What happens when Walmart comes to town? Other retailers "self destruct," which is no surprise, but there's a whole new study out proving it. According to a new study from Dartmouth’s Tuck School of Business, when Walmart enters a market,other mass merchandiser's sales dropped by 40 percent and supermarket's sales dropped by 17 percent. That is a pretty big hit for some stores, and, as we've documented in the past, often Walmart's entrance in an area means the demise of local businesses.

You can read the full article from BNET here. We'll also keep our eyes out for the full report when it is released. What has your experiences been? Have local stores shut down in your area due to Walmart?

Walmart's appetite for growth is insatiable. With about 4000 stores in the US alone and many more around the world, Walmart is huge and growing fast. Walmart is especially targeting China, India, and Mexico abroad for growth, and large cities domestically for growth. Of course that is not stopping the giant retailer from going after its more traditional locations. Many communities fight back when Walmart tries to steamroll its way in to town, but we haven't heard of of a case where Walmart would actually displace an entire community. But that is exactly what they are doing in one Florida community.

If Walmart gets its way, it will complete replace a mobile home community, forcing its 60 residents to move. The article is short on details, but we have to imagine that most of these folks aren't too happy about having to move. Here's the article from the :

It seems that police in Chattanooga, TN were fed up with crime at the local Walmart stores and decided to take a proactive approach. Instead of waiting for calls, they ran stings, and it worked. The police arrested 8 people. Now we've written about how crime-ridden Walmart parking lots can be in the past, but this is the first we've heard of any kind of stings. It's actually a great idea. Studies in the past have shown that if Walmart would patrol their parking lots sporadically, crime would drop significantly. It is unfortunate, however, that the police force had to step up and do this, because it should really be Walmart's responsibility. I suppose it's really no surprise, though. Walmart costs tax payers billions of dollars every year by shirking their responsibilities. The parking lots are Walmart's property, after all.

Here's the article from the local a local TV station:

Chattanooga Police have arrested 8 people, charging them with theft under $500 in connection with a sting that was conducted at area Walmart parking lots in Chattanooga.

Property Crimes Investigators set up yesterday on the lots of the Walmart in Brainerd and Gunbarrel Rd. and waited on would-be thieves. Investigators used 2 females who posed as shoppers who would leave their purses on the trunks of their vehicle and walk off into the Walmart.

With the holiday season approaching, Chattanooga Police are taking a pro-active approach in deterring thefts from vehicles, auto thefts and parking lot robberies by conducting these types of stings and getting the message out we are out in the communities and are working to prevent these types of crimes.

Chattanooga Police also report there were more good honest shoppers than thieves, 30 – 35 people who saw the purses that had been left, quickly turned them in to the store. Chattanooga Police want to commend these honest people and thank them for their honesty.

Charge with Theft Under $500 were:

Jermichael Bowling
Kelshia Hicks
Gaynor Espy
Joe Young
Sandra Harris
Marlin Dewayne Gates
Monica Gates
Elvis Carbajal-Osorio

Check out this Letter to the Editor from a local paper in Oregon:

Letter: Undermining prosperity Warrenton's leaders will actually hurt the economic life of the North Coast by inviting Walmart into their community. Walmart's "associates" earn significantly less than workers employed at comparable retailers. Last year Walmart associates earned 16 percent less than the average U.S. wage.

When Walmart moves in, it drives down prices and wages through predatory low-pricing practices. These practices have driven small local retailers who have served their communities for generations out of business. And while money spent at local retailers mostly stays in the community, more than 60 percent of money spent at Walmart does not. At the same time, Walmart drives other large retailers to hold wages and benefits down in order to compete.

To achieve its low prices, Walmart pays its workers far less than wages necessary to support a family. Walmart is the largest and most profitable corporation in the world. Yet its low wage scales make company health plans too costly for workers to afford, as workers have to pay over half their meager salaries to afford them. Rather than using some of its tens of billions a year in net profits to support worker health care, corporate policy is to save money by compelling employees to rely on public assistance programs for survival.

Walmart also is notorious for having some of the world's most regressive labor practices. It has been cited by the National Labor Relations Board for giving out work loads much too great to be completed during regular work hours and then compelling associates to work "off clock" hours for which they get no pay at all. It has been cited and fined for habitual discrimination against women.

And of all transnational corporations, Walmart is among the most militantly anti-union. Workers who try to organize are regularly fired, a practice contrary to the National Labor Relations Act. And managers are encouraged to spy on workers to be sure they are not discussing grievances or giving any signs of organizing, including meeting at one another's homes. Walmart is the undisputed leader in the corporate race to the bottom, which rejects American-made merchandise for that made under some of the world's most slave labor conditions in China, where the vast majority of Walmart's goods are manufactured.

No wonder Warrenton politicians and developers kept Walmart's arrival here a secret. Its corporate practices consistently undermine the prosperity of communities across the country.

For further information on Walmart's destructiveness, check out www.corpwatch. org/article.php?id=13796, "A Brief History of Walmart," and www.wakeupwalmart.com.

Activists have placed a new hurdle between Walmart and its plan to desecrate the historic Wilderness Battlefield in Virginia.

Yesterday, September 23rd, the National Trust for Historic Preservation, Friends of Wilderness Battlefield, and six nearby residents filed a lawsuit in the Circuit Court of Orange County. The suit challenges the August 2009 approval of Walmart's proposal to plant a massive super center unacceptably close to the historic battlefield.

Walmart's Wilderness proposal has drawn widespread condemnation from prominent historians, actors, politicians, activist groups, and concerned citizens. However, Walmart is hardly shy about building stores where residents don't want them. As Walmart Real Estate Manager Jeff Doss once noted, "If that were the case, we'd never build a store anywhere."

This time, Walmart won't be allowed to impose without a long, hard, and expensive fight.

We applaud the National Trust for Historic Preservation and Friends of Wilderness Battlefield for taking a stand against irresponsible development.

As we've often discussed, there are a number of reasons a town might not want Walmart to move in. There is the added traffic, the simple change of feel to a small town, the businesses Walmart may force out, and the tax credits and other incentives Walmart often demands from towns and cities. Another frequent concern is crime. Walmart has been a hotbed for crime for a long time. In particular, Walmart's parking lots, where criminals know there won't be a security guard on patrol, are often crime scenes.

A local Pennsylvania town is concerned about exactly that crime, among other issues. Check out this article from The Morning Call about a recent planning commission meeting for the town of North Whitehall:

"A state trooper fielded questions Tuesday from the North Whitehall Planning Commission and the public about current police coverage in the township and the potential impact of a large commercial center, including a 24-hour Wal-Mart.

Land development plans for the big-box retailer and four smaller sites at the North Whitehall Commercial Center -- proposed to be built in Schnecksville -- are currently under review by the Planning Commission.

Commissioner John Barto III asked if a big-box retailer would affect police service in the township.

...Resident Nancy Bramer said she obtained crime statistic figures for North Whitehall that show incidents increased from 1,701 in 2006 to 2,354 in 2007. Bramer said she also obtained figures for the Trexlertown Wal-Mart that showed 102 incidents in 2006 and 68 incidents in 2007. She asked Mahady if that amount of incidents would have a significant impact on state police coverage in North Whitehall.

"Absolutely, that is significant," Mahady said.

Attorney Erich Schock, who represents Wal-Mart, asked if two calls came in -- one for a home burglary and the other for a retail shoplifting -- would a determination be made.

Mahady said calls are prioritized all the time and it would depend on the circumstances of each situation, for example, whether a suspect was on premises at the home burglary or in custody of retail security."

In his autobiography, Sam Walton wrote: "We saturated Missouri...In the Springfield, Missouri area, we had 40 stores within 100 miles...we just started repeating what worked, stamping out stores cookie-cutter style." The Wal-Mart cookie-cutter in Missouri is still going strong.

The latest saturation is in Bridgeton, Missouri. The 15,000 residents of Bridgeton are swimming in Wal-Marts. There are 19 Wal-Marts within 25 miles of Bridgeton, including a Wal-Mart less than 3 miles away in St. Ann, and 7 miles away in St. Charles, Missouri. But Wal-Mart--and a developer who married into the family--wants to squeeze in another one.

Bridgeton is the oldest community in St. Louis County, and one of the oldest in the state of Missouri. It's also a city that has been losing population. Compared to 1990, the population in Bridgeton has dropped 15%. But Bridgeton Mayor Conrad Bowers says the city is on the way up. "Bridgeton is growing!" says the city's website. "New commercial and residential developments are underway and more are following, particularly as the '370' corridor blossoms."

According to the St. Louis Business Journal this week, the city is going to issue a request for redevelopment proposals within the next two weeks for some vacant properties formerly occupied by the retailer, Value City, which went out of business, and other tenants along St. Charles Rock Road.

One of the most prolific Wal-Mart developers in the country, THF Realty has proposed a Wal-Mart supercenter on the Value City property. THF has already contracted to buy a portion of the property that is included in the redevelopment request. THF also spent $32 million in 2006 to develop a Lowe's adjacent to the former Value City property.

THF Realty of St. Louis, was founded in 1991. It owns 100 properties comprising more than 20 million square feet of leaseable area in 23 states. A concentration of THF properties exists in Missouri, Illinois, Pennsylvania and West Virginia. The company says its mission is to be the "best private developer in America." The Chairman of THF is Stan Kroenke, a co-owner of the St. Louis Rams, and owner of the Denver Nuggets and the Denver Avalanche. Kroenke's net worth is around $3 billion--double what it was in 2003.

Building Wal-Marts is a family affair for Kroenke. He married into the Walton family. His wife Ann is the daughter of Sam Walton's brother Bud, who died in 1995. Ann Walton Kroenke is one of the richest women in America, with an inheritance valued at $2.6 billion.

Over the years, Kroenke and THF have been at the center of many controversial Wal-Mart developments in St. Peters, Columbia, High Ridge, Maplewood, and North St. Louis County, Missouri, as well as Glen Carbon, Illinois, Wheeling, West Virginia, and Buffalo, Minnesota.

Mayor Bowers is thrilled to let another big box store 'blossom' in his tiny city, because he thinks he knows a good economic deal when he sees one.

What you can do:

THF Realty owns 18 malls in Missouri alone. One of the most controversial Kroenke projects was Mapplewood Commons, a 439,550 s.f. mall located just 10 minutes South of St. Louis along Interstate 64. The center is anchored by a Wal-Mart, a Sam's Club and a Lowe's. When this project was finalized, Maplewood's Mayor at the time, Mark Langston, said he was "really pleased" that a Wal-Mart and Sam's club were given the green light by voters in Maplewood, Missouri.

What happened after the THF approval was unbelievable. THF began bulldozing an entire neighborhood of 150 homes!

The Mayor's cavalier response in the St. Louis Post Dispatch was: "We hate to lose these folks, but they're getting a good price for their homes." On top of that, TFH announced that it planned to expand its footprint beyond just the Wal-Mart and Sam's Club, to open a Lowe's home improvement store. This required the razing of another 52 homes in a residential area, bringing the total homes destroyed up to more than 200. All these families were uprooted from their homes, so Stan Kroenke could add another mall to his list of "assets."

But the story was even more bizarre: This very deep pocketed developer then asked Missouri taxpayers to give THF corporate welfare to tear down the homes, in the form of Tax Incremental Financing (TIF). This is the company that boasts that "in our first 10 years we built more than 15 million square feet of retail and office space."

Readers are urged to contact Bridgeton Mayor Conrad Bowers by emailing the city's Administrator at: cityadmin@bridgetonmo.com with the following message:

Dear Mayor Bowers, Your small city, with its declining population, already has 19 Wal-Marts within 25 miles of your city hall office. Your residents have plenty of discount stores to get their cheap Chinese products. The merchants who will be most affected by this superstore will be grocers like Schnuck's or Royal Food.

THF may have convinced you this is an economic development project---but its not. It's just about shifting market share from existing merchants---including Wal-Mart's own discount stores. Rather than create new jobs and new revenues, a Wal-Mart superstore will simply transfer sales from stores already in business.

Sam Walton boasted that Wal-Mart had become 'our own competition' in Missouri. Wal-Mart and THF are counting on your economic illiteracy to promote this project as a 'new jobs' project. But there's a reason why you're now trying to fill the empty space where Value City used to be. THF brings no added value to Bridgeton, and if you don't reject their bid, Bridgeton will find itself no better off financially after the superstore opens.

It's time to stop sprawling Bridgeton, and lead growth, instead of follow it. As one Mayor once said, ‘It's not how big you grow that matters. It's how you grow big.'

On July 26, 2009, Sprawl-Busters reported that a proposed Wal-Mart superstore in tiny Brooklyn, Connecticut had attracted two lawsuits. Wal-Mart's application for the 162,000 s.f. store was approved on March 19, 2009 by the Brooklyn Inland/Wetlands.

The I/W Commission voted that the huge superstore would not create a "significant activity" that would have a major impact on wetlands. They also ruled that the project would not cause unreasonable pollution or impairment the wetlands on the site. The Commission attached 14 insignificant conditions to their approval, including requiring Wal-Mart to use a biodegradable de-icing product on the parking lot.

Immediately after the vote, a citizen's group vowed to challenge the I/W Commission decision. The Battle of Brooklyn was in the news again on June 24, 2009 when another town board, the Planning & Zoning Commission, voted 7-1 to approve the application, with members again attaching their own list of 18 minor conditions to the plan. The commission will require Wal-Mart to increase its buffer area, do a daily litter clean up, conduct a noise and lighting test, and post a bond to ensure proper erosion control and landscaping on the site if the project is not finished. Only one member of the P&Z voted against the plan, noting that its huge size was not "in harmony with the town, does not have a New England architectural style and would hurt neighboring property values," according to the Norwich Bulletin.

Lisa Arends, a spokesperson for the group Brooklyn for Sensible Growth, told the newspaper, "I'm disappointed, but not surprised. "It is what it is, and we go from here." The second appeal in this case was formally filed in Putnam Superior Court on July 6th. The "Brooklyn Dozen," including residents Jeff Haines, Demetrios and Maria Pasiakos, Kerry and Elaine Lambert and Dan Litke filed as abutters to the project. The lawsuit charges that the P&Z vote for Wal-Mart was "illegal, arbitrary, capricious and in abuse of its discretion."

The residents say that town officials failed to follow town regulations and state statutes in making their decision. The plaintiffs and their experts testified during the hearings that the huge store--the building itself is almost three times the size of a football field--did not conform with other retail businesses in the area, or with the surrounding built environment.

Four acres including in the plan are zoned residential-agricultural, and not planned commercial. The lawsuit charges that town "staff participation during deliberations was in the nature of advocacy... and rendered the proceedings fundamentally unfair." The first appeal of the Inland Wetlands case will come up for a pretrial conference on September 23rd, and the actual court hearing date will be March 22, 2010. This means that citizens have effectively delayed any action on Wal-Mart's approval from Inland/Wetlands by one year from the vote of approval by that body. The P&Z appeal will delay the project further. Wal-Mart has indicated that nothing will happen with this project until the appeals are processed. With this litigation as a backdrop, it is not surprising that town officials do not want to cooperate with the efforts by local residents to prevent this kind of a big box fiasco from happening again in their community.

This week, the same Brooklyn Planning & Zoning Commission that approved the Wal-Mart voted to 'study' a zoning regulation change that would have created a size cap of 50,000 s.f. on all retail businesses. Such limitations on the bulk of stores have become commonplace in communities across the country as a bright line to limit big box sprawl. As a token to citizens who pushed for the new regulation, the P&Z did agree to form a subcommittee to "study," the issue to decide if a cap is desirable, and at what size it would be set. The "study" gives local officials more time to organize sentiment against the idea.

The subcommittee will have members of the town's Economic Development, Conservation, and Planning and Zoning commissions, as well as some residents. The size cap is Brooklyn's best avenue for protecting its small town character, and prevent the secondary sprawl growth that is attracted to big box projects like the Wal-Mart superstore. But on the advice of the town's lawyer, the Commission's review of the idea tabled without a vote, and the idea of a study was presented instead.

What you can do:

The size cap regulation as written would only have relevance to the planned commercial zone, because existing zoning regulations in every other zone already would rule out big box stores. Jeff Arends, who opposed the Wal-Mart and who helped propose the size cap, said the regulation change was written to apply to all zones in Brooklyn in cased new ones were added later. But under questioning by the P&Z members, Arends said he would be willing to see just the commercial zone targeted for the new cap. This size cap was submitted to the town last December--before any votes were taken on the Wal-Mart project--which will not be affected by the cap if it subsequently passed.

In the two hour hearing on the size cap, most of the testimony submitted to officials was in favor of the regulation, according to the Bulletin. "A 50,000 s.f. cap would not be the death of Brooklyn," one resident told the Commission. "Brooklyn deserves protection from the devastation and irreparable damage of urban sprawl which is knocking on our door," Lisa Arends told the Commission. Attorney Marjorie Shansky, who is representing the citizens in their appeals against the Wal-Mart decision, also spoke in favor of the plan.

During the Wal-Mart appeal, residents voiced concerns that land further along Route 6 would attract more big box sprawl and national chain restaurants if the Wal-Mart is built. The Brooklyn retail trade area already has a Wal-Mart 10 miles away in Putnam, Connecticut, plus a supercenter 14 miles away in North Windham, and another supercenter 14 miles away in Lisbon. "This store will not affect our stores in neighboring communities," Wal-Mart told its critics. "Having multiple stores in a region is a way to ensure we provide savings and convenience to as many as possible." Wal-Mart tried to use the economy's weakened condition as another reason to want a superstore. "With the economy in fragile condition, a Brooklyn store brings hundreds of new jobs and hundreds of thousands of dollars in tax revenue."

The reality is that there will be little or no ‘new' jobs at Wal-Mart, because the superstore in Brooklyn will cannibalize other Wal-Mart's nearby, and cause local stores---including grocery stores---to fail.

Readers are urged to email Planning & Zoning Commission Chairman Thomas Doherty with the following message:

"Dear Chairman Doherty,

I hope the Wal-Mart battle in Brooklyn has convinced you that big box superstores are a point of deep division in your small town, and that putting a limit on the bulk of buildings is as appropriate as placing a limit on the height of buildings.

This has become a mainstream zoning idea in communities across the country, going back more than a decade. This is a legitimate zoning tool to help Brooklyn guide future growth, instead of following the lead of national chain store developers. The cap will not affect Wal-Mart, so your 'study' of the issue should not be clouded by that.

As one Mayor has said, 'It's not how big you grow---but how you grow big, that matters.' Brooklyn will not get many chances to determine how it will grow. The size cap allows developers to fit into your vision of the future, rather than the reverse.

If you are going to tell people on your website, 'Take a minute and enjoy the view'---then you'd better protect the view in Brooklyn before it gets crowded out by big box sprawl."

Yesterday we wrote a post about what happens when Walmart leaves town. The empty, blighted shell of a huge building can be a strain on communities, and the longer it sits there, the worse it can get. But today, we see the closing of a store at a slightly different phase: right before it shuts down.

In New Britain, CT, Walmart rather abruptly decided to shut its store. It means that 162 jobs will be lost, and the Mayor is looking to help mitigate the situation. The article goes on to discuss the business:

“The building is still owned by Wal-Mart,” Stewart said. “They have to pay property taxes on it.”

The owners of that property are responsible for marketing the property, the mayor said.

Bill Carroll, business development coordinator for the City of New Britain, said he was disappointed in the abrupt way Wal-Mart handled the situation. Company officials dropped off paperwork about the store closing at the mayor’s office and left.

“We’re talking about 162 jobs and filling that space,” Carroll said. “It’s incumbent on owners of that building to hire someone to market the location. I’ll help any way I can. Aldi’s [food store chain] is nearby and they’ve been successful. Eventually, something will turn up.”

We're not so optimistic. As yesterday's post shows, Walmart isn't all that interested in dealing with vacant buildings, even if they still own them.

You can read the full article here.

While Walmart is ubiquitous, it's not without controversy when it wants to move in to a new town. Often local residents fight against building new Walmart stores because they feel it will negatively impact their community, put local stores out of business, bring extra traffic to the area, increase crime in the area, and generally detract from the feel of the neighborhood. There is yet another reason communities might not Walmart to move in...the remains of their store when they leave.

