An already contentious three-and-a-half year battle to stop Wal-Mart from building a Supercenter in Tarpon Springs just took a turn for the unexpected.
The St. Petersburg Times tells us today how the proposed site of a 205,000 square foot Supercenter has been compromised by two Bald Eagles who built a nest in a tree right smack dab in the middle of a plot intended to be a 1,000 car parking lot. Bald Eagles are no longer classified as endangered species, but the birds are protected under the Migratory Bird Treaty Act, whereby it is illegal to harm the birds, their nests or eggs in any way. A state wildlife official says that the nest would likely be classified a “category B project,” which would require Wal-Mart to apply for a special permit from the state before beginning any construction.
Wal-Mart has already been under fire for a whole host of problems that the Tarpon Springs project would bring, primarily the pollution and environmental problems that an oil & lube shop and thousands of cars a day would bring to the nearby Anclote River. The Friends of the Anclote River and literally hundreds of citizens have spoken out against this project for years, and the eagles’ nest might be what they need to finally kill the project.
And there was this very encouraging quote from the SP Times today:
Mayor Beverley Billiris said the agencies that protect the eagles will have to weigh in and advise the parties involved..."Maybe the eagle will settle the whole thing,” she said. “I think nature will be the one that will have the last say in it. That’s almost comical.”
That doesn’t seem to jive well with Wal-Mart Spokesman Quenta Vettel, who arrogantly says that Wal-Mart has been aware of the eagles’ nest since spring, and that the city shouldn’t have any say at all in what happens to the eagles:
“This isn’t part of the city’s purview,” she said. “Once we have site plan approval and all the permits that will be required to start clearing and construction, then you begin working with the appropriate agencies to make sure you protect the nest and the eagles.”
The City Commission is meeting next week to reevaluate Wal-Mart’s development certificate, which at least one commissioner says may have expired. Once Wal-Mart gets booted out of town, Ms. Vettel might regret telling residents they have no say what happens in their town.
Here’s betting that our supporters in Tarpon Springs will disagree.
TAKE ACTION NOW!
Email Mayor Beverly Billiris and the City Commission now, and urge them to deny Wal-Mart’s development certificate when they meet next week, and end this site fight now, once and for all.
Posted by Media Team | Permalink
How does Wal-Mart keep getting away with convincing reporters and environmentalists that it is serious about sustainability? It took Jack Neff, who writes for Advertising Age, to point out the hypocrisy of Wal-Mart¹s environmental policy. Of course, he did it quite subtly but the point is clear.
Neff pointed out in an October 12 piece that a Cincinnati-based executive search firm is circulating a job notice for a “Director - Portfolio Strategy, Private Brands, for Wal-Mart.” Ostensibly, it appears Wal-Mart is ramping up its marketing of its own brands. The position will report to Andy Ruben, who many will remember as the former head of Wal-Mart’s sustainability program. This is where it gets interesting.
There has been much written about how Wal-Mart is encouraging other companies to make their products more sustainable and promises to promote those that do just that. Much of that was initiated under Ruben’s watch. One might think that if Wal-Mart is serious about such initiatives it would make this a key part of any private label development. Not so. As Neff points out:
the new director position appears more squarely focused on growing sales, market share, cash flow and brand awareness—all of them included in the performance metrics of the job description, while sustainability metrics aren’t.
Once again, Wal-Mart says one thing and does another. Of course, no one is suggesting that Wal-Mart should not be focused on making money, just that its executives should not lie about their motives.
In Shift, Wal-Mart Puts Focus Back on Private-Label Growth [Advertising Age]
Posted by David Nassar, Executive Director | Permalink
The latest in a long, impressive history of environmental violations:
The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) today announced a settlement with Wal-Mart to resolve alleged violations of the Clean Air Act (CAA), which prohibits the sale or distribution in interstate commerce of non-essential products containing substances commonly known as Ozone Depleting Substances (ODS). According to the terms of the settlement, Wal-Mart will pay a total civil penalty of $199,000. Wal-Mart has taken action to investigate the causes of the violation, to come into compliance, and to ensure that the violation does not recur.
