalink
View Wal-Mart Watch's videos on YouTube