Unfortunately, Walmart doesn't build their stores to last, and when they decide the location is no longer making them sufficient profit, they simply pick up and leave. The problem is, no one wants a 200,000+ square foot shell. They're just too big to do anything with, and they tend to sit around for a very long time. Not only are the empty, blighted stores an eyesore, but they also tend to attract graffiti, abandoned cars, crime, and more.

Here's an excerpt from a story from Kansas city that demonstrates what can happen when Walmart decides your city is no longer making them enough money:

A scrap of paper that's snapped between the windshield and the wiper blade of a rusting Ford Bronco begs: "Please do not tow. Will return to pick up."

The Bronco sits in the parking lot of a former Sam's Club at Noland Road and U.S. Highway 40. The vehicle shares a piece of weed-strewn asphalt with several truck cabs and semitrailers of various origin. Dead bugs cover the face of one cab with a Kansas license plate and Louis L'Amour paperbacks visible on the dashboard.

The lot suggests a truck stop the morning after an alien abduction. Big-rig operators and others have stashed vehicles near the Sam's Club for more than a year — "maybe even quite substantially longer than that," according to Greg Hunsucker, co-owner of V’s Italiano Ristorante a few miles down the road.

Sam's Club, a division of Wal-Mart, abandoned the site in 2001. The still-vacant warehouse store, paint peeling from its siding, used to anchor General's Plaza, one of the sadder dying strip centers in the metro. Current tenants include a dollar store and a motorcycle-riding school.

The Sam's Club died a typical Wal-Mart death. Company officials, having determined that the intersection had outlived its usefulness, decided to relocate the business to a taxpayer-subsidized shopping district three miles to the east.

Wal-Mart has abandoned hundreds of locations in the course of its aggressive expansion. Often, city governments assist with those transitions through property-tax breaks or bond financing.

Al Norman, a Massachusetts-based critic of big-box stores who advises communities on how to keep them out, says Wal-Mart's inventory of "ghost stores" is unprecedented. Norman used to conduct a yearly inventory of orphaned Wal-Marts. "I stopped doing it just because it was too time-consuming," he tells me.

The Sam's Club on Noland Road would have to be included on any list of the most depressing zombie Wal-Marts. The building looks like a poorly maintained shed suffering from elephantiasis. The spider-web crack in the windshield of one of the truck cabs makes the parking lot look like a junkyard. "Boy, it has been an eyesore," Hunsucker says.

It's illegal, too. Responding to a complaint (not from me), Kansas City, Missouri, codes officials are in the process of notifying Wal-Mart that the Sam's Club parking lot is in violation. The property's zoning category does not permit trucks to be stored on-site.

Of course, Wal-Mart isn't the one using the lot as a motor pool. But the company's neglect has allowed it to happen. "The property owner is always responsible for the property," Wilson Winn, a manager in Kansas City's Planning and Development Department, tells me.

Read the full story here.

The battle over Walmart proposed store near a Civil War battlefield in Virginia has resulted in a local government official losing his job. Bill Rolfe was an Orange County administrator, until recently, but apparently the Orange County Supervisors weren't going to tolerate any discussion of where the proposed Walmart store would be located. Just a few days ago Bill Rolfe was fired for suggesting, rather reasonably it seems, that Walmart not build across the road from a protected and important historical battlefield, but instead build slightly farther away.

It seems pretty strange that the County Supervisors would make such a drastic move. After all, it's not as if Mr. Rolfe was the only one to suggest that Walmart build in a different location. In fact there has been a huge group demanding this change including conservationists, local residents, historians, activists, actors, elected officials and more.

That the Orange County Supervisors would resort to firing an employee simply for offering a different opinion is a shame, and we're not the only ones who think so. Check out these articles from the local Free Lance Star and US News & World Report calling out the supervisors, even suggesting that, "come the next election, Orange County voters should fire them."

From US News & World Report:

A few weeks back, I wrote about the ongoing controversy in Orange County, Va., where Wal-Mart wants to build a "supercenter" shopping mall on the ground where the Union and Confederate armies clashed in the battle of the Wilderness during the Civil War. Here is a disheartening update: A courageous and wise public official has been fired for suggesting that Wal-Mart choose a different site.

Wal-Mart needs a special permit to build its big box, with its flock of accompanying stores. When the Orange County planning commission held a public hearing on the permit, two thirds in the audience said sure, they would like to have a Wal-Mart in the county—but why does it have to be built on the battlefield?

County Administrator Bill Rolfe, who had "worked hard for two years to clear the bureaucratic thicket for Wal-Mart," according to the Fredericksburg Free Lance-Star, was impressed by the citizenry's logic. And he was moved by commentaries written in the newspaper by local residents who had fought a similar fight with Wal-Mart back in the 1990s—when it wanted to build a store next to George Washington's boyhood home in Stafford County, Va. In that case, the county officials persuaded Wal-Mart to build on different land, and everyone was happy. The Wal-Mart property was improved, and added to the tax rolls; the preservationists protected Washington's home, and the local economy continued to prosper as tourists came to see where George chopped down the cherry tree.

Rolfe's level-headed suggestion did not, unfortunately, persuade a majority of the Orange County board. Instead, after a closed session on Friday night, in the middle of the Fourth of July weekend, they fired him.

Yesterday, a Free Lance-Star editorial criticized the supervisors for their "red faces and quivering wattles" and concluded that "truth and justice have had better days." It praised Rolfe for a "spotless" record, and for "keeping [his] honor clean." The same cannot be said for the supervisors who voted, in a 3-2 roll call, to dismiss him.

The newspaper noted why the battlefield should be preserved. When the federal government surveyed the Civil War fields some years ago, it ranked the 384 major battlefields and put the Wilderness in the top 45 as "having a decisive influence on a campaign and a direct impact on the course of the war." Of those 45 "Class A" battlefields, 10 faced a "high" threat of development, including the Wilderness.

It gets worse. The land that Wal-Mart wants to pave was not only used by the Union troops during the Wilderness fight (in which no less a hero than Gen. Ulysses S. Grant wept at the carnage), but also by the Confederates in Gen. Robert E. Lee's great victory of 1863 at the adjacent battlefield of Chancellorsville, where Gen. Stonewall Jackson died at the culminating moment of a brilliant flank attack.

With the 150th anniversary of the Civil War approaching, there is bound to be increased interest in Virginia's battlefields. Even if greed is their primary motive, the Orange County supervisors should be planning to lure tourists to a preserved Wilderness battlefield, not despoiling it with a shopping center that could be built on another site.

Here are the names of the supervisors who voted to fire Rolfe: Mark Johnson, Zack Burkett, and Teri Pace.

Come the next election, Orange County voters should fire them.

Apparently a local Florida Walmart has been selling Alcohol to minors, along with several other businesses. According to the local news station, "Police, along with Mothers Against Drunk Driving, conducted an undercover operation Thursday targeting 23 different businesses. Alcohol was sold to minors at 12 locations including a Walmart and a Smokey Bones restaurant on Semoran boulevard."

We're not all that surprised, really. Walmart seems to have a particular malice for the law, whether its tax codes, or equal employment, or labor law. More importantly, though, is that breaking these laws are business as usual for Walmart because the penalties are less than a slap on the wrist. This commenter says it best:

"Walmart will blame the clerk, plead ignorance and pay the fine and go back to business as usual. Just like all the rest who got caught, why should anyone be surprised, these companies NEVER take responsibility for anything."

Last week Walmart announced it would close down an optical lab in central Ohio, laying off 650 people in the process. It's dire news, on its own, of course. With unemployment rates spiking across the country and the economy still struggling (except, it seems, for Walmart) the last thing any state needs is another closed store or factory or lab. This particular closing, however, is worse. It seems that the state of Ohio gave Walmart $1.8 million in tax credits to open this particular optical lab to create and maintain jobs in the state. Clearly, Walmart has not kept its end of the bargain.

Here's the article from the Associated Press:

Ohio to review if Wal-Mart reneged on tax deal

Economic development officials in Ohio say they will check whether Wal-Mart Stores Inc. violated terms of a tax agreement by closing an optical lab near Columbus.

Ohio gave the world's largest retailer a $1.8 million job-creation tax credit in 2001 on the condition that the company create and maintain jobs there.

Wal-Mart on Friday announced that it will close the lab, cutting 650 jobs. The lab makes eyewear for vision centers in Wal-Mart stores.

Kelly Schlissberg, a spokeswoman for the Ohio Department of Development, says the agency is reviewing its agreement with Wal-Mart to determine if the state can recoup money.

A message seeking comment was left Saturday for a Wal-Mart spokesman.

The Civil War Preservation Trust is having a news conference tomorrow to draw attention to the Wilderness civil war battlefield and Wal-Mart's attempt to build a gigantic big box store near it. We'll be going to cover the event, but I thought I'd give anyone in the DC area a heads up about the event.

OSCAR-WINNING ACTOR RICHARD DREYFUSS TO SPEAK AT ENDANGERED BATTLEFIELDS NEWS CONFERENCE

(Washington, D.C.) Oscar-winning actor and education activist Richard Dreyfuss will be the keynote speaker at a news conference about endangered Civil War battlefields on Wednesday, March 18, 2009. Best known for his roles in films like American Graffiti, Jaws, Close Encounters of the Third Kind, and his Academy Award-winning turn in The Goodbye Girl, Dreyfuss is also an avid student of history and has been involved in numerous documentary projects, including The Great Battles of the Civil War and Lincoln.

Dreyfuss will be joining Civil War Preservation Trust (CWPT) President James Lighthizer at the news conference for the release of History Under Siege, the organization’s annual report on the nation’s most endangered Civil War battlefields and what is being done to rescue them. Also speaking at the event will be Dr. Libby O’Connell, chief historian at History, formerly The History Channel.

The news conference will be held at 10:00 a.m. in the First Amendment Lounge of the National Press Club. Copies of the report will be available at the event. Refreshments will be served.

Following the news conference, Dreyfuss and Lighthizer will visit the African American Civil War Memorial, located at 10th and U Streets, NW, Washington, D.C., for a wreath-laying ceremony.

WHO: Oscar-winning actor Richard Dreyfuss, CWPT President James Lighthizer and historian Dr. Libby O’Connell

WHAT: News Conference and Wreath-Laying Ceremony

WHEN: Wednesday, March 18, 2009 at 10:00 a.m.

WHERE: News Conference will begin at 10:00 a.m. in the First Amendment Lounge of the National Press Club, 529 14th Street, NW, Washington, D.C.

Back in September, we told you that Blacksburg, VA, the hometown of Virginia Tech, was fighting to keep a Wal-Mart out of their town. Their last shot at stopping the massive development they feared would infringe upon their small town community, ruin small businesses, the environment, and increase sprawl, was the State Supreme court. Recently it was announced that opponents of the Wal-Mart development, including the town of Blacksburg and Blacksburg United for Responsible Growth (BURG), have won the court ruling. Congratulations to Blacksburg and BURG who successfully stopped Wal-Mart from coming to town.

Here's the article about the recent court decision:

Blacksburg’s Battle With Big-Box Ends

Area residents and the Town of Blacksburg have been fighting for two years to keep a big-box store out. It looks like that wish has finally been granted by the Virginia Supreme Court.

The big-box store, thought to be a Wal-Mart SuperCenter, was being proposed by Fairmount Properties of Ohio and its partners. Fairmount is the same company that has developed the First & Main retail center in Blacksburg.

Friday’s ruling by the court, however, affirms the Blacksburg Town Council’s right to require that the developer apply for and acquire a special use permit to build a 186,000-square-foot store off South Main Street as part of the First & Main retail project.

Justice Lawrence L. Koontz, Jr., gave the opinion of the state Supreme Court and said the principal issue was whether the circuit court correctly applied a legal code in finding that the owner/developers of a parcel of real property obtained a vested right to a particular use of the property under a rezoning ordinance and whether that code would bar the locality from enforcing the amendment of the zoning ordinance against the property.

Blacksburg residents are expressing relief at the end of the long legal battle. “As a small business owner in the traditional downtown, a social justice activist, and a founding member of BURG, I am thrilled with the ruling of the Virginia Supreme Court in favor of the town and its residents, said Margaret Breslau, owner of Homebody, a Main Street store self-described as retail as activism. “There is no place for bait-and-switch tactics, big-box development in proximity to schools and residential neighborhoods, and development that is not consistent with the interests of the town and our community. We want smart growth, planned development, and green space. This is not just a victory for our town but for the state and I couldn’t be happier.”

Many local residents were opposed to the big-box idea and to Wal-Mart in particular. Blacksburg resident Kathryn Welch said she did not oppose Wal-Mart, per se. “But I believe Blacksburg residents were baited and switched,” Welch said. Worse, the superstore site, right next to an elementary school, was totally inappropriate and unsafe for young school children. So I am happy about the ruling.”

The court concluded in its opinion of more than 40 pages that the circuit court erred in ruling that the developers had a vested right to develop on the property structures for retail sales in excess of 80,000 square feet of gross floor space without the necessity of first obtaining a special use permit.

Blacksburg residents had been anxious to hear the court’s ruling, and at least one resident said he was surprised at the result. “I’m pleased and pleasantly surprised by the ruling,” said Tim Colley. “I think it gives Blacksburg a chance to re-look at what kind of a community it wants to be and to put in place those measures to implement that vision. This is a significant step in planning for a truly sustainable community and not one following the status-quo of other towns hungry for the tax base that big-box retailers promise.”

In a unanimous decision on Friday, the court reversed previous rulings.

“I’m speechless,” Town Attorney Larry Spencer told The Roanoke Times. “I did not expect such a decisive victory.”

The court said that it entered a “final judgment here for the Town and the residents.”

What happens when Wal-Mart leaves town? Often, after Wal-Mart has moved in, run many local businesses and maybe a few grocery stores out of business, and made people defendant on their massive one stop shopping model, they leave a serious dearth of shopping options. they also leave a massive shell of a building plopped in the middle (or on the outskirts) of town. One town decided it would try and fix the problems by taking over the abandoned building. The town of Saint Martinville, LA is planning to build a shopping center where the Wal-Mart had been. The article suggests that the mayor of the town believes getting the abandoned building is a fair trade for Wal-Mart taking over the local economy and then leaving. We couldn't disagree more. Instead of still having an active local economy, this town now has to reclaim a massive, big box building and spend, potentially, millions to get shops to come back to town. Yes, we believe Saint Martinville would have been better off if Wal-Mart never came to their town in the first place.

Here's the article from a local news station:

Saint Martinville Walmart Now Property of the City

The old, vacant Walmart building in Saint Martinville is now one step closer to being revitalized. The building that has been vacant since October of last year is officially property of the city.

Mondays donation ceremony marked the title transfer with the city's Mayor and council members on hand.

Mayor Thomas Nelson, says it's a fair trade for the negative affects the store had on the city when it was open.

"We took a whipping. Our mom and pop stores weren't happy and it ended up running a lot of them out of business. They really took over the market" says Nelson.

The future of the building is still up in the air however, Mayor Nelson says the 44000 square foot building will most likely be divided up and transformed into a strip mall.

Last week, we told you about Riverview Market, a grocery store in New Hampshire, that closed because Wal-Mart came to town. It was a classic example of how Wal-Mart ruins "Main Street" in small towns across the country. Today, we've got yet another example, and this one is literally on Main St. Sobeys grocery store on Main St. in Stouffville, Ontario is closing after a Wal-Mart came to town.

Here's the full article from The Canadian:

U.S. Owned Walmart causes Canadians to loose 81 jobs in Stouffville

One of Stouffville’s four grocery stores will close Nov. 15.

Sobeys management gave the news to the 81 employees at its Main Street store Wednesday.

It’s the only Canadian store slated to close.

The west-end store opened in 2002 first as an IGA, replacing the downtown Stouffville IGA that closed in the 1990s. It became a Sobeys two years later.

The store is popular with seniors at the Parkview seniors complex across Weldon Road from it.

“Unfortunately, we had to make this decision,” said Sobeys Ontario spokesperson Tracy Chisholm. “Several factors go into these decisions.”

She could not elaborate, she said.

Sobeys will attempt to find positions for workers at its other area stores.

Wal-Mart made a big splash on the Canadian retail landscape when it opened its largest Super-Centre in the country, including a full grocery store, two years ago in southwest Stouffville.

Stouffville is also home to an A & P and a No Frills.

Sobeys Inc., headquartered in Stellarton, N.S., owns or franchises 1,296 Sobeys, IGA extra, IGA, Foodland and Price Chopper stores across Canada. The company is owned by Empire Company Ltd. Empire employs 37,000 people directly and through its subsidiaries. The company has approximately $13.2 billion in annual revenue and $5.1 billion in assets.

Wal-Mart is bad for local business. We've all heard about Wal-Mart moving in to town and all the local business closing down. But usually, we hear about it in broad terms. Now, we hear about a grocery store that is closing, and they've identified Wal-Mart as the reason. Riverview Market in Woodsville, NH. The store closes its doors just 6 months after Wal-Mart moved in to town. Wal-Mart claims another store. The retail giant has directly or indirectly been responsible for countless closings just like this one.

Read the article from the local news station:

Woodsville Grocer Blames Wal-Mart for Closure

Riverview Market, a grocery store in downtown Woodsville, NH, plans to close its doors any day and blames Wal-Mart's arrival across town as the straw that broke the camel's back.

The Wal-Mart Supercenter opened in March 2008 to much fanfare and despite concerns this very event would happen.

Tim Merrill, general manager of AG Supermarkets, Inc., which owns Riverview Market, said in a statement, "The recent opening of a nearby Wal-Mart further decreased sales at what was already a marginally successful location. We could not forecast a turnaround in the near future and were left with no other logical decision than to close."

The store's lease lasts into November, but with store shelves nearly bare after a 30 percent liquidation sale, it is unlikely it will last through the end of the week. Merrill also said AG Supermarkets, Inc., would help its employees with job placement in other Associated Grocers of New England stores.

That news disappointed loyal shoppers, including Elton Brinker.

"It's really sad to see it closing," Brinker said. "We've gained an option but then we lose an option."

Other nearby residents, who shop more often at Wal-Mart, were still upset by Riverview's imminent closure.

"I'm a business owner and it's sad to see a smaller company like that get basically pushed out 'cause of these larger companies," said Allen Riley.

At the same time, Riley said, "It's to be expected, you know? [Because} obviously Wal-Mart's here and they have everything and where ya gonna go? Where they have everything."

Over the last year or so, many reporters have written stories about how much Wal-Mart has changed, and how they are no longer as controversial as they were. Of course we know better. While Wal-Mart has ramped up their PR effort with flashy stunts and prominent press releases, they have remained, at base, the same company with the same problems. And the controversy hasn't gone away. Just take a look at this story about a recent Planning Commission meeting in Lodi, CA. Usually Planning Commission meetings don't draw a crowd, but when Wal-Mart was the topic, the hall was full and the discussion lasted far longer than it was scheduled.

Yes, controversy is alive and well when it comes to Wal-Mart. Many at the meeting were concerned that Wal-Mart would kill off local businesses, particularly grocery stores.

Here's the article from The Record:

LODI - A long-proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter on Wednesday night was once again the center of a heated debate in Lodi.

A capacity crowd filled Lodi's Carnegie Forum to argue whether the Planning Commission should approve a 226,441-square-foot Wal-Mart Supercenter at Kettleman Lane and Lower Sacramento Road.

The debate lasted until late into the night. Commissioners did not consider resolutions that would approve a land-use permit, and design and energy specifications by press time.

Proponents - who included Wal-Mart employees and the project's developer, Darryl Browman - touted Wal-Mart's ability to generate tax revenue, jobs and other forms of economic growth.

Opponents argued that a Supercenter would hurt small businesses and grocers. One even threatened to move away if a Wal-Mart was approved.

"I wasn't thrilled when the first Wal-Mart was approved," said Mary Miller of Lodi. "Now, I'm wondering if it's not the right time to sell my house and retire in Carlsbad."

City officials said in order for a Supercenter to gain approval, Browman must comply with a lengthy list of conditions.

The most notable conditions include purchasing 40 acres of farmland within 15 miles of the project and investing a minimum of $700,000 toward improving downtown Lodi.

Browman also must ensure the current Kettleman Lane building is leased to at least 50 percent of its capacity, sell the building to another retailer or put cash toward demolition costs, according to a staff report.

Browman told the commission he has already negotiated a lease for 90 percent of the building.