Maybe they forgot to run “Glow In The Dark Looney String” through the Live Better Index?
Agreement Reached Wtih Wal-Mart in Bentonville, AR on Clean Air Act Violations [EPA Press Release]
Posted by Eric Bull | Permalink
This story from the Arkansas Democrat-Gazette exposes how difficult it can be to separate fact from fiction with Wal-Mart’s green campaign. The retailer invited dozens of environmentally-friendly companies down to Bentonville, but doesn’t actually buy supplies from any of them. It was merely a chance for Wal-Mart buyers to see what an eco product looks like. Rand Waddoups’ quote further down in the story doesn’t really address Wal-Mart’s environmental problems, but it sure does sound good in a newspaper story!
Wal-Mart welcomes makers of products easy on environment [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette]
Inside the Lights of America company’s booth on the top floor of the Bentonville Plaza office building Tuesday, dozens of LED — lightemitting diode — lights for various applications glowed from a mere 350 watts of power.
The Walnut, Calif.-based company displayed vanity globes, accent lighting, track lights and other applications, with 1. 5-watt bulbs providing light equivalent to a 40-watt incandescent bulb.
Despite the obvious energy savings, Brian Halliwell, vice president of sales and marketing for Lights of America, doesn’t see LED bulbs replacing general-purpose light bulbs anytime soon. For now, he said, the miserly lights are likely to remain in the realm of accent lighting in the home.
Lights of America was among 80 vendor companies that set up booths as Wal-Mart Stores Inc. hosted its first “closed-loop networking showcase” near the company’s headquarters. The event brought together buyers for Wal-Mart stores and Sam’s Club warehouse outlets with companies featuring environmentally friendly products for sale at retail or for use in store construction.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Enviro. Team | Permalink
Wal-Mart has already acknowledged (PDF) the fact that illegal logging goes on in its wood supply chain. A new investigation by The New Yorker follows lumber from the forests of Russia to the toilet seat aisle of Wal-Mart stores.
Taking six years to eliminate illegal logging from its supply seems like a long time for a company that can get Procter and Gamble to sell concentrated laundry detergent in a matter of months, don’t you think?
Posted by Enviro. Team | Permalink
Can one word be the difference between a Wal-Mart and no Wal-Mart? In Estero, FL, that might be the case.
For years, Wal-Mart has had a loosely planned project in Estero on U.S. 41 and Estero Parkway. The project, however, has always been tied to the long-planned widening of U.S. 41 to 6 lanes. Wal-Mart is fighting hard to reclassify the project to a “super-concurrency” from just a “concurrency” - which currently prevents Wal-Mart from breaking ground until until the road project begins.
Al Norman at Battlemart runs down the laundry list of reasons locals are opposing the project, which would be detrimental to all of Estero’s long-held smart-growth plans
From the sounds of the city planners, moving up the Wal-Mart might jeopardize the timeline of the much-needed widening project. This on top of the serious traffic concerns of a putting in a Wal-Mart before the road is widened (Wal-Mart is planning to commission a new study which “changes the parameters” and magically reverses the conclusion that this would be a traffic nightmare.)
The road project already requires the city to donate several acres of a historic estate, and the proposed Wal-Mart site is only about 1000 feet away from the Koreshan Park Historic Site, which is a preserved unique 19th-century colony.
Like almost anywhere else in Florida - there is no shortage of Wal-Mart stores around Estero, with 8 in the Fort Myers area, and another 6 around Naples. Estero doesn’t need another one - all the signs are pointing to no for this new Wal-Mart.
TAKE ACTION NOW!
Email all five members of the Lee County Commission and tell them to say no Wal-Mart once and for all.
Posted by Eric Bull | Permalink
In case you hadn’t noticed, Wal-Mart has received some criticism for its business practices over the last few years. Condemnations of low wages, discrimination, environmental damage, damage to local economies and sweatshop sourcing have come at Wal-Mart from all angles. At some point, someone at the company realized these attacks might be bad for business.