As students return to school around the country, Wal-Mart makes a killing on back to school sales. They also like to tout their local support, often to schools. But in Washington State, and across the country, Wal-Mart is selling high school logo goods, undercutting the school's fund raising efforts. A few schools have tried to contact Wal-Mart, letting them know that they need the funds from selling their goods for things like diesel to get their teams to different events, and equipment. Wal-Mart has essentially said they will keep selling the goods, which could mean that Schools don't have enough for their athletic department budgets.

The Cheney Free Press and the Times News have both written stories about this trend. We think it is absurd and Wal-Mart should pledge to make a sizable donation to any school whose apparel they sell, and donate a portion of sales to the schools. After all, as the articles point out, Wal-Mart has no right to sell the apparel; the Schools own the brands and logos.

The town of Blacksburg, VA has teamed up with BURG, Blacksburg United for Responsible Growth. BURG's mission "is to promote the development of commercial activity in Blacksburg in a way that enhances the town’s distinctive character, maintains the integrity of its neighborhoods, and promotes environmental sustainability. We support measures that improve the viability of locally-owned businesses, encourage pedestrian-friendly development, help revitalize Blacksburg’s downtown, limit sprawl, and preserve open spaces." Based on these criteria, BURG, and the town of Blacksburg are fighting back against Wal-Mart.

They've got one more shot to stop the store using the courts with an upcoming case in the State Supreme Court, but BURG says they won't stop there. We support BURG and the great work they're doing.

If you live in the area, join with them to keep their town independent, locally owned, sustainable, open and sprawl free.

Check out the article from Planet Blacksburg:

Blacksburg's Wal-Mart Fight Continues Jenna Nichols

The fight for a Wal-Mart in Blacksburg continues as the Virginia Supreme Court grants an appeal to the January 24, 2008 ruling of Ordinance 1450.

Blacksburg United for Responsible Growth (BURG) and the Town of Blacksburg will have one more chance to fight for keeping Wal-Mart out of Blacksburg. A ruling by Montgomery County Circuit Court judge Robert Turk allowed Fairmont Properties to construct the box store by over turning the ordinance just as the Board of Zoning Appeals had done months earlier.

The Virginia Supreme Court was scheduled to hear oral arguments from BURG and the Town of Blacksburg on August 27, 2008. Before the groups spoke in front of the three-judge panel, they were informed that the appeal had already been granted based on the review of written arguments.

The hearing is expected to be set within the next few weeks. Members of BURG expect that the hearing will take place in late winter of 2008 or spring of 2009.

If the court rules in favor of BURG and the Town of Blacksburg, Fairmont Properties would then have to reissue site construction plans and seek special permission from the Town of Blacksburg to begin construction.

Daniel Breslou, chairman of BURG's steering committee, said that if the Virginia Supreme Court allows Fairmont Properties to construct a box store on the site then it is not exactly the end of the road for BURG's fight.

While legally the fight would be over for Fairmont Properties opposition there are other ways to continue. Breslou said, "We would make sure to keep in touch with Wal-Mart and let them know that the community is against [the construction]. We would use persuasion to fight."

A large coalition of groups working to keep Wal-Mart from coming to their community (including local Wake Up Wal-Mart activists) have gathered more than enough signatures (more than 10% of the registered voters) to put an initiative on the ballot in the 2009 election. Residents will vote on a ban of grocery stores over 90,000 square feet that is specifically aimed at keeping a Wal-Mart out of their town. The petition drive went so well that organizers are asking people to stop collecting signatures because they do not want to go over the 15% threshold which would force an expensive special election.

We will wait to see how the citizens of Ventura vote next year, and we offer a well deserved congratulations to the coalition of activists working to keep their community the way they want it: free of economically destructive stores like Wal-Mart.

Read the full story from the Ventura County Star here, or below:

Voters to get initiative against Wal-Mart

Backers of an initiative aimed at blocking Wal-Mart or a large grocery store from opening in Ventura say they have collected enough signatures to put it before voters, and they have instructed supporters to stop gathering more to avoid a costly special election.

"We were told a special election could be as much as $400,000 and we thought, Whoa, that's not good government,'" said Ed Lacey, a local attorney and spokesman for Livable Ventura, one of half a dozen citizen and union groups backing the measure. "We don't want to put the city and taxpayers in that spot."

The initiative would keep the world's largest retailer from opening in Ventura by banning any new store selling groceries that is larger than 90,000 square feet.

Big grocers could face special conditions if they decided to move into an existing but vacant store.

Proponents, who filed initiative papers in January, initially set their sights on the Nov. 4 election, hoping to strike before Wal-Mart tries to replace a shuttered Kmart on Victoria Avenue with a store of its own.

But a tight timeline — they needed 8,903 verified signatures by May — proved too demanding.

Relying on volunteers and paid gatherers, proponents say they now have collected more than 10,000 signatures, although some likely will be disqualified because they do not belong to registered voters in Ventura.

Supporters, however, are confident that they have more than the 5,936 signatures, or 10 percent of Ventura registered voters, needed to qualify for the next regular city election in November 2009.

That ballot will feature races for four seats on the City Council, among other items, at an estimated cost of $125,000 because expenses are shared with the county, City Clerk Mabi Plisky said.

If supporters collected and submitted signatures from 15 percent of registered voters, the city could be required to hold a special election.

That could cost $300,000, not counting necessary staff time, Plisky said.

A Wal-Mart spokesman called the effort disappointing and said the company's three other stores in the county — a Wal-Mart and Sam's Club in Oxnard and a Wal-Mart in Simi Valley — had more than 4 million visitors last year and generated some $1.8 million in sales tax revenues for those communities.

Time to raise more money

The initiative's authors cast Wal-Mart as a "behemoth" with "predatory practices," and worry that it would hurt local businesses, add low-wage jobs in a community without affordable housing, worsen traffic and alter Ventura's reputation as a quaint beach town.

Proponents have instructed volunteers to stop all signature gathering this week. They plan to submit the signatures next week.

Waiting until next year's election allows supporters to raise more money, add to their army of volunteers and expand their education efforts, including more door-to-door campaigning, supporters said.

Forcing taxpayers to spend $300,000 for a special election also could embolden their critics, who point to the potential windfall of sales tax revenue from a Wal-Mart store and the potential chilling effect that the measure could have on attracting other businesses.

"We don't want Ventura to have less (city) services because we forced a special election," supporter Das Williams said.

Coalition support

The initiative specifically targets large grocery stores but not all big-box outlets. Lacey said it would not ban a large electronics store like Fry's or Best Buy, or a department store.

The coalition supporting the measure includes the Tri-Counties Labor Foundation, United Food and Commercial Workers, the Stop Ventura Wal-Mart Coalition, Livable Ventura, Ventura County Working People's Alliance and the Central Coast Alliance United for a Sustainable Economy.

The Ventura City Council voted in January to limit the size of multistory stores at the Kmart site and along Victoria Avenue to 100,000 square feet, despite pleas by the coalition to lower the number to 90,000 square feet.

Nontaxable grocery items

The proposed initiative would prohibit any new "super store" greater than 90,000 square feet that devotes more than 3 percent of its sales floor to nontaxable grocery items.

Companies wanting to use existing stores such as the Kmart site also could face greater scrutiny and possible conditions if it's proven that the new store would pay low wages, increase demand for affordable housing, add traffic and negatively affect other businesses.

Wal-Mart has not filed a formal application to replace the Kmart building, which it controls, but presented a conceptual plan to build a 150,000-square-foot store with groceries when it last met with city leaders.

This is, and forgive the pun, the latest viral video about Walmart floating around the web these days. You may have seen it before, it's been around for quite some time, but this version is updated to include 2007 stores as well. In short, it shows a map of the US with green blips for every new Walmart store built from 1962 to 2007. It is a pretty incredible video, so go watch it.

A recent article from The Washington Post discusses the impact of Wal-Mart on small businesses in Landover, Maryland, a community in the Washington, D.C. metro area. According to the authors, small businesses have been minimally impacted by the Wal-Mart store, which is great to hear. I hope the people of Landover continue to support their local independent businesses.

However, the facts suggest that their experience is not representative of most American small businesses. Several studies have demonstrated that when Wal-Mart comes to town, many small, locally-owned shops inevitably close down. One of the most comprehensive studies on the impact of Wal-Mart on rural communities was conducted by Kenneth Stone at the University of Iowa. Check out the full text of the study here. Stone found that small towns lose up to 47% of their retail trade within 10 years of a Wal-Mart moving in nearby. Landover is not a rural area, it should be noted, and a recent Chicago study found that Wal-Mart's impact on urban small businesses tends to be less severe than rural ones. The authors cite the Chicago study as evidence that small proprietors in urban areas like Landover have nothing to fear from Wal-Mart. What the authors did not mention, however, is that the study still found that within a year of Wal-Mart opening its first store in Chicago, 23 stores, or 12% of businesses within three miles of the Wal-Mart, went out of business. While that might not as severe as the rural Wal-Mart effect, for those 23 small businesses, Wal-Mart's impact was anything but insignificant.

I remain hopeful that the Landover business community will be able to withstand Wal-Mart's impact, but urban communities around the country should continue to be weary about the Bentonville Behemoth.

Every so often, we like to highlight stories where communities stand up to Wal-Mart and let the giant corporation know that, for various reasons, they don't want a massive big box store in their town. This story is particularly inspiring. I encourage you to go to the website too, and watch the footage, it shows some of the land these two moms saved.

From WESH in Florida:

Moms Win Battle Against Wal-Mart

A couple of Central Florida stay-at-home moms have taken on the biggest bullies in business and government and won.

The area's environment and drinking water supply could be winners as well.

Lisa Smith and Arlynn Baker walked through what will become Central Florida's newest nature preserve after winning a five-year battle.

It all started because they were determined to prevent their children from having to dodge Wal-Mart traffic in front of their school. The land once was an Atlantic beach.

Authorities said it's a critical recharge area for Titusville's drinking water wells, and there's almost no land like it left.

The two women stirred up so much opposition that it was too hot even for Wal-Mart, and the retail giant backed down.

"This is a perfect example to people elsewhere that, you know, it does look like a mountain, but take one step at a time," Smith said.

The state's land preservation agency, Forever Florida, just voted to buy the property, so now, no one can ever develop it -- all because two mothers refused to give up and refused to be intimidated by red tape or corporate lawyers.

A local group in Atascadero, California are working on passing an initiative that would set up size restrictions for retail space, and ban massive super-stores, like the one Wal-Mart is trying to build. They just had their first victory working toward the initiative, getting over 1,500 signatures from the community (more than 10% of the registered voters) on a petition that will allow the initiative to be introduced to the city council. Congratulations on the first step, Atascadero, you have our support as you move forward!

Here is some local coverage from KSBY, a local news station:

The fight to keep a retail giant out of one Central Coast city gets a boost of local support.

Thursday, the "Atascadero Shield Initiative" got the required number of signatures to present its case to the city council on June 24.

The initiative is sponsored by the group Oppose Wal-Mart. It would set a size limit on commercial retail stores and ban superstores like the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter from coming to the city.

Once it is presented, the city council can make the initiative an ordinance or submit it to voters in November.

and from SanLuisObispo.com, the county's news site:

An initiative that would block a Wal-Mart Superstore proposed for Atascadero’s north end has obtained enough valid signatures to qualify for the November ballot.

The petition for the measure, called the Atascadero Shield Initiative by its proponents, contained at least 1,511 valid signatures, enough to satisfy the requirement that 10 percent of registered voters sign it, City Clerk Marcia McClure Torgerson confirmed Friday.

Tom Comar, a leader of the anti-Wal-Mart effort, said the measure is intended “to protect local businesses, to ensure that the General Plan is maintained and to protect the rural, small-town character and the feel of this unique city on the Central Coast.”

The City Council is scheduled to discuss the measure June 24, when it will have three options. It can adopt the proposed measure as a city ordinance, place it on the Nov. 4 General Election ballot, or ask for analysis of the effects of the measure before deciding to adopt it as law or put it before the voters.

City Manager Wade McKinney said his staff would describe the options to the council but would not recommend a course of action.

The proposed Wal-Mart project for property at Del Rio Road and El Camino Real has divided the community for more than two years.

Supporters say it would encourage residents to shop locally and would bring new sales tax revenue to the city. Opponents say a mega-store would provide only low-income jobs and would hurt local businesses and the environment.

If you keep up on Wal-Mart news, you will have no doubt picked up on the large number of law suits and stories involving inappropriate behavior of male supervisors towards females who work at the store. This, of course, could happen anywhere, but at Wal-Mart, it's a part of the corporate culture to turn a blind eye to such demeaning, sexist harassment. Well once again, there is an example of a woman being fired after she complained to HR.

The West Virginia Record has the story:

Logan woman says she was wrongly fired by Wal-Mart

CHARLESTON - A Logan County woman has filed a suit against Wal-Mart, claiming she was fired after she informed human resources of inappropriate conduct taking place among the store supervisors.

Sherry Muncy filed the suit May 15 in Kanawha Circuit Court. The suit is against Wal-Mart as well as supervisors Dwight Neal and Calvin Stapleton.

According to the suit, Muncy was an assistant store manager at Wal-Mart. While employed there, she claims Neal and other employees subjected her to unwanted and unwelcome hostile remarks, including some of a sexual nature.

Muncy claims she informed the human resources manager of the inappropriate conduct, but no action was taken to stop the hostile behavior.

On Oct. 26, 2007, Muncy was discharged, which she claims is retaliation because of her reports on the harassment that was occurring in the workplace.

In the three-count suit, Muncy claims her termination is a violation of the West Virginia Human Rights Act. She seeks compensation, including back pay, front pay, damages for humiliation, embarrassment, emotional and mental distress and loss of personal dignity, as well as punitive damages.

Attorney Paul Stroebel is representing Muncy. The case has been assigned to Judge Charles King.

Across the United States, communities everywhere are standing up to the invasion of the colossal force known as Wal-Mart. Over 450 site fights against Wal-Mart have occurred here in our nation. In West Dundee, a suburb of Chicago, Illinois, over 500 local residents have been raising their voices against the planned 186,000 square foot retail center and have been attending village commission meetings to speak out against the new development.

"That scale and proximity to the nearby Tartans Glen subdivision -- located southwest of the proposed development -- would hamper residents' quality of life," said resident Teresa Smith. "The placement will make it impossible for residents not to be affected in a negative way by Wal-Mart."

We, across this nation, need to congratulate the residents of West Dundee for having the guts to stand up to the Wal-Mart. Check out this article from the Daily Herald for more information.

If you read the news about Wal-Mart regularly, you've probably noticed that the gargantuan company is constantly coming out with new schemes for its national and international expansion. Build lots and lots of stores all at once, build fewer stores this year, expand in areas where there are already stores, super-size existing stores, build in the suburbs, build in the city...the list goes on. Wal-Mart's tried tons of strategies. One strategy has been failing, however, and that's their attempt to become an "urban pioneer" (a phrase Lee Scott used). Wal-Mart has long been relegated to suburban strips and out-of-the-way rural shopping destinations, and it looks like it's going to stay that way. Wal-Mart's test for urban stores was in Chicago and it's just been announced that they won't build any more there, at least not for years to come.

The Chicago Tribune has the story of a major victory for those who think Wal-Mart needs to change its ways before it expands:

A closeout for Wal-Mart

Wal-Mart Stores Inc.'s hard-fought battle to turn Chicago into a beachhead for urban expansion across the country has come to a quiet end, at least for the foreseeable future, as big-city politics held sway over low prices.

Now the world's largest retailer is turning its attention to a backup plan of opening stores just outside city limits, banking that thousands of low-to-middle-income city dwellers will travel to collar suburbs to shop at the discount store. Among the suburbs Wal-Mart is looking at are Calumet Park, Cicero and McCook, according to people familiar with Wal-Mart's plans.

Wal-Mart got the word from city officials last month that Mayor Richard Daley doesn't want to risk a messy showdown with unions over Wal-Mart—like the big-box store battle of 2006—while Chicago is still in the running as a host city for the 2016 Olympics, according to people familiar with the matter. The International Olympic Committee is slated to make that decision in October 2009.

"That's the end of the story, at least for the next two to three years," said John Melaniphy, a Chicago-based retail real estate consultant. "I think in the long run they'll end up in the city one way or another, but it's going to take them a long time."

Goldman Sachs Group Inc.'s development arm, Archon Group LP, isn't waiting. The Chicago-based developer of Chatham Market on the South Side, where Wal-Mart had hoped to open its second city store, put a "For Sale" sign on the property last week.

Lowe's Cos. has already opened a 117,000-square-foot anchor in the shopping center at 83rd Street and Stewart Avenue. Wal-Mart was slated to be the second anchor and Archon had counted on the discount chain to attract other retail tenants. The developer has not been able to find another anchor to replace Wal-Mart.

"We're doing this to see what options present themselves," said Bill Moston, director of retail investments for Archon in Chicago. "We have a responsibility to pursue all available options and to evaluate what they are."

That could mean the empty land would go for other uses such as office space or storage or housing.

Not long ago Wal-Mart had ambitions of operating as many as 20 stores in the city. It opened a 142,000-square-foot discount store in the Austin neighborhood on the West Side in September 2006.

Wal-Mart wanted to open supercenters in the rest of the city, roughly 180,000-square-foot stores that also sell groceries.

But the retailer, which has a non-union workforce, ran into opposition from unions that have been trying to stop the Bentonville, Ark.-based company's expansion into northern cities.

Both Wal-Mart and the unions say they help everyday working families. Wal-Mart points to its affordable merchandise, willingness to blaze a trail into the food deserts of inner cities, and the hundreds of workers each store employs. Unions point to their campaign to persuade Wal-Mart to pay higher wages and health benefits to workers.

"We are a store that wants to come in and invest in that community," said Roderick Scott, head of public affairs for Wal-Mart in Chicago.

Dennis Gannon, president of the Chicago Federation of Labor and a leader in the unions' battle against Wal-Mart, declined to comment on the turn of events.

The mayor's press office and Pete Scales, spokesman for the Department of Planning, declined to comment on its talks with Wal-Mart.

Chicago Planning Commissioner Arnold Randall notified Archon on March 14 that he would not let Wal-Mart open at Chatham Market as proposed because of a letter from the previous developer that pledged to keep the retailer out.

Wal-Mart and Archon met with the commissioner last month to look for a way to make the project work.

"We always want additional retailers in Chicago," Scales said. "Hopefully [the potential sale] will open it up to other retailers other than Wal-Mart."

Daley, siding with business, took a political bruising in the summer of 2006 when he overturned, in his first veto, a big-box ordinance passed by the City Council. The ordinance, aimed at Wal-Mart, would have set minimum pay and benefit levels for any major retailer with a store 90,000 square feet or larger.

In the wake of the veto, unions poured millions into the City Council elections in a successful bid to support candidates who, among other things, were likely to oppose Wal-Mart's city expansion.

Wal-Mart Chief Executive H. Lee Scott first announced his intention to position Wal-Mart as an "urban pioneer" in an April 2006 speech in Chicago, saying the company "has never been afraid to invest in communities that are overlooked by other retailers."

But in the two years since, Wal-Mart has made little headway in expanding into Northern cities. It has yet to crack Boston, Detroit or New York.

And international markets such as Brazil are whetting the giant retailer's appetite, making it unclear how much longer the company will continue to focus on America's inner cities.

Ald. Howard Brookins (21st), who tried and failed to bring Wal-Mart to his South Side ward, said he's not happy with the decision.

He said he plans to woo retailers at the shopping industry's annual trade show in Las Vegas this month, hoping to find a replacement for Wal-Mart.

"We're not guaranteed the Olympics," said Brookins, "but we're guaranteed to get [sales] tax revenue from Wal-Mart."

As always, we take heart when a community stands up for itself. We'd like to offer a big congratulations to Duluth. Here's another great article from the Atlanta Journal Constitution:

With Wal-Mart fight over, participants reflect on battle

It was a bruising fight.

But now that Wal-Mart has scratched plans to build a 176,000-square-foot supercenter at the corner of Peachtree Industrial Boulevard and Sugarloaf Parkway in Duluth after almost a year of trying, the various participants are reflecting on what happened.

For the citizen group Smart Growth Gwinnett, born out of residents' opposition to a big-box development so close to their neighborhoods, it feels like a victory for the little guy —- proof that you can take on a Goliath and even occasionally win.

"I think that this shows that citizens getting involved in their government can have a positive impact," said Ed Wilson, president of Smart Growth, which represents residents from 11 neighborhoods. "I heard from numerous people that it was quite enlightening to get involved and observe how the city works."