So the company went on the offensive. Charles Fishman, author of The Wal-Mart Effect, explained to a conference of editorial writers this week that in recent months, Wal-Mart has made a massive effort to improve its image. Whereas the retailer once focused on lowering prices regardless of the cost, attacks on the company’s ethics made Wal-Mart realize the high price of behaving badly.
Fishman is certainly right on this point: after years of criticism, it seems Wal-Mart’s leadership finally recognized the value of a good reputation. Since its revelation, Wal-Mart has worked to highlight not only its low prices but its good deeds too, spending millions to publicize its environmental efforts and charitable giving. A new ad campaign, a new slogan and numerous public appearances by company executives drive home Wal-Mart’s new message: We’re not all bad, really.
Wal-Mart’s work to become a socially responsible company, however, is far from done. The company’s labor problems remain completely unresolved: wages and benefits for hourly workers are still paltry, allegations of union-busting remain rampant, and the company’s discriminatory practices have resulted in dozens of lawsuits in the last year alone. Labor issues are the most expensive to resolve, but a recent study (PDF) shows that shoppers take a company’s labor practices into consideration above all other social responsibility issues. The company cannot and will not succeed with its image overhaul until these issues are addressed.
Even Wal-Mart’s highly-touted environmental campaign has problems. While the company cites reduced packaging and organic cotton among its crowning achievements, Wal-Mart’s massive energy consumption, unsustainable land use, and unethical sourcing practices negate any positive impact the company might have. Poor product quality contributes to environmental problems too, and several recalls over the last year and a half reveal the high price of cutting costs. The company’s relationship with local communities continues to be a problem as well.
Like Mr. Fishman, we are also interested to know the impact of Wal-Mart’s environmental footprint - both good and bad. But any examination of Wal-Mart’s sustainability efforts should take into account the company as a whole - with all its problems, from factory to shopping cart - not just the side Wal-Mart wants us to see.
Two say Wal-Mart image on mend [Arkansas Democrat-Gazette]
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt | 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 with reports from two states that Wal-Mart is undercutting high school activity and athletic fundraising by selling merchandise bearing the logos of local high schools. In both cases, the schools in question were never contacted by Wal-Mart about whether sales of the items would hurt the school’s efforts to raise funds.
In addition, you’ll find Time and The New York Times delving into the topic of Wal-Mart moms, and the role they’ll play in the November election. Plus, check out our section on Wal-Mart and the environment to find out more about the unethical behavior of Wal-Mart’s sustainable mining supplier, and from California read about how the retail giant fought (unsuccessfully) a port-truck plan that would require tougher environmental and security standards.
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.
Wal-Mart Watch Weekly Update for Elected Officials
Posted by Corey Himrod | Permalink
Sep16
Cleveland Walmart Fiasco
In August 2006, everything was good at the City View Mall in Garfield Heights, Ohio. Wal-Mart built a supposedly first-of-its-kind store on top of a landfill. It made headlines for supposedly attracting 6,000 applicants for just 200 positions.
Two years later, things are a little different. It turns out that building on giant pile of garbage might not have been a good idea after all. The Ohio EPA has long been investigating the site, and has found significant soil erosion, polluted water seeping into storm sewers, and - most notably - combustible methane gas seeping into the store. The independent investigation by Wal-Mart indicated raw sewage backwash present in the store, a dangerous shift in the foundation of the store and confirmed the methane problems.
And just for a little more scandal (we know you wanted it): Mayor Thomas Longo, one of the chief architects of the landfill project, is saying publicly that he thinks methane is not the reason Wal-Mart is pulling out: “It’s a business decision...It’s a dollars-and-cents issue with these people.”
His claim sounds a little dubious, but for now - Wal-Mart is the only store to pull out of the complex.
Wal-Mart closes at City View on methane fears [Cleveland Plain-Dealer (Ohio)]:
Wal-Mart closed its store at City View Center on Monday, saying explosive gas at the site, built atop two toxic dumps, poses a danger to customers and employees.