It was also instructive, and gratifying, he said, to be involved in the creation of the city's comprehensive ordinance that governs all aspects of buildings over 75,000 square feet.

Hammered out by the city, local developers and citizens and adopted in December, the new guidelines reflect the community's consensus of what the Duluth of the future ought to look like.

For the retailer, there's the sense that procedural victories notwithstanding —- Wal-Mart finally won three of its four requests to vary from city building codes —- in the end, putting the supercenter on that site was not going to be worth it. "We had to take into consideration the increased cost," spokesman Glen Wilkins said, "which in our business, typically trickles down to customers as well."

The city's six-month moratorium on large-scale buildings, enacted last summer, when Duluth decided it needed time to create a comprehensive plan, made it hard for the company to move forward, Wilkins said, as did the city's "changing the rules in the middle" of the process.

"I think it is unfortunate to a certain extent," Wilkins said, "with gas prices what they are, that customers won't have an opportunity to shop closer to where they live."

For city staffers, there's a sense that the whole protracted struggle yielded valuable lessons —- despite the fact that Duluth is still facing two lawsuits from landowner Jack Bandy, which are pending in Gwinnett Superior Court. (Neither Bandy nor his attorney returned calls for comment.)

It was an up-close education in the intricacies of the zoning process, planning director Cliff Cross said. His tenure started in the middle of the Wal-Mart debate, with having to defend his predecessor's executive approval of Wal-Mart's plans. The Zoning Board of Appeals ruled the previous planner had overstepped her bounds, and forced the store to reapply for permission to vary from city building codes.

"I think one of the biggest benefits was the development of our large-scale building ordinance," Cross said. "And I think it showed that the process works. That was the whole point of going in front of the ZBA. That's what it's for. The director doesn't have complete control."

City administrator Phil McLemore said he's proud of the way the City Council and staffers handled what has been a stressful chapter.

"I think they were fair to everybody," McLemore said. "I don't think they went way off and took sides. [Wal-Mart] made a business decision not to go ahead with the construction. It obviously had to do with the economy. I can see where the citizens would be glad, and [Bandy], who had hoped Wal-Mart would go forward, would not be. For the city, our efforts to be as fair as possible to both sides was done in a correct manner."

From Eileen Drennen at the Atlanta Journal- Constitution.

Wal-Mart announced late Thursday night that it would not build a 176,000-square-foot Supercenter at the corner of Peachtree Industrial Boulevard and Sugarloaf Parkway in Duluth.

While every step of the stores rollout was greeted by crowds of protesters wearing red T-shirts and carrying "Stop Wal-Mart" signs, there was no indication that pressure from neighborhood group Smart Growth Gwinnett had an effect on the decision.

Instead, company spokesman Glen Wilkins said in a press release, the decision was "related to Wal-Mart's announcement in June 2007 to more strategically prioritize development of Supercenters."

There are already two Wal-Mart stores within six miles of the proposed location, in Duluth and neighboring Suwanee.

"While this decision is certainly an appropriate one from a business standpoint," Wilkins said in the release, "it takes nothing away from the fact that Duluth is an excellent community and a great place to do business."

Smart Growth's Marline Santiago-Cook, who lives directly across Peachtree Industrial near the proposed Supercenter, said the group was not just excited about Wal-mart's decision, but the larger changes that resulted from their lengthy fight. As part of the larger citywide debate about managing development, the city of Duluth adopted a large-scale building ordinance last December that governs all facets of projects over 75,000 square feet.

"Not only did we achieve our goals of stopping this particular project," Santiago-Cook said, "but we got a bigger win by the implementation of the new ordinance, which will address any future project at this particular site as well as in the entire city of Duluth."

The two lawsuits filed against the city of Duluth by landowner Jack Bandy – who wanted to sell his 30-acre site to Wal-Mart – are still pending in Gwinnett Superior Court. The first, alleging that the city violated the open records act by approving a moratorium on large-scale buildings without first advertising it on an agenda, has a trial date set for Sept. 15.

Check out this article from Central New York News

Wal-Mart calls it quits on Liverpool site

Wal-Mart is withdrawing plans to build a Supercenter in the town of Salina near the Liverpool Thruway exit on Route 57.

It attributed the move to budgetary reasons.

While the giant retail chain generally had the support of the town of
Salina, it ran into resistance from the village of Liverpool via protracted court actions.

The retailer has been working at locating a store on the Salina site for about five years.

Area residents have been split over the proposed giant box store. Some
welcomed the retail variety nearby, while others worried about the traffic congestion and gutting of the village business community as potential negative fallout from such a store being located just north of Liverpool.

Wal-Mart did not refer to such a conflict in its news release today.

"The decision is related to our continued plans to moderate growth of U.S. Supercenters," the release says. "After re-evaluating the anticipated budget, a determination was made not to move forward with this project."

A new piece by Al Norman over at the Huffington Post reveals that Wal-Mart has canceled 45 supercenters and community groups have blocked another 19 in the last 10 months. This huge number is in part due to Wal-Mart's new growth plan, which attempts to limit the number of new stores, and in part due to local anti-Wal-mart sentiment. Check out the article below, and notice in particular how Wal-Mart treated the towns it left.

According to a list released this week, Wal-Mart Stores has abandoned a record-shattering 45 proposed projects over the past 10 months -- often leaving local officials dejected and confused. Another 19 Wal-Mart projects have been killed by local citizen's groups. In total, the world's largest retailer has suffered an historic loss of 64 projects.

The list of store cancellations was compiled by Sprawl-Busters, which has maintained a database on Wal-Mart battles for more than a decade. Since June, 2007, the Arkansas-based retailer has delayed or killed its own stores in the following communities:

Aledo, IL; Arlington, WA; Belfast, ME; Bonita Springs, FL; Brooksville, FL; Chico, CA; Concord, CA; Crowley, TX; Derry, NH; Elyria, OH; Fircrest, WA; Garden Grove, CA; Gilbert, AZ; Glen Carbon, IL; Hadley, MA; Hemet, CA; Hilo, HI; Isle of Wight, VA; Knightdale, NC; Lake County, FL; Lakeland, FL; Lawrence, NJ; Lewiston, ME; Liberty, OH; Pennfield, MI; Hillsborough, NH; Kilbuck, PA; La Puenta, CA; Marietta, GA; Marysville, WA; Memphis, TN; Morganton, NC; Neptune Beach, FL; Oakley, CA; Oxford, NC; Portland, OR; Raleigh, NC; Ravalli County, MT; Rutland Charter, MI; Spooner, WI; St. Peters, MO; Sioux Falls, SD; Stoughton, WI; Sunrise, FL; Waukesha, WI.

These store withdrawals usually come with little advance notice, and even less explanation. In September, 2007, for example, when Wal-Mart suddenly folded its tent in Lancaster, Massachusetts -- 3 miles from the construction site of another Wal-Mart superstore -- the company issued a terse, four paragraph press release which stated, "The decision is related to Wal-Mart's recently announced plans to moderate growth of U.S. supercenters as part of leveraging capital resources through a strategy designed to improve returns and sales within U.S. stores." Such dense statements left local officials scratching their heads in disbelief -- sometimes following months, even years, of lobbying by the retailer to get a project approved.

Up until 10 months ago, Wal-Mart was planning to open a new store in America every 26.5 hours. But all of that changed on the morning of June 1, 2007. On that Friday morning, Wal-Mart stunned 18,000 stockholders assembled in the Bud Walton Arena on the campus of the University of Arkansas in Fayetteville. The retailer announced its growth plan for 2008 -- in what the New York Times described the next day as a "turning point" for the company.

In their laps, stockholders held Wal-Mart's 2007 Annual report, which said, under the heading "Future Expansion," that the company's "planned expenditures will include the construction of...265 to 270 new supercenters..." But in the weeks between sending their Annual Report to the printer, and their stockholder's meeting -- Wal-Mart popped its own growth bubble.

For several years, Wall Street's reaction to the retailer's overly-aggressive U.S. construction forecast had been less than encouraging. In 2005, for example, Bernstein Research Call issued a 13-page report warning stockholders of the downside of Wal-Mart's superstore plans. The analysts noted that Wal-Mart's growth "is under siege in several regions of the country from growing opposition by local communities...Local opposition has successfully squashed numerous plans among big box players in different parts of the country." Bernstein noted that "heightened resistance could negatively impact these retailers by slowing their square footage growth rates." Even modestly slower long-term square footage growth could have both an earnings per share and valuation impact, researchers said.

Because of grassroots anti-Wal-Mart groups, Bernstein warned, "it is clear that (discount retailers) will need to pursue a substantially larger number of permits going forward to hit their internal square footage targets given the likelihood of many opportunities failing."

Not only had Wal-Mart suddenly slammed on the brakes for 2008, but the company said it would open "only" 170 superstores per year for the next three years, and 80 supercenter would be deferred into 2009. In its 2007 Annual Report, the company explained, "We are focused on prioritizing capital spending to the projects that produce the highest returns. We want to improve our Company's return on investment, or ROI, improve our comparable store sales and improve our working capital productivity. The outcome is a focus on the most capital efficient opportunities."

In part due to the company's pale 1.9% growth in same store sales in 2007, John Menzer, Wal-Mart's Chief Administrative Officer, admitted, "We also have been focused this year on reducing cannibalization of existing stores via our more strategic selection of U.S. real estate projects." Same store sales indicates the performance of existing stores by measuring the growth in sales for such stores during a particular period, over the corresponding period in the prior year. Wal-Mart's same store sales have been dropping for 20 years, but this past year was the worst. The 1.9% growth rate in 2007 compares to 5% in 1997, and 13% in 1987.

Every store site that Wal-Mart proposes is reviewed by its executive-level Real Estate Committee, which looks at a number of benchmarks to see if each unit meets the retailer's Growth Model: the state of the economy, the local trade area, competition in the area, local demographics, real estate and construction costs, and: "potential impacts on neighboring Wal-Mart stores." This last metric -- the cannibalization factor -- has had a major impact on the deep-sixing of many superstore projects this year.

"As we continue to add new stores in the United States," the company told shareholders, "we do so with an understanding that additional stores may take sales away from existing units. We estimate that comparable store sales in fiscal 2007, 2006 and 2005 were negatively impacted by the opening of new stores by approximately 1% in fiscal years 2007, 2006 and 2005. We expect that this effect of opening new stores on comparable store sales will continue during fiscal 2008 at a similar rate."

To measure Wal-Mart's retrenchment another way, the corporation added 42,000,000 square feet of store space in 2007, compared to 39,000,000 square feet in 2006. It's current growth plan cuts new square footage to 20,000,000 for 2008. As projects get cancelled, square footage growth drops, sales growth slows, all of which can impact earnings and company valuation. The last thing Wal-Mart wants is for investors to see the company for what it really is: a middle-aged corporation choking on its own domestic appetite for growth. If it weren't for China and India, Wal-Mart's growth prospects would be problematic. Yet Wal-Mart's future as a colonial retail empire is far from certain, if places like Indonesia, Germany and Japan are the yardstick.

Sam Walton explained that his growth strategy was "to saturate a market area by spreading out, then filling in...We became our own competition." He once boasted that Springfield, Missouri, for example, had 40 Wal-Marts within 100 miles. But Wal-Mart has paid a price for competing with itself. Today, the saturation card has been overplayed, and the retailer has been forced to go on a superstore crash diet. While hundreds of sling-shot coalitions have been hurling rocks at this retail Goliath for years, ironically, it is now the giant itself which is reeling from its own self-inflicted excesses.

This has created a wonderful 10 months for anti-Wal-Mart groups in 21 states, who have woken up in their small towns to read that another proposed Wal-Mart superstore has dissolved, as suddenly as the morning mist.

We have all heard the stories of Wal-Mart ruining local businesses when they come to town, but in Burkburnett, TX, the opposite has happened: Wal-Mart left, and their local stores picked up. It is an encouraging story, and it shows that folks can live without Wal-Mart! Here's the story from the Times Record News

Burkburnett stores are reporting an uptick in business since Wal-Mart closed its location just off I-44 in October.

The local Dollar Store has extended its hours, and other stores are reporting a 10 to 15 percent increase in sales, said Burkburnett Development Corporation Executive Director Kelly Bolen.

“Everyone is doing their shopping locally,” she said. “Local businesses are stepping up to meet the need.”

Bolen heard that for the month of December, for instance, the city had only experienced a 4 percent drop in sales tax receipts.

“If you think in the grand scheme of things, four percent is not bad after losing Wal-Mart,” she said.

The cause for the increase in local sales may be a backlash against the retail giant.

Local resident Debra Pugliesi said she was mad at Wal-Mart for first coming into town and taking money away from local businesses. And now, she said, the store had abandoned the town altogether.

“We’re boycotting Wal-Mart after what they did to us,” Pugliesi said.

As she browsed the racks at Hayes General Store in downtown Burkburnett recently, Pugliesi said she was traveling around to Burkburnett stores to take a look at what retailers had to offer.

“We’re trying to figure out where to go. We came in here to see what all he’s got. We just came from the Dollar Store,” she said.

The high cost of fuel might also be contributing to more people shopping in Burkburnett, she said.

“Gas is too high to be running around looking for stuff,” she said. “Three dollars a gallon? That’s six bucks to go to Wichita Falls and back.”

Becky Linker, manager at Hometown Hardware, said she’s noticed more foot traffic over the past few months in the store. That’s translated into more sales.

“We’re really busy,” she said. “People just keep saying that they’re glad we’re here. They’re glad they don’t have to go to Wichita.”

Jerry Hayes with Hayes General Store said he’s also seen a noticeable increase in both traffic and sales.

“We’ve seen more faces in the store. We’ve seen an increase in sales,” he said. “The traffic inside the store, there’s definitely been more.”

Hayes said he and other business owners are working together to make sure that customers are able to find what they want in Burkburnett.

Stores regularly call each other searching for items. If he doesn’t have what a customer is looking for, maybe another business does, Hayes said.

The end result is a strong local economy with local businesses ready to fill the void left by Wal-Mart, he said.

“We were here before Wal-Mart and we plan on being here a long time after Wal-Mart,” he said. “As long as our customers continue to come in, we’ll continue to serve them. That’s our plan.”

The Ventura County Reporter, a local paper in California has backed an effort by citizens to block Wal-Mart and other large stores from setting up shop in Ventura. Recently there have been tons of great stories about local communities rejecting the poor jobs, tax evasion, discrimination, poor treatment of workers, and environmental problems that come with new Wal-Mart Supercenters. This newspaper joins a growing group that refuses to let Wal-Mart take over their community. Here's the editorial:

In today’s age of paid political signature gatherers, we are leery about ballot initiatives. However, the campaign to stop Wal-Mart and other large retailers with non-taxable inventory from setting up shop in Ventura is an effort we can put our support behind.

That effort, which would prevent any retailer larger than 90,000 square feet with 3 percent or more of its space devoted to selling non-taxable items (groceries, etc. — meaning an Ikea or large electronics store wouldn’t be stopped by the measure) from opening within the city of Ventura, is a far better researched and reasoned measure than other recent initiative efforts. By addressing very serious worries, such as concerns about eminent domain or the impact concerns about Wal-Mart could have on other large retailers that may offer a major sales tax boon to the city, initiative organizers have blunted some of the major concerns of their potential opponents.

The best argument for supporting this initiative is that doing so would bolster other efforts to strengthen Ventura’s own identity and local business offerings, followed closely by the fact that resisting a Wal-Mart at the Kmart plaza means resisting the massive outlay of municipal resources that would be necessary to support it.

A retailer known for leveraging its worldwide clout to undercut competitors, Wal-Mart’s interest in building a Superstore offering groceries at the Kmart site is worrisome. It would threaten the ability of Trader Joe’s, Ralphs, Vons and other major grocery chains to do business. A common argument to this line of thinking is that those stores do not appeal to the same customers that would shop at Wal-Mart, and opposing the store on those grounds is simply arrogant hypocrisy. In reality, though, the major supermarket chains still employ a unionized (although weakening) workforce and Trader Joe’s offers very affordable quality groceries without scrimping on support for its employees.

Ventura is also dotted with smaller independent food retailers already straining from the presence of major grocery stores. They include Midtown’s Green Market (itself a replacement of the historic Jue’s Market), Sam’s Central Market and the Red Barn on the Avenue and specialty retailer’s such as Shamsi’s Deli and the La Mantia Italian grocery. Such establishments strengthen neighborhood identity.

All of these retailers have something to be concerned about in Wal-Mart’s shadow. So does the city. Whatever reservations one has about a Vons or a Ralphs or an Albertsons, the additional strain of a Wal-Mart could mean added pressure at their locations in Ventura.

A key argument in support of Wal-Mart is the blight of the Wal-Mart site, the idea that anything is better there than nothing. However, a Wal-Mart meeting the 3 percent grocery threshold could mean the closure of other grocery stores throughout the city, in turn increasing the possibility of blighted properties throughout town.

Of course, that threat doesn’t stop with grocery stores. It could mean more empty storefronts throughout town, rather down the street at the iconic Salzer’s complex, itself already facing the challenges of an increasingly digital marketplace, or across the 101 in Downtown and Midtown, where small, locally owned retailers still struggle with high rent and increased competition from large retailers.

Yes, it is already worrisome that Target has just opened its second store so close to its first in Ventura. It would have been nice to see a unique retailer at the Pacific View Mall. Target, at least, has opened through cooperation with the city and its neighbors and at a site capable of supporting its impact. With mostly taxable merchandise, it remains a contributor to our local economy.

Overall, the lesson remains that this community must both support its local businesses and look deeper at the impact of those wishing to set up shop in our city.

Susan Slattery's story is encouraging. She got in to public life as an opponent to a Wal-Mart Supercenter, helping found Friends of the Anclote River to block a store from being built in town. She then ran for City Commissioner of her hometown, Tarpon Springs, FL, and won! We here at Wake Up Wal-Mart think it's great that a community activist who took it upon herself to fight for her city gained such respect as to win a pubic office. Congratulations to Susan Slattery and Tarpon Springs!

Here's an exerpt from the St. Petersburg Times about Susan Slattery:

Susan Slattery wears her red and white campaign button everywhere.

Whether checking out at the grocery store or in line at the bank, the first-time City Commission candidate says her political accessory is a great way to get the word out about her campaign...

The Tarpon High School graduate and longtime resident says much of the city's infrastructure is in disrepair. Roads are crumbling and about 30 percent of residents use septic systems, she said.

Revitalizing the city and trying to attract some big name stores downtown could boost the city's economy, she said. Slattery would not, however, want one of those stores to be the proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter on the Anclote River. She was a founding member of Friends of the Anclote, the group opposing the project.

"Putting a Wal-Mart Supercenter on our river is not going to improve the quality of life," she said.

I found this letter from a Mayor to his town about some allegations Wal-Mart has lobbed at him as they try to strong-arm their way in to his town. It is an interesting look in to how Wal-Mart deals with cities and towns that we don't normally see. It was published in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin:

So I read in a recent newspaper article that I refused to meet with representatives of Wal-Mart to discuss the Promenade project in Fontana. I'm a pretty unreasonable person. Pigheaded, some might even say. But what John Mendez, the latest spokesperson for Wal-Mart, failed to share was that I informed him I don't meet with companies threatening litigation against the city. And, if I'm not mistaken, Mendez has been quoted in local newspapers as saying the company will enforce its property rights.

Your company's representative at all City Council meetings was not an architect or a professional planner, it was your attorney. So forgive me if my litigation detector isn't pegged with Wal-Mart not getting its way in the Promenade.

What you also failed to mention in the newspaper article (or to any of the paid employees who attended our City Council meeting) was that I have met with Wal-Mart or its representatives no fewer than five times over the past several years, imploring your company to work with our community and council to develop where it makes sense to our community and to Wal-Mart. You purchased the Promenade property after we had already initiated the Specific Plan process and after we had already begun talking about a walkable, mixed-use development. Come to think of it, you also purchased your site in south Fontana against the advice and opinions of city officials, after a Specific Plan for the area had already been completed.

Am I seeing a trend here? Does the $200 billion gorilla simply march into every jungle and get its way?

But I digress

When your company asked for a continuance two months ago, you stated that you had a dramatic proposal that would fit in with the vision of the City Council that would fit the mold of a pedestrian friendly shopping, theater, and restaurant experience at the gateway to Fontana off the 210 Freeway. An experience that wasn't going to be a sea of parking, that would promote the lifestyle center development trends that have proven so successful in many communities. And after granting the continuance, you bring forth a proposal that is twice the size of the maximum building size allowed in the specific plan, with a sea of 1,200-plus parking spaces in front of your "downsized" super-duper, almost-larger-than-a-middle-school Super Wal-Mart. You then have the audacity to "present" 5,000 signed cards from residents stating that they want to save $2,500 on their groceries duh! I want to save $2,500 on my groceries. But I'm not willing to sell the vision of this community down the road simply because Wal-Mart isn't willing to move to another viable site.

But here's where it gets really offensive: There are representatives of Wal-Mart implying that if the city accepts the store in the south Fontana location, then the company will move the store in the north.

Sounds a lot like extortion to me, and I'm not willing to sacrifice the quality of life of my residents in the southern end of town to realize the vision in the north.

So here's my advice: You want to know what I want? Read the Specific Plans for the Promenade and the Empire Center projects.

Take a gorilla-size Q-tip from aisle 55, clean out your ears, and re-watch the numerous council meetings and State of the City addresses where the vision for Fontana has been presented.

And please stop the push-polling and threatening of political activism. Clearly, you didn't do your homework when you decided to land in this jungle. We've dealt with beasts far more menacing than you in the past.

Mark Nuaimi is the mayor of Fontana.

In a long string of community victories recently, Lawrence Township, New Jersey won a three and a half year battle with Wal-Mart. Let's Stop Wal-Mart lead a valiant fight against the retail giant, and with community members out in force, prevented the store from being built. Here's the story from The Times:

Reading the newspaper recently, one might conclude that Wal-Mart walked away from building a store on Spruce Street in Lawrence Township due to a change in strategy following the economic downturn (The Times, "Wal-Mart drops store plan -- Retail giant says Lawrence site no longer fits marketing strategy," Feb. 14). The Wal-Mart spin machine has indeed peddled this interpretation. The truth lies elsewhere.

After a protracted 3 1/2-year battle to prevent the construction of a Wal-Mart on Spruce Street, the public triumphed. Goliath was run out of town. How was Let's Stop Wal-Mart, a volunteer group of regular citizens, able to succeed against the largest corporation in the world? Many people in the community got involved in ral lies and hearings. They leafleted, petitioned and held meetings. Young people, college students, trade unionists, environmentalists and senior citizens let their voices be heard and helped in many capacities, such as by writing letters to the editor of newspapers, contacting other organizations, calling friends, making signs and calling the press.

In battling one skirmish after another, we discovered that for all its paid experts, Wal-Mart came up short on adequate answers to seri ous problems.

The Spruce Street site is contiguous to the Shabakunk Creek, an area prone to recurrent flooding. The creek is part of the Delaware River watershed and eventually becomes part of the river from which we take our drinking water. Non- point source pollution from thou sands of cars and toxic chemicals from store products would have further compromised the Shaba kunk.

Hoping to gain a big tax ratable, our elected township officials and planning board missed the fact that deteriorating property values caused by the presence of a Wal- Mart store in the area could result in a net loss of tax dollars while raising the cost of municipal services.

Local residents repeatedly expressed legitimate fears about traffic and cited the numerous acci dents that already occur in that busy corridor, yet Lawrence officials let Wal-Mart's interest trump public safety.

One must also call into question the legal advice paid for by Lawrence taxpayers. According to the planning board attorney's professional website, he "concentrates in the areas of real estate acquisition and development" as well as "representing planning and zoning boards." His company's big client is the New Jersey Builders Association. Lawrence Township's planning consultant's company has profited from megabuck projects at taxpayer expense such as Waterfront Park, the Roebling Complex, the $40 million Capitol Center Redevelopment Project, and the $1.2 billion Asbury Park Waterfront Redevelopment pork barrel.

Do such "experts" represent the public interest or the corporate interest? Why do so many municipalities pay them handsomely for their less-than-balanced viewpoint? Is it possible that so much overdevelopment has occurred despite the public's disapproval because local government experts are so often the same people representing developer interests? The attorney general should launch a statewide investigation into potential conflicts of interest among attorneys, planners and traffic consultants hired by municipalities and the developers.

As our fight to stop Wal-Mart continued, residents launched a "Living Wage" initiative to prevent "big box" stores from paying substandard wages without health benefits. The response to the "Living Wage" campaign was overwhelmingly positive. Approximately 1,200 signatures of registered Lawrence voters, more than the 10 percent required to put the initiative on the ballot for the November 2006 election, were col lected and certified by the township clerk. In a rather blatant case of the public interest being usurped by corporate interests, Lawrence rushed its attorney into court to prevent the referendum from appearing on the ballot. He then turned the case over to the Retail Merchants Association lawyer to argue. Lawrence voters were never able to vote on the ballot initiative.

The people repeatedly raised concerns about improper zoning for Wal-Mart. The area along Spruce street is zoned highway commercial (HC), not regional commercial (RC). Clearly, Wal- Mart is a destination regional one- stop shopping outlet and as such should be located only in an RC zone. The only such zone in Lawrence is out by the Quaker Bridge Mall. Even the stores located there do not rival Wal-Mart as a one-stop shopping destination. Why was this ignored by our township's professional advisors? Were they acting on behalf of the public's interest? Wal-Mart should have been in front of the zoning board, not the planning board.

It is a sad commentary on the state of our local government that it took a suit filed by Lawrence residents against Wal-Mart and the planning board to frighten away the "Beast of Bentonville." Clearly, Wal-Mart understood that Lawrence residents had a strong case. The counts against the Wal-Mart plan listed in the lawsuit drew on the very arguments made repeatedly to the planning board and town council to no avail. These included improper zoning, inadequate stormwater management, inadequate traffic studies, and the unwarranted granting of variances. Once the suit was filed in Superior Court, Wal-Mart realized that if it did not pull out, it would face more years of delay, with huge legal and consultant expenditures, and probably not succeed, as indeed a desti nation store is not permitted in an HC zone.

We now have a unique opportunity. With Wal-Mart gone, we must press our local and county governments to take appropriate measures to clean up the site, rip up the asphalt, revegetate the area around the creek and its flood plain and improve the watershed. If necessary, the government can use eminent domain to take control of the area around the creek, as it is important for the health and safety of the public to prevent future flooding and contamination. Just imagine a park-like setting around the Shabakunk with recreational facilities, perhaps a neighborhood movie house/arts center, a coffeehouse or restaurant, and a refurbished Farmer's Market.

We stopped Wal-Mart, and together we can create a plan to en hance the quality of life in south Lawrence and improve the watershed.

Wal-Mart is looking to expand its May Landing store in New Jersey and make it a supercenter. But local residents and union activists who showed up at the hearing won't let that happen without their say so. It is truly encouraging to see folks take control of their own communities. Here's the full article from the Press of Atlantic City:

Facing a pro-union audience of about 100 people, Wal-Mart presented plans to expand its Mays Landing store into a supercenter during a Planning Board meeting Thursday. The board had not decided whether to grant Wal-Mart final site-plan approval before The Press' deadline and was likely to continue the hearing to a future meeting.

Member Patrick Childs said they aren't necessarily against expansion of the store.

"What we support is for the Wal-Mart to hire local workers," he said. "Union workers."
The expansion would increase Wal-Mart's 129,670 square-foot store on the Black Horse Pike by more than 66,600 square feet.

The addition is needed to build out the food aisles and create a full-service supermarket with fresh produce and meats, said Jennifer Hoehn, senior manager of public affairs for the company's New Jersey unit. The store would also feature new signs and parking.

The expanded supermarket "offers another level of convenience to our customers," Hoehn said.

The store currently employs about 325 people, and could see as many as 125 new hires because of the expansion, Hoehn added.

The UFCW says that while Wal-Mart is one of the state's largest employers, almost half of its workers receive health care that is subsidized by the state - a drain on taxpayers.

"It's a drag on the economy," Chudoff said, adding that organizing Wal-Mart employees doesn't make sense since "the average worker stays less than a year."

Hoehn said that more than 60 percent of Wal-Mart employees are full-time with benefits. The average full-time Wal-Mart employee in New Jersey makes $11.44 per hour.

"We have over a million employees (nationwide), and that sort of speaks for itself," Hoehn said.

Wal-Mart announced this week that it will open 80 supercenters in the first quarter of 2008. The Bentonville, Ark.-based company opened 195 supercenters last fiscal year and plans to open about 170 this year, including one on Landis Avenue in Vineland.

Here's some local news coverage about how Hadley, Mass beat Wal-Mart. Personally, I think the fact that this new Wal-Mart was going in across the street from another was reason enough to block the store.

It is hardly the type of town you might expect to win a fight against Wal-Mart. There were no "liberal activists" (the stereotype of those involved in Anti Wal-Mart campaigns), but there were a lot of concerned citizens in Ramapo. A small, traditional community, made up primarily of orthodox Jewish citizens, fought to keep Wal-Mart out of their town, and they won. It just goes to show that there are a lot of communities out there who don't want a Wal-Mart. Here's the story from the New York Times:

It was Friday afternoon when the developer who had been intent on building a 215,000-square-foot Wal-Mart in this hamlet sent word to the town offices in Ramapo. The fax was terse, but its message clear: “We will not continue to proceed with the development.”

The news that the developer, and potentially Wal-Mart, had scrapped plans it had so diligently worked on gave observant Jews, who make up the bulk of the population here, reason to rejoice.

They had waged a modest yet unyielding campaign against the proposed store, which they feared would force too many outside influences into their insular world of Orthodox Judaism.

It also represented a political vindication of sorts for Christopher P. St. Lawrence, town supervisor of Ramapo, which encompasses Monsey, in the heart of Rockland County. He hung much of his re-election on a promise to keep the Wal-Mart out of Monsey. During his campaign, he mailed a flier to every home in Monsey, saying, “Supervisor St. Lawrence opposes the Monsey Wal-Mart.” Mr. St. Lawrence was elected to a fourth term in November.

“Wal-Mart doesn’t vote for the supervisor,” said Rabbi Jacob Horowitz, one of Monsey’s most respected religious leaders. “The people vote for the supervisor.

“We work very hard to raise our families the right way,” Rabbi Horowitz said. “And the supervisor understood that preserving our lifestyle is something that’s very important to us.”

There were other issues that Mr. St. Lawrence said had prompted him to stand up against putting a Wal-Mart on Route 59, like the flood of traffic such a big store could bring to a two-lane highway that is already clogged much of the time, and its impact on the revitalized downtown section of Spring Valley, a village northeast of Monsey.

“We’re very pro-business here,” Mr. St. Lawrence said. “But it has to be the right business.”

Wal-Mart says it has not yet formally given up on the project.

Philip H. Serghini, a spokesman for Wal-Mart, said that the company had placed the plan “under review,” weighing the costs of pushing it forward against its potential benefits.

To build here, Wal-Mart would have to overcome at least two obstacles: finding another developer and preparing a new environmental impact study. The town Planning Board rejected the one it received last June on the ground that the proposal to ease traffic on Route 59 with a combination of turning lanes and more traffic lights was inadequate.

Jerrold Bermingham, managing director of the National Realty and Development Corporation, which was to have built the store, did not respond to e-mail messages or phone calls left with him and his lawyer.

With about 28,000 residents and almost 200 synagogues squeezed into 2.2 square miles, Monsey feels at once crowded and neighborly, the type of place that seems immune to the modernity that surrounds it.

Many of the women do not drive, and their children attend the dozens of yeshivas, or private religious schools here. Among the most observant families, home computers are strictly forbidden.

“These are not people who were schooled in the tactics of public protesting, or who even felt comfortable doing it,” said Richard Lipsky, a spokesman for the Neighborhood Retail Alliance, a coalition of small-business groups that helped residents here wage their battle against Wal-Mart. “They never imagined they could beat a giant like Wal-Mart.”

The retailer made numerous attempts to woo the Jewish community. Company representatives met with rabbis and agreed to conceal the covers of celebrity magazines featuring photographs of scantly clad movie and television stars to avoid offending Jewish patrons. Wal-Mart also hired a firm to send mailings in Yiddish to local homes, asking residents to suggest ways the company could improve the area.

“A lot of us sent the mailing back to them with the words, ‘No, thanks,’ written at the top,” said a 36-year-old Hasidic man who has lived here for 18 years and who requested anonymity to keep with his religious tradition of modesty.

Then, the community hit back. Residents joined union workers for a rally in December 2006, and circulated petitions and ran ads in Yiddish and English every week for 32 weeks in a local newsletter, Community Connections. The ads warned of the additional traffic the store would attract and how it would expose their children to such unwelcome sights as bikinis and lingerie.

“Very little money was collected or spent” in the effort, said Jacob Guttman, 33, who is Hasidic. “It was just a well-organized and carefully planned grass-roots campaign.”

The rabbis, for their part, encouraged the faithful to speak up. When Wal-Mart offered to repair Monsey’s heavily used sidewalks and build others, the rabbis asked residents to write to local officials, saying they did not need new sidewalks.

“We were determined to make Wal-Mart uncomfortable because by making them uncomfortable, we thought they would eventually leave,” said Rabbi Horowitz, who is also the executive director of a social services agency here, the Community Outreach Center.

“We’re very strong believers that everything comes from the Almighty,” he added. “I think the Almighty realized that for our children to grow up in a beautiful community, for our traditions to be preserved, we couldn’t have a Wal-Mart.”

A Massachusetts community stopped a Wal-Mart Supercenter after a battle that centered around environmental standards, and a rail-to-trail path. Congratulations to Hadley Neighbors for Sensible Development, the main group fighting this battle, on their win! You can read about their victory on the group's blog. Here's the press release from the group:

WAL-MART DROPS HADLEY SUPERCENTER PLANS; DEVELOPER VOWS TO FIND NEW TENANTS

Wal-Mart has dropped its plans to build a supercenter in Hadley, Massachusetts.

The company’s decision ends three years of efforts to build a 212,000-square foot store at the Hampshire Mall.

Representatives for the Pyramid Companies, which is developing the site on which the supercenter was to be built, have notified residents and local officials that Wal-Mart is no longer a prospective tenant. However, Pyramid says it will continue to develop the site and seek new tenants to take Wal-Mart’s place. Wal-Mart continues to operate a regular-sized discount store at the Mountain Farms Mall less than 300 yards away.

Wal-Mart’s decision to abandon the supercenter plan means that a smaller scale development could be built that protects the nearby Norwottuck Rail Trail and surrounding wetlands. The supercenter would have been the largest single structure in Hadley, with loading docks within 250-300 feet of the Rail Trail.

In 2007, Wal-Mart announced it was cutting back by about one-third the number of some 270 new supercenter openings nationwide this year. Pyramid representatives said the current economic downturn was a factor in Wal-Mart’s decision, as well as the fact that the Hadley location had become a “difficult” site on which to build a supercenter.

Wal-Mart and its developer first filed plans to build the supercenter and 13-acre parking lot in March 2005. As planned, the supercenter would have wiped out several acres of wetlands. In November 2005, Hadley residents presented a 91-page report that detailed the wetlands impacts that Wal-Mart refused to admit. In early 2006, the Hadley Conservation Commission and Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection ruled that indeed Wal-Mart had not reported all the wetlands and required that new plans be filed if the project was to move ahead. However, for the past two years, the developer
has refused to produce plans that comply with wetlands laws and has instead continued to Hadley Neighbors for Sensible Development appeal these rulings through the state Division of Administrative Law Appeals process.

These appeals remain active and a ruling is expected in the coming weeks.

In April 2007, Wal-Mart’s environmental impact report was rejected by the Massachusetts Secretary of Environmental Affairs for failing to show all wetlands and stormwater impacts, as well as for failing to provide adequate traffic management. The rejection came after some 380 area residents, agency officials and business owners wrote
comments to the state expressing concerns about the supercenter project. But in May 2007, Wal-Mart held an “open house” at the Hadley American Legion Hall to assure residents and local officials that the supercenter would be built.

The new store would have drawn more than 6,500 new vehicle trips per day, adding to the 22,000 trips already on Route 9. The supercenter would have increased traffic nearly five-fold where the Rail Trail crosses South Maple Street. The Planning Board and Mass. Department of Conservation and Recreation asked for a bridge or tunnel crossing to protect bicyclists and pedestrians, but Wal-Mart would only agree to a yellow flashing light. The supercenter would have been the third major “big box” project in Hadley in recent years. Construction is under way on a 230,000-square foot mall at Route 9 and North Maple Street that will include a Home Depot and five other stores; and the state recently approved a 180,000-square foot development for a Lowe’s home improvement store at the Long Hollow Bison Farm one-half mile to the west near Mill Valley Road.

Many residents were frustrated that Wal-Mart refused to discuss compensation for the loss of more than 20 acres of farmland. In contrast, residents negotiated an agreement with the developer of the Lowe’s store to pay the Town of Hadley $410,000 to mitigate the loss of 13 acres farmland. Similarly, the Home Depot project includes approximately $125,000 in payments to help protect some 60 acres of Hadley farmland.

It is not clear how large another store on the site could be. In May 2006, Hadley Town Meeting voted overwhelmingly to restrict the size of future retail stores in town to 75,000 square feet or less. Wal-Mart’s developer, Pyramid, filed subdivision plans just prior to that vote to lock in a temporary “grandfathering” exemption from the retail size-limit for most of the site, but the subdivision approval process for the entire site is not yet complete.

Members of Hadley Neighbors have asked the Planning Board to deny the subdivision because it violates several zoning and subdivision regulations and the Board is therefore under no obligation to grant the variances necessary for approval. By not voting on the pending application, the Planning Board is unnecessarily extending Pyramid’s ability to evade the 75,000-square foot retail store size limit. The size limit was enacted as one of the first steps in Hadley’s new Master Plan, adopted unanimously by Town Meeting in October 2005.

A North Carolina community has been fighting against a Wal-Mart supercenter, and their efforts have paid off. Here's a press release from the community group C.A.R.E. (Citizens Against Residential Encroachment) who lead the fight against the new supercenter.

On March 3, 2008, the Knightdale Town Council announced the cancelation of the Village Park Commons development (including a new Super Wal-Mart), citing economic downturn as the reason. C.A.R.E. (Citizens Against Residential Encroachment) is very pleased with this decision and the victory it represents for so many town citizens. There are many reasons people from all over objected to the development. Some citizens were concerned with traffic, some with crime, some with the environmental impact, and some with the sheer size so near residential homes. Many people could not understand why a new Wal-Mart was needed with one 3.2 miles down the road, and a new one nearly finished in Zebulon—let alone the fact we already have a very successful Wal-Mart in Knightdale. The Town’s own LURB (Land Use Review Board) cited many of these very things before rejecting the proposal.

Some on the Town Council have already begun to blame us for revenue losses and other problems, but we strongly reject that notion. The Town’s flagrant disregard for so many concerned citizens’ wishes is what led us down this road. The people did not cause any loss in revenue, the Town did. It was their unwillingness to negotiate or compromise that forced this into the courts. No effort, in nearly two years, was made by the town or by the developer (Rick Rowe) to come to any kind of win-win type solution. With no good options ahead of us, town residents continued to fight in the only way they could. This effort was made to protect our property, our children, and our way of life—things every American would strongly fight for, just as we have.

We hope that, in the future, the Town will show a stronger willingness to hear the voice of its constituency without the need for legal action. We know the developer thought a few (hundreds, actually) angry voices would go quiet, but they did not.

After a six year battle over a proposed Wal-Mart, the giant retailer decided not to build. Wal-Mart says it was part of a national pull back of growth, but the residents of Union County say it was their opposition. Its another victory for folks who want to choose the future of their neighborhoods, and not let huge corporations take over that role. Here's the article from the Charlotte Observer:

We're not victims here in Union County. We don't just sit back and wait to see what form growth around us will take.

We can, and should, have a say.

Wal-Mart's decision last week to walk away from its plan to build a Supercenter in the Marvin area proves your voice can be heard.

Residents in that area didn't want the center. They made that point clear to everyone involved during the six-year legal battle.

Wal-Mart believed the fight was worth it because the site is between Weddington and Marvin, a good market with median household incomes of more than $97,000, according to the 2000 U.S. Census.

There's bound to be a few shoppers there.

But last week a Wal-Mart spokesman said the company won't build on the 28-acre site at Rea and Tom Short roads. They're trying to sell the property for $8 million. It's all part of a nationwide pullback, the spokesman said.

The people who lived in nearby subdivisions such as Somerset and Hunter Oaks were willing to persevere because they had a vision of what they wanted their neighborhood to look like.