The announcement comes less than two weeks after the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency threatened to shut down the big-box plaza off Interstate 480 if the owners did not step up efforts to monitor and vent the methane from underground sewer lines.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Media Team | Permalink
Wal-Mart markets its new “Love, Earth” jewelry line as “fashion jewelry that honors, cherishes and protects our planet.” Targeted at shoppers concerned with the environmental and human rights problems associated with gold mining, shoppers can trace their “Love, Earth” jewelry from “mine to market,” assured that it is sourced “from mines that maintain leading environmental and social standards.”
Just one day after Norway slammed Wal-Mart’s “sustainable” gold supplier for massive environmental damages, the environmental group Global Response has publicly condemned Wal-Mart for its gold greenwashing campaign. While the company makes overtures to environmentalism - using pictures of green fields and butterflies on the “Love, Earth” website - it relies on vague terminology, few enforceable standards and biased monitoring in calling the jewelry line “sustainable.” From Global Response:
Wal-Mart’s criteria look good on paper. They include “Safe disposal and management of waste and hazardous materials ...Protection of ecological functioning, ecosystem services and important biodiversity...Respect for the rights of individuals, indigenous peoples and communities [and] Contribution to the sustainable development of communities affected by operations.” But who is monitoring Newmont’s performance? Newmont and Wal-Mart.
The group goes on to criticize Wal-Mart’s mining partner, the Newmont Mining Corporation, for mining on land owned by the Western Shoshone tribe of Nevada. The Western Shoshone Defense Project has been fighting Newmont for years over the corporation’s environmentally-damaging practices.
Wal-Mart’s other partner in the “Love, Earth” line is Rio Tinto, a mining company recently blacklisted by Norway’s pension fund for its environmental damage in Indonesia. Norway has categorically refused to invest in irresponsible corporations: Wal-Mart itself was dropped from the fund in 2006.
Wal-Mart wants customers to see it as an environmentally-progressive corporation, but the company is trying to do it on the cheap. Rather than improve its sourcing practices or demand change from its suppliers, Wal-Mart has repeatedly focused on marketing instead. This not only fails to protect the environment, it actually tricks shoppers into supporting unsustainable practices.
What you can do: Join Wal-Mart Watch and Global Response in calling on Wal-Mart to stop greenwashing its gold. Click here to write a letter to the retailer, or send a complaint to the Federal Trade Commission for false advertising. With your help, we can spread the word about Wal-Mart’s greenwashed gold.
Posted by Enviro. Team | Permalink
Norwegians have dealt another ethical blow to Wal-Mart.
The Norwegian Government Pension Fund, known as the oil fund, has long since dropped all shares of Wal-Mart stock. But today it was announced that the fund dropped its entire $853 million stake in major mining company Rio Tinto for “grossly unethical conduct” resulting in massive environmental damage. This is the same Rio Tinto that Wal-Mart selected to supply it with “sustainable” jewelry.
The fund specifically cited the company’s mining practices in Indonesia, where it, among other things, “discharges about 230,000 tonnes of waste product – known as tailings – per day into a local river.” Rio Tinto is currently being blamed for thousands of deaths in Papua New Guinea, and good rundown of Rio Tinto’s history of labor and environmental abuses can be found here.
And remember, Rio Tinto is just supplying the “sustainable" 10% of Wal-Mart’s jewelry…
Ethical investors attack Rio Tinto [The Independent (U.K.)]:
The Norwegian government has launched an unprecedented attack on the UK mining giant Rio Tinto, selling a £500m holding in the company after accusing it of “grossly unethical conduct” relating to environmental damage.
The Norwegian Ministry of Finance released a statement yesterday saying it had “decided to exclude the company Rio Tinto from the Government Pension Fund – Global, due to a risk of contributing to severe environmental damage”.
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Eric Bull | Permalink
We missed Rainforest Action Network’s “Greenwash of the Week” back in April when they did an amazing job explaining the problems with Wal-Mart’s green efforts. The core of their argument: Wal-Mart’s low prices don’t reflect the true environmental cost of its products. RAN vloggers Bria and Robin break it down:
Does this mean that Wal-Mart really cares about being a green company and changing the way they do business to protect our future and the environment? Not exactly.
One reason Wal-Mart’s prices are so cheap is that they don’t pay all the environmental and human costs of all their products. They’re subsidized by environmental and human exploitation.