About a year ago I applauded, and wrote about, a similar battle involving the people of Waxhaw.

They fought and held off a proposal for a 200,000-square-foot, 24-hour Supercenter at Jackson Station in Waxhaw. They also had a vision: maintain small-town charm with a safe place to walk, not threatened by dense shopper traffic.

These fights aren't easy to win. You've got to be willing to fight for a long time and spend money. Still, battles like these serve a purpose in this county. They show developers and elected officials that, if no one else is willing to say no, some homeowners will.

That doesn't necessarily mean anyone is wrong.

This county should work to bring in commercial development to keep the tax burden reasonable for homeowners. Business owners are simply being smart in our current economic climate when they try to build in areas where people have money to shop. Homeowners have every right to take action that protects their property values and ensures a safe environment.

Conflicts are inevitable. Still, this is how Union County will grow into whatever its future will be.

And there's plenty on the horizon to fuel more conflicts. Homes are still going up, roads and other infrastructure still must be built, new businesses will still come here. You've already heard about everything on this list.

So maybe it's time to stop framing these conflicts in terms of winners and losers. It's actually about finding the solution that works best for the most people involved.

The emphasis is on involvement -- speaking up.

We've all heard the cliche: "NIMBY (not in my back yard)." When you decide to take that position, you know it won't be easy. You also should know, you're being an involved citizen.

Involved citizens may not always win, but they do make better government, and ultimately a better county.

Here is an interesting story where Wal-Mart had a unique negative impact on a community. The town has lost several bus drivers who are seeking employment at the new store in town, and may lose more. I guess Wal-Mart doesn't just pull business from other stores in town. Here's the article from The Mountain View Telegraph:

A rush on jobs at Wal-Mart in Edgewood is affecting bus routes in the Moriarty-Edgewood School District.
As of Jan. 22, three bus drivers had already gone to Wal-Mart for employment, according to district transportation supervisor Ernie Sandoval. Up to five more drivers may be looking for jobs there as well, he said.
"Even before we started losing (bus drivers) to Wal-Mart, we were in trouble here," Sandoval said. "We're hurting right now, and if we lose any more (drivers) then we're really in trouble."
According to Wal-Mart officials, the store will open in early March. In preparation, Wal-Mart is taking applications for 400 or more positions. Construction is scheduled to be completed Monday, and that is when employees and management will begin to stock the 214,000-square-foot building.
Although Wal-Mart is going to be among the East Mountains and Estancia Valley areas' largest employers, the area's largest employer is still the Moriarty-Edgewood School District, according to Superintendent Karen Couch. That's why the district is seeing a change, Couch said.

"Any new employer in the area will affect us," Couch said. "Any loss to us is worthy of consideration and review." The recent loss of bus drivers to Wal-Mart has drivers hauling two loads of kids a day, according to Sandoval. For students, that means long hours traveling to school, and some wait 30 to 45 minutes after school for a bus. "When you consolidate (bus routes), somebody's got to get on earlier and somebody's got to get on later," he said. "We're looking at all of our (bus schedules) and saying, 'What the heck are we going to do?' '' He added that he doesn't fault people for doing what is best for them and their families, even if that means he is left with positions to fill. It isn't just district bus drivers who have made a move to Wal-Mart, according to district director of personnel Cindy Sims. "In nutritional services we've lost three employees so far," she said. She pointed out that the district was already trying to fill positions in that area. There are now a total of six open positions, according to Sims. Despite having open positions, the work still has to be done, Sims said. "It just means fewer hands trying to accomplish the same task," she said. "I've had to go and help serve meals ... principals help ... it's whatever you have to do to make sure that meals are prepared for the kiddos." There are a number of benefits of working at the school that both Couch and Sims pointed out. Medical dental and vision insurance come at reduced rates for lower-income employees, and most employees are eligible for health benefits, according to Sims. Employees also get summers off and working parents will likely have the same schedule as their children. "It's a very family-friendly schedule when you have young children," she said. "You're off when they're off." Sims added that starting wages at Wal-Mart and in nutritional service positions in the school district are similar, but take-home pay at Wal-Mart is greater. There are two big reasons for that. First, school district employees have a mandatory retirement contribution, and second, employees' pay is distributed evenly throughout the year; in other words, each year they get a portion of each paycheck later, during the 12 weeks when they aren't working during the summer.

Citizens of Canfield, Ohio recently made their case against a newly proposed Wal-Mart Super Center, citing concerns about Wal-Mart crowding out local businesses, and increasing traffic to unsafe levels. According to WYTV 33, Wal-Mart officials would not allow cameras in the meeting. We're not surprised, since the town of 7,500 turned out over two hundred people who "defiantly rejected the idea of a Wal-Mart coming into their community."

Still, Wal-Mart presses on, making us wonder what happened to the ideals of Wal-Mart Founder Sam Walton, who opposed building stores in communities that did not want them. As Wal-Mart real-estate manager Jeff Doss admitted, "Were that the case, we'd never build a store anywhere."

Here is the article from Channel 33 News, WYTV.

Wal-Mart officials made their way into Canfield, to make their case for a one hundred and seventy-six thousand square foot Wal-Mart Super center. The store would go right off route 224 next to route 11. But, so far, Wal-Mart has a lot of convincing to do.

In fact, Wal-Mart officials would not let us go inside the meeting with our camera, and it's no wonder, because the more than two hundred people inside defiantly rejecting the idea of a Wal-Mart coming to their community.

Residents like their "Mom and Pop" stores, and many are concerned about potential traffic and safety hazards.

"Those safety issue arise from an increase in traffic, currently we have twenty-nine thousand cars a day on Rt. 224 between Rt. 11 and Market street. They're going to add thirteen thousand more cars to that. I don't understand how that's going to work, your kids are on a bus, safety forces have to get to our house in a fire truck.", says concerned citizen, Tim Smith.

Still though, Wal-Mart isn't giving up.

"The reason you have law and the reason you have a process like this, is so that everyone gets treated or dealt with fairly, in the same way. So, therefore, this is a zone change request. We will present it to the county, as well as to the township, and we will let them

Wal-Mart's next step is to try to get the land it wants re-zoned for commercial use. Then the company will make an official presentation to Township Trustees.

It's unavoidable. At some point in our lives, we will all have a bad neighbor. You know, the kind that blasts heavy metal at 4 AM or throws raucous parties on Sunday nights.

Typically, you have options: You can walk next door to have a few words, talk to your landlord, or just resort to calling the police. It seems impossible that it would take hundreds of complaints to city officials before your neighbor gets the boot... unless your neighbor happens to be America's largest employer.

That's the situation in Carson City, where, instead of hosting all-night parties, Wal-Mart is operating heavy machinery at odd hours and keeping the surrounding community awake. After hundreds of complaints, and a brief period of rest, Wal-Mart is back to its old ways and citizens of Carson City want action. From the Nevada Appeal:

Wal-Mart says it's tried to keep quiet but residents near the Carson City store say it is too loud too early and the city should do something about it.

The city planning commission will look at the issue that has come out of complaints officials have received since January about noise from trucks and machines. The city has hosted four meetings between the store and residents during that time.

"Time after time the Wal-Mart delivery activities would function within the requirements, but then would fail due to one reason or another," according to a division report.

The division has received over 100 complaints about the noise, said Planning Director Walt Sullivan. He said he's looking to the commission to recommend what to do.

The store has a special city permit to operate, but that permit also limits what the store can do. Delivery and receiving hours at the loading dock, for instance, are restricted to 5:30 a.m. to 11 p.m. Trucks can't idle at the back of the building. Machines such as trash compactors can only run between 8 a.m. and 10 p.m. Trucks have to wait on the west side of the building for their shipments.

The commission could recommend several things, Sullivan said, such as modifying the store's special permit or holding a special hearing to look at the issue.

There has to be "give and take" between the store and residents, but "it would help a lot if they (Wal-Mart) just followed the guidelines."

As in Carson City, Wal-Mart has drawn fire from communities and neighbors all across the country. David McCartney, Wal-Mart's neighbor in Lebanon KY, complained that Wal-Mart cracked the foundation of his house by using explosives within a few feet of his yard. Across the nation, hundreds of communities have formed "site fight" groups, taking issue with Wal-Mart's affect on traffic, property values, wages, product safety, crime, and so on.

It just goes to show that you can't invite an irresponsible company like Wal-Mart into a community and maintain the quality of life Americans have come to expect.

Wal-Mart and its addiction to cheap, unsafe Chinese goods has been all over the news recently. This month, at least forty were sickened by the kind of tainted beef sold nationwide at Wal-Mart stores, prompting the second largest beef recall in history. Toxic chemicals like melamine have been found in Wal-Mart's pet food, and its shelves are stocked with lead-laced children's toys.

It sounds like a cheap horror novel but, unfortunately, it's all true. The situation is critical, and now is the perfect time of year to spread the word. So, in keeping with the spirit of Halloween, and Wal-Mart's terrifying product safety record, we've decided to host a feature called "Tales from the Big Box Boneyard."

Yes, the title is cheesy, but this is serious stuff. In the days leading up to Halloween, we are encouraging supporters to write us with their most disturbing Wal-Mart horror stories. After Halloween, we will feature five of the most ghastly tales, and their authors, on our website. To contribute, just add a comment to this post.

We're not looking for anything specific, but the more shocking, terrifying, and stomach turning the better. It is Halloween, after all, and we know there is no shortage of horror stories from the aisles of Wal-Mart. Just to give you a little inspiration, here are a few honorary Wal-Mart horror stories from recent headlines that are disturbing enough to get your skin crawling.

"Ratatouille"

Earlier this month, a Utah woman was preparing lunch for her children when she noticed something peculiar floating in the green beans she had bought from Wal-Mart. it was the severed head of a mouse.

No, it's not Stephen King's remake of the Pixar classic. It actually happened to Marianne Watson.

"I'm queasy just talking about it," she said, in an interview with the Salt Lake Tribune. "Thank goodness it ended up on the top and not the bottom, so I didn't serve it to [my family]."

Now, her refrigerator is a makeshift morgue where she keeps the frozen head of the offending mouse, as the matter could take up to two years to be fully resolved. When asked if she would consider returning to Wal-Mart, Watson said "Until I'm reassured that it's just an isolated incident, I won't."

Something tells us Wal-Mart won't be seeing Marianne Watson anytime soon.

"Flip Flop Horror"

Kerry Stiles bought "a cheap pair of flip flops" from her local Wal-Mart store. She wore the flip flops briefly,and only for a few minutes at a time, until she began to notice a tingling sensation on the parts of her feet where the straps touched her skin. The tingling quickly turned into a severe chemical burn that ate through her skin.

Like a responsible consumer, Kerry decided to bring the issue to the attention of local Wal-Mart management. There, she met with a Training manager, Jim, who literally turned his back on her as she tried to explain the problem with the dangerous flip flops. As if that wasn't insulting enough, Wal-Mart eventually gave her the number to a factory in CHINA, instructing her to direct her complaints overseas.

After hundreds of similar reports surfaced, Wal-Mart couldn't ignore the issue any longer. Thousands of the flip flops were pulled from Wal-Mart's shelves. Not much consolation for Kerry, who was left insulted and, literally, scarred for life.

Don't worry, your stories don't need to be this extreme. Though we expect some hair-raising tales, we're interested in any of your bad shopping experiences. So, get to writing!

Victory in Clark County! The activists at Wal-Mart Watchdogs and the people of Washington state have brought the construction of a new Wal-Mart in Clark County to a standstill. From the Columbian:

Clark County commissioners lined up to give frowny-faces to Wal-Mart on Wednesday, tossing out a developer's plans for a possible store site in Salmon Creek.

Each of the three commissioners found problems, which ranged from storm runoff to traffic safety to the proper certification by a traffic engineer.

Commissioner Betty Sue Morris said evidence surrounding the developer's plans to pipe stormwater through a neighboring set of condominiums had changed too drastically since the county's initial review.

As Morris, a Democrat who rarely opposes developments, said she would therefore vote to reject the plan, one audience member let out an audible gasp.

Morris added that she'd never seen a more dangerous truck exit than one planned to open onto Rockwell Road, southwest of the site.

Commissioner Steve Stuart echoed Morris' concerns and added that he was troubled by a development engineer's failure to put an official stamp on his traffic report.

"We put the submission criteria in there for a reason," he said. "It should never have been considered technically complete."

Bay Area residents have successfully kept Wal-Mart out of their communities. For more, check out this article from Bloggingstocks.com

Wal-Mart Stores, Inc. may not ever get any love in the San Francisco area. The world's largest retailer had its hopes for more store frontage in the San Francisco Bay Area dashed this week when the retailer's primary construction vendor pulled out from its prior application to build the big-box location. The vendor was controlled by a family that was apparently sympathetic to the plight of chasing off new Wal-Mart stores in the Bay Area, so it pulled its application for building a new Wal-Mart Supercenter as a result.

The new Wal-Mart location, which was to be built in the North Concord area, now has no firm to build it. North Concord residents and the City Council there had cited the Wal-Mart proposal as inadequate in addressing issues such as traffic, public safety, urban decay, water control, energy and parking. In other words, the usual suspects when a municipality wants to fend off a proposed Wal-Mart location.

Of course, Wal-Mart has a history of trying again and again to get locations built in areas that have significant shopper traffic and good demographics, and surely the retailer won't put its tail between its legs and leave town like Wal-Mart CEO Lee Scott indicated would happen in New York City recently. With only three Wal-Mart Supercenters approved in the Bay Area in the last four years, Wal-Mart has been beaten up pretty well in that area, although it continues the fight.

From Community Press

More than 225 people packed the Burlington Elementary gym on Aug. 1 for a Boone County Planning Commission public hearing regarding a proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter at the corner of U.S. 42 and Weaver Road.

Wal-Mart wants to build the 184,000-square-foot Supercenter on 35 acres of land. Accompanying the store would be two 8,000-square-foot "quality restaurants", a 3,000-square-foot fast-food restaurant, and a 10,000-square-foot retail center.

The land, currently zoned industrial, needs a commercial zoning change before the project can proceed.

Cindy Hodson, spokesperson for the Boone County Residents for Responsible Growth, was on hand with a group of people displaying anti-Wal-Mart signs. The group has collected 4,000 Boone County signatures opposing Wal-Mart since early June.

"We oppose the rezoning," Hodson said. "The zoning is not consistent with the 2005 Boone County Comprehensive Plan concerning traffic, economic development and fiscal responsibility."

Ronald Hendricks of Florence echoed Hodson's sentiments.

"There is already a traffic jam on that road everyday," Hendricks said. "This store would bring more cars and people. What are you going to do with them when you can't handle the situation you have already got?"

Robert Matko, a traffic engineer hired by Wal-Mart, was on hand to present traffic study findings.

"Wal-Mart is prepared to spend $1.5 million on roadway improvements to make sure they mitigate the impact of the development," Matko said. "These improvements will maintain or even improve existing road conditions."

Some road changes Wal-Mart would like to make include adding right-hand turn lanes, interconnecting traffic signals, and adding traffic signals on side streets.

A few residents even supported Wal-Mart's proposal.

"We've got pile of junk where the old warehouse was," Marvin Hennemann, of Florence, said. "The payroll taxes coming into the city will help keep our taxes down."

Henneman went on to say that the unified development would be appropriate for the land it sits on.

The Planning Commission's zone change committee will discuss the plan Aug. 15 at 5 p.m.

From the Raleigh News and Observer:

Empty Wal-Mart buildings plague communities across the nation. At any given time, about 350 former Wal-Marts lie vacant in America, according to Al Norman of Sprawl-Busters, an organization that opposes big-box stores. At least nine empty former Wal-Mart spaces -- the equivalent of 12 football fields in size -- occupied North Carolina as of February, Norman said.

The retailer's shift to massive supercenters, though, means more empty Wal-Marts in towns such as Hillsborough.

"It's just a giant hole in the community that can last for years," said Julia Christensen, a former university lecturer now writing a book on how communities reuse empty big box stores.

Read the full article.

From the San Francisco Chronicle:

The April 5 ruling by the Court of Appeal in Fresno upheld an ordinance enacted in 2004 by Turlock (Stanislaus County) that was backed by neighborhood supermarkets and labor unions. The court, setting a statewide precedent, said local governments can enact such restrictions to prevent the collapse of local businesses and resulting urban blight.

To read more about Turlock, click here.

From the New Jersey Times:

LAWRENCE -- "Would you like a Wal-Mart in your backyard?"

That was the question Gina Quinones asked members of the Lawrence Township Planning Board Screening Committee yesterday as she pointed a finger at each one of them and then turned her attention -- and her pointing finger -- to representatives of Wal-Mart.

She didn't get an answer.

A resident of Tiffany Woods, a housing development situated off Spruce Street near the 23.5-acre site proposed for a new Wal-Mart, Quinones was one of a very vocal group opposing the store for reasons that ranged from traffic to wage policies.

Dressed in a white T-shirt with the words "Wal-Mart Superstore" in an X-ed out circle, Quinones was applauded by about 50 residents who attended the informal meeting. Some were members of LET's Stop Wal-Mart, and about 40 of them demonstrated outside the township's senior center on East Darrah Lane before the meeting began.

Click here to read more.

From the Sunbeam:

PENNSVILLE TWP. -- The Pennsville Planning Board met again with Angeloni Development Monday night in the non-air conditioned auditorium at Pennsville Memorial High School to discuss the proposed Wal-Mart Super Center on Lighthouse Road and state highway 49.

The proposed development would include a Super Wal-Mart that would include a tire and lube service center, a garden center, a gas station along with an extra retail store to the north of the Wal-Mart. The project is proposed for a site just south of the current Wal-Mart.

About 60 residents were present to see the presentations on the proposal on Monday night. The number of residents in attendance dwindled from the meetings months before when the auditoriums in Pennsville Memorial High School and Central Park School were almost filled.

There was one group of residents present Monday who strongly opposed the super center by wearing anti Wal-Mart T-shirts. They met before the meeting in the parking lot to rally and show they are not in favor of the larger Wal-Mart.

Click here to read the full article.

From The Eagle (College Station, TX):

Residents turn out to protest rezoning proposal

More than 300 people attended a Thursday meeting of the College Station Planning and Zoning Commission at the College Station Conference Center.

Residents turned out to protest a proposal to rezone about 50 acres at the southeast corner of Texas 6 and Rock Prairie Road. The change would allow a Wal-Mart SuperCenter to be built at the site.

Also discussed was a land-use change for 35 acres near Sebesta Road.

From Press Enterprise:

Angry Corona homeowners put feelings onto banners

CORONA - A group of homeowners suing Wal-Mart and developer Fieldstone Communities plan to air their grievances today at a protest of sorts.

Residents of the Vista Grande Development, which overlooks the Wal-Mart on Ontario Avenue, said they are frustrated by stalled talks with the retail and construction companies and plan to voice their displeasure in the form of huge banners visible to shoppers and passersby.

The group is angry about water damage to their backyards and homes they say was caused by a poorly constructed retaining wall between Wal-Mart and the neighborhood above it.

After more than two years of imploring the companies to fix the damage, they are taking their message to the public.

Resident Mark Stahovich said the public display is a reaction to the lack of action on the part of Wal-Mart and Fieldstone, whom he said have been largely unresponsive.

"We've invested our life savings in these homes," he said. "Our American dream has turned into an American nightmare because our lives have been on hold."

John Simley, a Wal-Mart spokesman, confirmed the lawsuit but said it would be "disrespectful to the court" to talk about the case.

"The proper place for the arguments to be handled is in court and we prefer it that way," he said.

Fieldstone said in a statement that the company is "committed to working with its homeowners and to seeing a satisfactory resolution to this problem" but said residents should look to Wal-Mart for a fix.

"As Wal-Mart designed and built the wall and slope and as it still owns and maintains them, Fieldstone Communities, Inc. believes Wal-Mart has the responsibility and ability to repair the problem."

Stahovich said Wal-Mart may have built the wall but he believes that Fieldstone knew it was unstable before the homeowners went through escrow, an allegation the company's attorneys refuted in court documents.

Stahovich moved into his newly built 3,500-square-foot home on Radcliffe Circle in February 2002. In February 2003, the first heavy rains came and about two days later, residents noticed that their backyards were sliding down the slope, he said.

Fieldstone referred the homeowners to Wal-Mart, and the retailer didn't respond at all to the complaints, Stahovich said. Several residents then retained an attorney and filed suit against the two companies.

Fieldstone said even though it didn't create the problem, it installed slope- and groundwater-monitoring devices, covered backyards with plastic sheeting to keep water from further seeping into the soil and agreed to pay the cost to repair any damage to landscaping resulting from the plastic sheeting.

Wal-Mart is nearing completion on repairs to the retaining wall, Simley said.

For Stahovich, just fixing the wall does not repair the permanent damage done to his home and others.

"Wal-Mart has not been impacted by the damage they have caused nor has Fieldstone Homes," he said. "It is just us homeowners that are struggling with the added burden of big companies taking advantage of hardworking families..."

From The Times (NJ):

Dozens protest proposed Wal-Mart Residents challenge 3rd version of project

LAWRENCE -- "Would you like a Wal-Mart in your backyard?"

That was the question Gina Quinones asked members of the Lawrence Township Planning Board Screening Committee yesterday as she pointed a finger at each one of them and then turned her attention -- and her pointing finger -- to representatives of Wal-Mart.

She didn't get an answer.

A resident of Tiffany Woods, a housing development situated off Spruce Street near the 23.5-acre site proposed for a new Wal-Mart, Quinones was one of a very vocal group opposing the store for reasons that ranged from traffic to wage policies.

Dressed in a white T-shirt with the words "Wal-Mart Superstore" in an X-ed out circle, Quinones was applauded by about 50 residents who attended the informal meeting. Some were members of LET's Stop Wal-Mart, and about 40 of them demonstrated outside the township's senior center on East Darrah Lane before the meeting began.

At the informal meeting, Wal-Mart presented a third version of its proposed development along 1060-1100 Spruce St. near the borders of Lawrence, Ewing and Trenton, this one reducing the size of the store to 134,243 square feet and the number of parking spaces to 725. An 8,500-square-foot seasonal garden center also is proposed for the site.

Wal-Mart traffic engineer Ray DiPasquale called it "one of the smallest prototypes ever worked on for Wal-Mart."

The discount retailer's initial 2004 plans called for a 156,000-square-foot store and garden center, along with a tire and lube center, plus 633 parking spaces. When told they would have to go to the zoning board for a use variance in connection with the tire and lube center, Wal-Mart came back in February 2005 with a plan that reduced the store size to 134,579 square feet and dropped the tire and lube center. Parking spaces were increased to 761.

Their new proposal also calls for changing the four lanes of Spruce Street to three lanes with a middle turning lane.

Chris Altomari of the township's Environmental Committee pointedly asked the Wal-Mart representatives if their company had "ever placed a store of this size on a neighborhood street that has on-street parking."

DiPasquale said he thought there was another one in New Jersey but would have to research it.

Altomari then proposed that Lawrence pass an ordinance restricting big box stores to Route 1.

The Spruce Street property once housed Coleman Buick and Cahill Motors. There would be two entrances to the store along Spruce, one of which would extend Arctic Parkway at an existing traffic light.

Gina Quinones' husband, Ramon, complained that property values would diminish if the discount shopping giant were built.

"I don't have anything personal against Wal-Mart, but we have trouble getting in and out of our houses now. I live on the lower part of the hill, and cars speed down it now. I heard that on Sundays alone 100 trucks would be coming in an out of Wal-Mart."

A Spruce Street resident was one of a number of speakers applauded by the audience when she asked, "Would any of you like to buy my property right now?"

From The Gazette:

Wal-Mart has scrapped its plans to build a hotly contested Supercenter in a southeast Colorado Springs neighborhood, ending an 11-month battle with residents.

The company is searching for other sites in the same area, Wal-Mart spokesman Gray McGinnis said.

“We feel this area is prime for an additional Wal-Mart,” he said. “We look forward to continuing to work with (the community) to put together a project that works for everybody.”

The proposal faced opposition from many Soaring Eagles residents who complained the store would be too large, noisy and busy for a residential area and that they never expected a big-box store in their backyard.

“It shows what a community can do when they try to fight Wal-Mart,” said Keith Varney, a resident and member of the Soaring Eagles Community Coalition.

He said he won’t be pleased if the store opens somewhere else close by. “There are just too many places on the other side of Powers (Boulevard) where they can build and not impact homes and schools.”

The proposal also encountered obstacles from city planners, who said a big-box store wouldn’t fit with the character of the neighborhood of about 537 homes near the intersection of Powers and Hancock Expressway. Instead, planners said Wal-Mart should be required to break the store into a number of smaller buildings.

In the six months since, Wal-Mart officials had remained silent about their plans, saying only that they were reviewing their options.

“It was only by the skin of its teeth” that the neighborhood did not get a Wal-Mart, said Councilwoman Margaret Radford, who represents the area.

That’s because a city ordinance that gave the area commercial zoning in 1998 specified that “uses shall be restricted to those shown on the approved concept plan.”

That concept plan depicted several hotels, office buildings and restaurants — not big-box stores.

When Wal-Mart first submitted its application, city planning officials took the position that concept plans expired after four years and therefore, a big-box store was allowed. They later changed their position.

For the majority of Soaring Eagles residents, especially those whose homes bordered the proposed store site, “it’s welcome news,” said Jim Webber, president of the Soaring Eagles homeowners association.

“There also were some residents that wanted them to come,” he said.

Their neighborhood still borders an empty commercially zoned plot of land, Webber noted. “Now, we’re concerned and curious about who will be interested in that property,” he said.

Although Radford agreed that Wal-Mart didn’t belong in the neighborhood, she said the area does need more retail stores, particularly since two grocery stores recently closed.

“We have a huge challenge in getting larger storefronts reoccupied,” she said.

The store would have been the 10th Wal-Mart in the area.

Wal-Mart has five Supercenters in Colorado Springs and one in Fountain. Plans have also been approved for stores in Woodland Park, Monument and Falcon.

From the Star Bulletin:

Kapolei residents showed up in full force at a neighborhood board meeting Wednesday night to criticize a proposed Wal-Mart store in the area, prompting the board to vote to oppose the store's development.

"It was quite a night," said Maeda Timson, chairwoman of the Makakilo/Kapolei/Honokai Hale board. She estimated an audience of about 200 at the meeting. "It was very emotional. This meeting was originally intended to get information, not to take action."

Timson said she is drafting a letter this week to Wal-Mart Stores Inc., Honolulu councilmembers and Campbell Estate, asking the big-box store to look elsewhere.

"There were many questions," she said, "but there were at least 17 times when they said they didn't know. And these were basic questions."

Wal-Mart spokesman Kevin McCall said he could not answer many questions because the project is still in early stages of development. The developer is still in the due-diligence phase, he said, and no deal on the site at the mauka-Diamond Head corner of Makakilo Drive has been finalized yet.

"We were here more to listen," McCall said. "We believe that as more information becomes available, it will become more clear that this project is appropriate for that area."

He added that Wal-Mart is trying to be forthcoming with its plans.

"We've come forward that this is not a supercenter," he said. "We've come forward that traffic is our predominant issue of concern and it needs to be addressed."

The Wal-Mart planned for Kapolei will be similar in size to the one in Pearl City, which measures about 148,000 square feet.

A supercenter, McCall said, typically includes a grocery store and can measure up to 200,000 square feet.

Wal-Mart announced last week it plans to open only after scheduled traffic improvements are made in 2008.

"We think that the opportunity is there," McCall said. "It is zoned commercial, and we believe it is an appropriate place to be within the community after the improvements are done."

Theresia McMurdo, spokeswoman for the Campbell Estate, said she has received comments both for and against the Wal-Mart project.

When the deal is finalized, she said Wal-Mart's designs would need to be approved by the city's design review board.

But the core members of Kapolei First, which number about 50, are not about to stop their opposition to Wal-Mart, according to spokeswoman Carolyn Golojuch.

"This is not the end," said Golojuch, whose husband, Michael Golojuch, is vice chairman of the Kapolei neighborhood board. "It's not over until it's over. We need to continue to stand up for the welfare of the community."

She said the group would continue waving signs, knocking on doors and gathering signatures for its petition against Wal-Mart.

Some alternative uses for the site suggested by community members, she said, include a park, another school or parking for mass transit.

The issues brought before the neighborhood board were not apparently just over traffic and the size of the proposed Wal-Mart, but over the Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart's corporate practices, which have prompted class-action suits, critical books and a film.

Small-business owners at the meeting said the big-box store would put them out of business. Residents from Kapolei Knolls wanted a statement in writing, assuring them that the new Wal-Mart would not be a supercenter.

Neighborhood board member Brent Buckley, who made the lone dissenting vote, said he simply wanted more dialogue.

"I have concerns, as much of the community does, but I think we need to keep a door open to dialogue," he said. "By saying no, I'm afraid we already shut the door ... and I don't think we stopped Wal-Mart (Wednesday) night."

Buckley added that some community members in the audience did approach him afterward, saying they wanted to support Wal-Mart but were too intimidated to get up and speak.

Commentary went on for close to two hours, pushing other items on the agenda to next month's board meeting. No additional presentations by Wal-Mart were scheduled with the board.

Community groups across America continue to join together to keep Wal-Mart out of their neighborhood until the company changes its business model. Today, newspapers highlighted community activism in cities including Knightdale, North Carolina, Grand Haven, Michigan, and Lancaster, Michigan. These groups are educating their fellow citizens about the poverty-level wages, unaffordable health care, traffic, crime, pollution, and noise that Wal-Mart would bring into their communities.

From the News & Observer (NC):

Several residents have formed Citizens for the Cessation of the Knightdale Supercenter, a group that is trying to persuade officials to oppose the Wal-Mart. Last week, more than 30 people attended a meeting organized by the group.

The group's three founders --Sherri Schultheiss, Rita Rakestraw and Paula Gavasto --spent much of the meeting telling attendees why they believe the Supercenter would not be a good addition to the community. The meeting began with a 20-minute clip from "Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Prices," a documentary that vilifies the retailer for its business practices.

Gavasto, who lives on Mingocrest Drive in Timber Ridge, said she objects to the Supercenter because of the store's size and proximity to homes, and because it's a Wal-Mart. Gavasto said since learning a Supercenter might be built behind her house, she's tried to find out as much as possible about the company. She said she has problems with the way Wal-Mart treats its employees and worries about the environmental impact the store will have.

"I don't shop at Wal-Mart anymore," she said.

Last night, in the Indiana city of Zionsville, city commissioners voted down Wal-Mart's plan to build a Supercenter in the community. Restaurant owner Kent Esra started a petition in opposition of Wal-Mart locating in Zionsville. The petition has about 5,000 signatures.

"Approving this Wal-Mart would probably be the single-biggest wallop this town ever had," resident Dirk Hendricks said last night.

Is your town also battling a Wal-Mart? Find the resources to help in your fight at http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/community/.

As part of our first year anniversary celebration, WakeUpWalMart.com released a new 8-minute grassroots video/DVD, entitled, “America’s Campaign to Change Wal-Mart.” Watch it now on our homepage!

The video is a key organizing tool for grassroots supporters. We will continue to use it to launch new monthly, local community meetings called WakeUps to reach out and recruit new supporters.

"America's Campaign to Change Wal-Mart" tells the story of WakeUpWalMart.com – how a movement caught fire and grew an unprecedented 210,000 supporters in its first year. It explains why Wal-Mart must change, and it highlights news clips from thousands of coordinated grassroots actions that have already forced Wal-Mart to respond.

But we have only just begun. WakeUpWalMart.com supporters across the country will keep fighting until Wal-Mart provides affordable health care to its workers, pays a living wage, respects our communities, and sets the standard for a better America.

Click here to watch the video and email it to your family and friends!

One year ago today, WakeUpWalMart.com launched an unprecedented grassroots effort to unite Americans from all walks of life in a campaign to change Wal-Mart. We started with one simple belief – the American people are the only force powerful enough to change Wal-Mart.

A year later, we are one of the fastest growing, broadest-based social movements in the country with over 210,000 supporters dedicated to changing Wal-Mart.

And change is exactly what we need. We cannot allow Wal-Mart or corporate America to make obscene profits, while not providing health care, driving down wages, shipping our jobs overseas, breaking child labor laws and even lobbying against our own national security. It is wrong and it stops with you.

As we mark our first year anniversary, we are more focused than ever on activating our supporters and coordinating our local actions. To help start this process, we are asking our supporters to host or attend a new community action campaign called “WakeUps.” WakeUps will be monthly meetings held on the first Wednesday of every month in cities across America. We will use the WakeUps to update you on the campaign, inform you about new campaign actions, and to invite members of your community to learn more about why Wal-Mart needs to change.

Tonight, WakeUpWalMart.com supporters will kick off the WakeUps in 14 different cities. Please sign up here to host your very own local WakeUpWalMart.com community group.

Our goal is to have 1 million Americans united to change Wal-Mart by 2008. One million Americans fighting to make Wal-Mart provide affordable health care, pay a living wage, protect American jobs, end child labor, and respect our communities.

We can do it and we have to!

Wal-Mart has combined the economic power of Standard Oil with the values of Big Tobacco and it threatens every middle class job in America. Please join us today in helping us spread our message to every local community in America.

Remember, this is not just a fight to change Wal-Mart, but a fight for what kind of America we want to live in. From the bottom of our hearts, we thank you for everything you have done this past year and we are inspired, passionate and more enthusiastic than ever about what we can do to change Wal-Mart and build a better America in the years to come.

Happy anniversary!

Community groups and local politicians all around the country are fighting to keep Wal-Mart from building or expanding unwanted stores in their neighborhoods. A sampling of today's news from Oregon, Massachusetts and Wisconsin:

From "Neighbors Say No To Proposed Wal-Mart" (OR):

The store that Wal-Mart wants to build in Gresham is about half the size of one it wasn't allowed to build in the city last year. But neighbors of the Wal-Mart proposed for 182nd Avenue and Powell Boulevard say their opposition hasn't shrunk.

Members of the Centennial, Hollybrook and Southwest neighborhood associations voted overwhelmingly against the new Wal-Mart proposal Monday night. Only two of about 250 people at the meeting raised their hands in favor of a store.

From "Mayor: Wal-Mart Isn't Welcome" (MA):

Mayor Joseph A. Curtatone has joined the growing ranks of elected officials to speak out against Wal-Mart’s employment practices, and to recognize its destructive effect on healthy local businesses, said a local union this week.

In a recent City Hall meeting with the Greater Boston Labor Council, Curtatone made clear that he would vigorously oppose any effort to put a Wal-Mart in Somerville.

“I want you to know that I will resist Wal-Mart here in Somerville, not only because of the company’s labor practices, but because of what they do to local merchants,” said Curtatone. “I’m not about to let Wal-Mart come in to wreak havoc on our local workforce and business community.”

From "Wal-Mart Opposition To Lay Out Its Side" (WI):

The group of residents who have serious questions about the potentially negative impact of a new Wal-Mart Supercenter will host a town hall meeting Thursday at 7 p.m. at VFW Memorial Hall in Hartford.

From the St. Louis Post-Dispatch:

A crowd spilled out the front door of City Hall on Wednesday night as residents
protested a proposed expansion of the city's Wal-Mart into a Supercenter.

"It's time for big-box retailers to start to do the right things by their employees," said David Cook, local coordinator of WakeUp Wal-Mart, a national organization that supports grassroots opposition to the international retailer.

Cook, who is also affiliated with the United Food and Commerce Workers Local No. 655, told aldermen that the retailer's wage and labor practices did not fit Wentzville's master plan.

He said Wentzville households had a median income of about $47,000. Because of Wal-Mart's low wages, he said, a household would need three full-time Wal-Mart employees in order to earn the wages to sustain that income. Additionally, the expansion would further hurt the city's plan to revitalize its downtown area, he said.

"I have a hard time figuring out how building a massive expansion to the Wal-Mart will help your downtown retailers," Cook said.

Aldermen were scheduled Wednesday to consider a revised site plan that proposed expanding the store by 70,000 square feet to 220,000 total square feet. But the board decided to table its decision until its next meeting, March 22, after Cook questioned whether the session violated the state open meetings act.

"No accommodations were made to allow the large public to attend this meeting," Cook said, noting that about 60 people were unable to enter the meeting room because it had reached fire safety capacity. "It is my belief all motions and recommendations made at this meeting could be deemed moot."

Missouri has 70 Wal-Mart Supercenters. If the expansion is approved, it would be the second Supercenter to arrive in St. Charles County this year. In January, the county's first Supercenter opened about five miles away, along Highway 40 in Lake Saint Louis.

Wal-Mart has had a store in Wentzville for more than a decade. In early 2002, it relocated to a 65-acre shopping center along Wentzville Parkway that was financed partly through a transportation development district. Shoppers in the district currently pay an additional quarter-cent sales tax on purchases to pay for $2.4 million in road improvements and enhancements in and around the center.

Cook said that subsidies and special treatment for big-box retail centers were unacceptable and that the city should have required Wal-Mart and other stores in the shopping center to pay their own way.

Resident Dana Hill was among those protesting the Wal-Mart expansion.

"We're paying to build their stores and roads that lead to their front doors," Hill said. "If you want low prices, then level the playing field. Give the community choices and fair competition, and it will prosper with economic growth."

Earlier today we profiled Nashua, NH residents and their successful fight to keep Wal-Mart out of their community. Now, we take a look at a new community battle in Pickerington/Violet Township, Ohio.

The following is a letter from a local organizer about the beginning of a grassroots campaign by local residents:

Last weekend, I went door-to-door with other WakeUpWalMart.com supporters to inform residents that Wal-Mart was trying to sneak its way into our community. While distributing 2,500 flyers on a rare sixty-degree winter day in Ohio, I greeted dozens of neighbors who were gardening and enjoying the sun. One person after another thanked me for spreading the word. Not a single person wanted Wal-Mart in our community.

The news created quite a buzz, and about 300 concerned citizens attempted to squeeze into the public hearing room with a maximum capacity of 71. The group spilled out into the parking lot.

Last Tuesday night Pickerington residents came together in a big way to fight the world’s biggest corporation.

Wal-Mart had tried to slink into Pickerington unnoticed by hiring TLG Development Company to rezone 106 acres of prime residential property for a store. Of course, TLG Development Company refused to disclose which retailers would occupy the space.

Prior to the start of the meeting, several residents approached a TLG developer demanding that she admit the retail space would be anchored by a Wal-Mart Supercenter. TLG finally admitted to the Wal-Mart, but not on public record. The meeting had to be tabled and has been rescheduled for March 23, 2006, 7:30 p.m. at the Senior Center in Pickerington.

As citizens of Violet Township and Pickerington, we have a right to speak out against a Wal-Mart store that will forever negatively influence our way of life. We are stepping forward to protect our property values, our work lives, our safety and our outstanding community.

We’re still fighting!

Tina
Columbus, Ohio

Earlier this week a real estate survey revealed strong opposition to Wal-Mart from local communities, with 63% of Americans surveyed saying they would oppose a Wal-Mart store if one were proposed in their community.

This weekend we profile two different communities who have recently fought Wal-Mart's race-to-the-bottom business model. First, we'll highlight the recent battle in Nashua, New Hampshire. Later today, we'll look at a local battle in Ohio...

In Nashua: Last month, Wal-Mart store #19 brought its plans to build a Super Wal-Mart to the Nashua Planning Board. All that stood between the giant of Bentonville and its new store was Nashua's concerned citizenship.

Wal-Mart pitted its armada of experts, lawyers, and limitless budget against the people of Nashua, only to lose the battle. Here is a profile of one town's story from The Hippo:

The Nashua Planning Board narrowly denied Wal-Mart’s site plan for a supercenter at the current site of Building #19 last month. After charging through Conservation Commission and Zoning Board challenges, Sam Walton’s retail giant looked like it was on its way into town.

Many consider the company just plain evil, but Wal-Mart would tell you they’re simply a business. After all, doesn’t Magneto have perfectly good reasons for fearing non-mutants? Is Lex Luthor really a villain, or just a multimillionaire hanging out with high school farm boys?

All that stood in Wal-Mart’s way was a group of concerned citizens who didn’t want their traffic snarled and their water polluted. They banded together and, with a supporting cast numbering in the hundreds, did battle for their way of life.

This is their story.

On Feb. 14th, 2006, members of the Waterbury Board of Education shot down a $2000 grant from Wal-Mart due to the chain's immoral business practices. From the Waterbury Connecticut Republican American:

"Do we need to sell our souls to get these grants? No," said board member John Theriault, one of four to vote against the request. Three commissioners voted in favor.