It’s called “externalizing the cost of production.”
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt | Permalink
We’ll be extremely busy this weekend relaxing and celebrating the valiant efforts of American workers, so in the meantime - a brief round up of the week’s Wal-Mart blogs.
DEADLY BASSINETS SOLD AT WAL-MART
Wal-Mart Still Selling Dangerous Cribs [WakeUpWal-Mart.com Blog]
Wal-Mart has long been plagued with recalls of dangerous products, and it has often been implicated in taking too little action about such products. Now it seems Wal-Mart is still selling a dangerous crib that is responsible for two deaths.
Here is the story yesterday at Consumeraffairs.com. I hope Wal-Mart (mentioned in this story) and other retailers have stopped selling these products, since being notified of the imminent hazard warning. And I assure readers, if SFCA’s defense somehow prevails in court, that the Congress will be quick with a technical correction to the new law.
After the jump, Wal-Mart’s local food, more on the company’s mandatory meetings and the new Marketside stores.
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
Wal-Mart Canada has faced some big labor problems lately. A 2005 lawsuit against the company’s anti-union labor practices made it to the Canadian Supreme Court this month, and at almost the same time workers in a Wal-Mart garage in Gatineau, Quebec managed to unionze, much to the company’s chagrin. So the company’s PR department did what it does best: divert attention.
David Cheesewright, CEO of Wal-Mart Canada, announced today that all of the company’s new Canadian stores will be “energy efficient.” The retailer has yet to meet any independent guidelines for energy efficiency, so its environmental claims are somewhat unclear, but the announcement comes at a time when Wal-Mart Canada could use some serious public relations karma.
Cheesewright insisted that the efficiency improvements were simply cost-saving measures, and said “environmental sustainability and business sustainability—it’s the same thing.” However, the company has yet to announce any such measures for its U.S. stores - or its stores in any other country, for that matter. The number of “energy efficient” Wal-Mart stores remains a pitifully small percentage of the company’s total operations. So if Cheesewright’s statements are true, Wal-Mart is missing out on a lot of cost savings - and we all know Wal-Mart wouldn’t do a thing like that. Perhaps the retailer is actually just looking for some free PR among our neighbors to the north.
Wal-Mart aims for ‘greenest stores on the block’ [Financial Post (Canada)]
Wal-Mart Canada Corp. pushed its green agenda ahead Tuesday by pledging that all new stores will be built to be markedly more energy efficient, and existing stores will be retrofitted to make them more environmentally friendly.
“Wal-Mart Canada (WMT/NYSE) has been intensely dedicated to environmental sustainability over the past three years,” Wal-Mart Canada CEO David Cheesewright said at the annual meeting of the Association of Municipalities of Ontario on Tuesday. “Perhaps no change has been as significant as those made to the way we build and operate our buildings. And the changes are progressing. We are confident that Wal-Mart stores will be among the greenest on the block.”
Read the rest of this story ...
Posted by Alex Goldschmidt | 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
With gas and food prices soaring, Jan Stalley says she’s thrilled that the Wal-Mart on Telegraph Road is being expanded to a supercenter, adding a full-service grocery.
“I can’t wait,” said Stalley, who lives with her husband and two sons in south St. Louis County. “Wal-Mart is going to make Schnucks and Dierbergs run for their money.”
Those sharing Stalley’s sentiments will be glad to hear that the Bentonville, Ark., retailer is proceeding with expansion plans in the St. Louis area despite cutbacks in other parts of the country. The company plans to open eight of its supercenters through next year, the first being in Fenton next month.
“We have slowed down growth, but it hasn’t affected the St. Louis market,” said Carol Johnston, vice president and regional general manager. “It’s a fantastic market for us. … The time is so right.”
Consumers are finding their budgets increasingly squeezed by rising prices for food and fuel. Reports from the Labor Department on Thursday showed consumer prices have risen 5.6 percent during the last 12 months, and weekly earnings, when adjusted for inflation, are down 3.1 percent.
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
View Wal-Mart Watch's videos on YouTube