Not surprisingly, board members wished to distance themselves from a company whose image has been tarnished by, among other offenses, several violations of child labor laws.

"If Wal-Mart wants to improve its relationship with the community, it has ample opportunity to do so by complying with Connecticut law," added board member Ann Marie Sweeney. "You don't compromise your values because somebody waves the almighty buck."

Sweeney was referring to environmental and child labor violations at Connecticut Wal-Mart stores. The state fined three Wal-Mart stores in June for a series of child labor violations, including instructing minors to operate hazardous equipment and work past 10 p.m. In August, the company reached a $1.15 million settlement with state officials to resolve water management complaints at 22 stores.

Last weekend, over 1,000 faith leaders and community activists gathered in over 20 states to join together in Candlelight Vigils for Change. (Pictures from around the country are included below the fold).

Below is some of the program from the vigil in San Jose, CA with Reverend John Freeseman and Reverend Deborah T. Simon.

Leaders: Every religion stands for justice and speaks about light in the midst of darkness. This night we gather in the dark to light a candle for change.

Leaders: We call on Wal-Mart this holiday season to lift their workers and their families out of poverty level wages.

All: We light a candle for a change of heart in Lee Scott.

Leader: We call on Wal-Mart this holiday season to provide affordable health care to all their workers.

All: We light a candle for a change of heart in Lee Scott.

Leader: We call on Wal-Mart this holiday season to provide women and people of color opportunities for advancement.

All: We light a candle for a change of heart in Lee Scott.

Leader: We call on Wal-Mart this holiday season to honor children by abiding by child labor laws.

All: We light a candle for a change of heart in Lee Scott.

Leader: We call on Wal-Mart this holiday season to become an example of moral leadership in corporate America.

All: We light a candle for a change of heart in Lee Scott.

Leader: There is no better gift CEO Lee Scott and Wal-Mart could give to its workers, their families, and America than to do what is morally right and change for the better this holiday season.

All: We light a candle for a change of heart in Lee Scott.

For more pictures, visit our photo gallery.

Joining the ranks of Mayor Jim Bernard and Mayor Dan Klein, Lincoln, NE Mayor Coleen Seng has announced that she will veto plans for a development in her city if it includes a big box store such as Wal-Mart.

From the Lincoln Journal Star:

Lincoln Mayor Coleen Seng told the City Council Monday morning she will veto a development in northeast Lincoln if it includes a big box store — in this case, Wal-Mart — with more than 100,000 square feet.

Seng said while she supports the residential portion of the development, the city-county Comprehensive Plan designates that land as a “neighborhood center,” and a big box store does not meet her definition of a neighborhood center.

While neighborhood centers allow up to 250,000 total commercial space, Seng said that’s intended to mean a variety of stores and services, similar to development near South 27th Street and Nebraska 2, with a Russ’s, Shopko and other assorted stores.

“The proposal attempts to super-size and redefine a neighborhood center,” Seng told the council just hours before they’re scheduled to vote on the development. She had remained mum on the issue, although there was talk she would veto the project.

In and around Denver, Colorado, canvassers signed up nearly 900 new supporters to the WakeUpWalMart.com campaign last weekend. Volunteers and organizers went door-to-door and to local shopping centers talking with their neighbors about standing up to corporate greed and demonstrating the amazing power all Americans have to change Wal-Mart and America for the better.

The folks in Colorado were welcomed at the doors and into conversations with many who are starting to realize the high costs of Wal-Mart's morally bankrupt practices.

Adding in the Colorado totals from the weekend, we are now quickly approaching our goal of reaching 150,000 supporters by the end of December. Can we reach 150,000 by the end of the week? Will you help:

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/friends

This past Monday, there was a Town Hall Meeting and Hearing held in Stoughton, Wisconsin that was sponsored by Stoughton Forward, the citizen group leading the fight against Wal-Mart. About 80 people turned out on a bitterly cold night, including 3 of the city's 12 alders. Stoughton Forward had to sponsor the meeting because the city refused to do so.

At the heart of the discussion and controversy is a request for the city to annex 185 acres of land that could eventually include another Wal-Mart Supercenter in Wisconsin, and 40 acres of other commercial development as well as 1,000 homes and condominiums. This overly ambitious project, flys in the face of any reasonable and planned growth, and it would threaten Stoughton's beautiful downtown business district which has spent great amounts of money and time on improvements over the past 20 years.

Now there is another wrinkle. A concerned group of citizens has raised possible ethical conflicts of interest on the city council. It has asked that 2 alders, David McKichan and Paul Lawrence excuse themselves from further voting, or explain to citizens why they do not have a conflict of interest.

In the case of Mr. McKichan, he owns and operates a construction firm that builds and remodels homes in and around Stoughton. Mr. Lawrence on the other hand, works for one of the largest real estate developers in the Stoughton area and has sold real estate for years.

If the mayor of Stoughton, Helen Johnson tries to avoid dealing with this issue prior to the next vote, it would be a severe betrayal of the public trust

The city council is scheduled to hold its next vote on the land annexation next week Tuesday, December 13th. If the land annexation passes, Wal-Mart will be a few giant steps closer to getting another Supercenter. Concerned members of the community are expected to pack the meeting. Stay tuned!

Tom Boese is a Wisconsin Field Producer for Brave New Films

Here's a roundup of articles from today about communities all over the country fighting to keep Wal-Mart out. For more on what you can do to protect your community from the negative impacts of Wal-Mart, visit our Community Fights section.

Murfreesboro, TN:

A battle is brewing in Murfreesboro, where many residents say there's no need for a third Wal-Mart stores.

Murfreesboro may get a third Wal-Mart Supercenter. Monday night was a chance for the planners to make their case, but for many residents, the verdict was already in.

It wasn't supposed to be a public hearing, but the neighbors who crowded a Murfreesboro school band room found other ways to make their voices heard.

"It's a chance for people to see what the designers are doing so that when we do have public hearing they'll know about which they speak,” said Murfreesboro Planning Director Joseph Aydelott.

“I moved here because it's a nice neighborhood. I think Wal-Mart will have a negative impact,” said Murfreesboro Resident, Anna Grupke.

Kilmarnock, VA:

A banner flapping above state Route 3 lets travelers know that Kilmarnock is celebrating its 75th year, but town merchants are beginning to wonder if their days are numbered.

Word that Wal-Mart might be coming to town is spreading door-to-door, encouraging fears that the era of small-town retailing on the Northern Neck may be drawing to a close.

"Besides dropping a bomb on Main Street, I can't think of a better way of destroying the town," said Bill Smith, chairman of the Lancaster County School Board. Smith also sells baseballs, bats, fishing lures and other sports gear at his store in the heart of town.

Montevideo, ND:

City council members in Montevideo took no action on requests to put the brakes on a proposal by Wal-Mart to build a superstore.

Instead, they approved a motion at their meeting on Monday that supports a proposal to re-zone property on the eastern edge of the community that is to be acquired by Wal-Mart for the store from agricultural to highway commercial use.

Council members declined to take action on a proposal by a variety of business owners in the community to place a limit on the size of new retail construction in the community.

They also took no action on a request by the business owners to place a moratorium on large retail development to allow time to study the impact of the Wal-Mart proposal.

“A lot of people will be hurt by another big box,” said Joel Olson, manager of the Country Market grocery store in Montevideo.

Midland, GA:

Midland resident Rebecca Shepard said she finds Lawrenceville to be a "soulless strip mall" of an Atlanta suburb where you can't tell where the Gwinnett County town begins or ends.

"Gwinnett is a mess," added Anne Webb, formerly of Cumming, Ga. "We don't want Gwinnett."

Shepard said afterward that Monday's meeting didn't change her mind about Wal-Mart.

"My main concern is not just traffic," she said. "'I think the traffic issues are significant and of concern, but my main concern is about smart growth, about abandoning the core of the city, about the number of abandoned buildings."

This just in from WakeUpWalMart.com leaders in Milwaukee:

We were thrilled with excellent turn-out and media coverage for our two screenings of “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price” on Wednesday. At the Oriental Theater in Milwaukee, over 300 people showed up for 227 seats. The local FOX and CBS affiliates filmed extensive pieces for their evening news. A Wal-Mart Public Relations person came and identified himself to one of the news crews. He took one look at the huge crowd standing in line, and when asked for comments, he told the reporters "I have nothing to say" and quickly left the theater.

Of the 300 people in attendance, 150 had pre registered on the Internet and the rest had responded to an intensive advertising effort. Our community coalition partners who have fought side by side with us to stop Wal Mart in site fights were also a great help in spreading the word. The Sierra Club, Wisconsin Citizen Action, Milwaukee Clean Clothes Campaign, Faith Community for Worker Justice, Save American Manufacturing Now and numerous local unions helped drive up the interest. We were able to squeeze in 270 people which meant many stood through the entire show. Nearly 70 people were turned away, but each had a listing of additional screening sites and dates.

The second film screening was held in Kenosha and drew an attendance of 85, including a large contingent of Student Democrats from the local high school.

-Dan Welch and Brian Romanowich

It was pouring down rain on a windy November Tuesday night in Michigan. I walked into the basement of St. John's Episcopal Church in Royal Oak, Michigan (right outside of Detroit) expecting a small crowd to make the trek to the movie screening of "Wal-Mart the High Cost of Low Price" in such treacherous weather.

Instead, I was amazed at the unbelievable turn out. The church basement was packed with hundreds of concerned citizens who came out to the Human Rights Film Festival sponsored by many local Michigan groups, including the Interfaith Committee on Workers Issues and local WakeUpWalMart.com leaders. This is just one example of the fantastic events happening all across the country this week.

On Monday in Atlanta, Georgia over 600 people attended a movie screening, over 550 in Syracuse, New York, 300 plus in Oklahoma City, more than 300 in Boston, 125 in Torrington, Connecticut, and close to 100 in Sioux Falls, South Dakota. Hundreds of thousands of people are watching the movie this week and are signing up to take action with the campaign in the coming months.

And it's not just movie screenings. WakeUpWalMart.com leaders just finished a rally in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania with other local groups. Last Friday, we teamed up with student leaders and professors at Penn State for a Wal-Mart Teach-In and local rally.

Perhaps there are still movie screenings or other events going on later this week in your community. Please visit the following link to find an event near you and RSVP today:

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/ucp/findevents.html

From the Morning Journal in Ohio, we learn that the community of Lorain has won a terrific battle against Wal-Mart. A small community coalition called the West Side Preservation Group put $2,700 into the effort, while Wal-Mart's local front group raised more than $151,000.

This story reminds me of the quote "never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world. Indeed, it is the only thing that ever has."

Congratulations to the citizens of Lorain, OH for not backing down and letting their voice be heard.

Voters rejected city council's redistricting of 37 acres along Cooper Foster Park Road by more than 2,500 votes, according to unofficial results from the Lorain County Board of Elections.

''The people believe that Wal-Mart's not good for Lorain,'' said Gerald Phillips, attorney of the West Side Preservation Group, an organization that opposed the development. ''It's a great day for the underdog, in a David vs. Goliath battle. The little guy won.''

For strategies, tactics, and the tools you need to lead a successful campaign to stop Wal-Mart from destroying your community, visit our "Community Fights" section:

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/community/

I just got back from one of the 102 Halloween Candy Fundraisers we had across the country today. Over 20 WakeUpWalMart.com volunteers and children met in Bowie, Maryland at Wal-Mart Store #1893. We passed out literature on Wal-Mart's health care crisis and this week's leaked memo. We also did some grassroots fundraising to help raise money to provide health care for Wal-Mart workers who have none.

The most amazing part of the day, aside from raising a considerable amount of money and handing out over 1,000 flyers, was the response we received from Wal-Mart customers. I was actually shocked at the overwhelmingly positive response - customers told me they agreed with what we are doing and asked what action they could take. Many customers talked about the tax burden they are facing because of Wal-Mart's health care crisis, others said they had heard about the campaign and wanted to get involved, and many had just started to learn the real truth hidden behind Wal-Mart's PR machine.

The only people who didn't welcome us were the managers, as you might expect. Seems they didn't want their customers or employees to know the truth, to know that top level executives have a new health care motto: "Unhealthy Need Not Apply." Fortunately, we have First Amendment rights in this country. Fortunately, our grassroots campaign cannot be silenced.

We'll update you throughout the weekend about other actions across the country. Stay tuned to learn more about upcoming actions as part of our Holiday Campaign. This is merely the beginning of much, much more to come!

From The Cleveland Plain Dealer:

Every attempt to increase the wage since then has sputtered. Now, under pressure from fed-up workers, cities are beginning to act on their own.

Boston, San Francisco and 128 other cities have enacted living-wage laws, more than 80 of them in the past five years.

Most of the laws guarantee that city contractors and vendors pay workers at a minimum level -- a wage they can live on.

On Election Day, Oberlin could become the sixth and smallest city in Ohio to take action. Cleveland, Toledo, Cincinnati, Dayton and Lakewood all have passed such laws since 2000.

Opponents charge that the Oberlin proposal is nothing more than an attempt to keep Wal-Mart out of town.

The retailer, criticized nationwide for low pay and benefits, plans to build one of its super centers at Ohio 58 and Ohio 20, a store opponents say would decimate shops in the city's historic downtown a few miles away.

In July, Jim Bernard, Mayor of Milwaukie, sent us a letter that he had sent to the Mayor of a neighboring city, expressing his hopes that a plan to build a Wal-Mart in Milwaukie would not succeed.

Here is an update on that proposed Wal-Mart, from the AP:

City officials in Milwaukie are hoping three schools will join to buy nearly eight acres to create a college campus and scuttle plan for a Wal-Mart on the site.

The plan would have Portland State University, Clackamas Community College and Oregon Institute of Technology buy the land from owner Howard Dietrich Junior.

The Wal-Mart proposal has sparked protest from southeast Portland residents who say it would hurt local businesses.

While Wal-Mart is busy planning their super-secret public relations spin campaign, grassroots leaders all across the country are busy telling their communities the real facts about Wal-Mart. In the past two days alone, three different Wal-Mart proposals have been shot down because of leaders like you, taking your concerns about the harmful effects of Wal-Mart to your community. Here is a sampling of news articles that can tell the story:

Monroeville, PA

Grass-roots organizers can take much of the credit for persuading Monroeville council to reject a proposed Wal-Mart store. But even Hurricane Katrina played a role.

Opponents overcame Wal-Mart's impressive array of consultants, professional studies and offers of financial assistance to sway council. Looming over the deliberations were notions of stewardship of the land and governmental responsiveness to the public -- principles that have been brought to the fore by the disaster on the Gulf Coast.

In a vote just before midnight on Tuesday, council rejected Wal-Mart proposals 5-2.

Avondale, AZ

Relentless resident opposition pushed the developers of a proposed Avondale Wal-Mart to pull out.

Kitchell Development Co. withdrew its request to rezone the land, at the northwestern corner of Avondale Boulevard and Van Buren Street.

It's not uncommon for some developers to scrap plans for Wal-Mart stores when facing overwhelming public opposition, said Keith Morris, a spokesman for Bentonville, Ark.-based Wal-Mart Stores Inc., the world's largest retailer.

Voorhees, NJ:

Plans for a Wal-Mart at an existing mall in Voorhees, N.J., were withdrawn, the developer said Wednesday.

Instead, Pennsylvania Real Estate Investment Trust said it will revamp the Echelon Mall by renaming it Voorhees Town Center and adding 200,000 square feet of "lifestyle" retail space and 450 housing units, including condominiums and apartments.

For tools, strategies, and to discuss your local Wal-Mart efforts with others in your area, visit our "Community First" section today:

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/community

Yesterday, we learned from The Oregonian that Wal-Mart is appealing the denial by the city of their plans to build a store in Gresham, OR. The following was sent in to us from Javon Gilmore, campaign coordinator for the community group Gresham First.

Today Wal-Mart filed an appeal of the City Planner’s decision to deny a permit application for the proposed site at 182nd & Powell. Type II appeals are heard by a Hearings Officer, and the local process must be completed no later than October 29, 2005. Further appeal would be brought before the State Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA).

While it is disappointing that the hard work by the City Planner in preparing a decision is not acknowledged by Wal-Mart, we have reviewed their development history and have been preparing for the appeal. Various concerns exist regarding the suitability of this site, and we are confident that the Hearings officer will uphold the initial ruling.

NEXT STEPS
Our land use attorney, Chris Cook, will coordinate efforts during this phase of the process. Greenlight Engineering will also provide testimony of traffic impact findings and recommendations. Fundraising will continue to ensure the best possible legal defense of the land use concerns and zoning violations. Strategic details will be discussed at our next meeting (time and place to be announced later in the week).

FINDING A SOLUTION
The current proposal has raised concerns regarding the health and well being of our region’s economy, workers and community livability. Unfortunately, these factors are not currently protected by our City Planning and Development code.

Gresham First recommends the development of zoning regulations that would require retail projects over a certain size to undergo an independent economic impact review, to help make informed decisions about our future with objective information on the potential costs of large scale retail developments, without using an outright ban. Many communities are adopting land-use policies that restrict the growth of predatory business, support downtown revitalization and create an environment where locally owned business can thrive. Applicants who demonstrate they will provide an economic benefit to our community should be allowed to build.

PLEASE VOICE YOUR OPINION!
Please help protect the long-term health of our community by urging the Mayor and City Council, as well as Metro Councilors and State leadership for “big-box” restrictions. Please visit our website at greshamfirst.org/letters.htm

RUMMAGE SALE #3
The hard work involved with planning and executing our rummage sale on August 20 contributed to the success both as a fundraiser and a recycling festival! Many thanks are due to volunteers who gave up their weekend (and backs) for the cause.

STAY POSITIVE & INVOLVED!
Our concerns were validated by City staff in “Round One” and the hard work and planning for “Round Two” will ensure that the Planner’s decision will be upheld. Congratulations to everyone who helped achieve our campaign goals for this phase of the process.

There have been a number of articles over the past few days about citizens fighting to stop Wal-Mart from destroying their way of life. Here are a few from around the country:

Plattsmouth, NE:

About 150 people gathered Thursday night to watch the city's Planning Commission unanimously recommend against a rezoning request that would allow Wal-Mart to build near the city's southern gateway.

One by one, commission members said Wal-Mart's request to rezone land in the Osage Ranch subdivision to general commercial was out of whack with the city's comprehensive plan. The plan calls for low- to moderate-density residential development in that area.

Craig, CO:

The announcement was made Friday that the Wal-Mart Corporation has plans to open a supercenter in Craig, and by Monday morning Cris Criswell was circulating a petition in opposition.

The fifth-generation Moffat County native doesn't know whether he'll be able to stop plans he think will severely affect existing businesses, but he's going to try.

"I just think it's really, really bad for the community," Criswell said. "I think it'll wreck a lot of stores. I think the downtown area will be just a ghost town if Wal-Mart comes to town."

Northridge, CA:

Stymied in previous efforts to block plans for a Wal-Mart, neighbors hope to use a recent state Court of Appeal ruling and new environmental studies to derail the controversial project.

Residents fear the 156,000-square-foot store proposed for Nordhoff Street and Tampa Avenue - across from Northridge Fashion Center - will trigger massive traffic jams in an already congested area and put some retailers out of business.

Critics also note that Wal-Mart already operates three stores within seven miles of the site and question the need for another.

To learn more about what your community can do to keep your community "Wal-Mart Free," visit our "Community Fights" section:

http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/community/

From The Detroit News:

Wal-Mart has been run out of Independence Township -- for the time being.

The news came just weeks after township activists launched a campaign asking elected officials for a special tax to ward off unwanted development projects.

Ballot language for the proposed legal defense fund, a one-time half-mill tax, is awaiting legal opinions from its attorneys and the Michigan Townships Association.

In the meantime, Township Supervisor Dave Wagner brokered a deal with Orco Investments to drop plans for two big-box stores and move forward with a mainly residential project."Wal-Mart is not happening. No big-box is happening on that property at all," Wagner said Tuesday before a crowded township board meeting.

After a thorough review by city staff, with input from the applicant, neighborhood groups, and consultation by an independent transportation-consulting firm, the Wal-Mart proposal for 182nd and Powell has been denied by the City of Gresham. The press release is available on our website at www.greshamfirst.org

Gresham First was organized to advocate responsible development, and our current mission has been to raise public awareness of the proposed application and encourage citizen participation in the public process. We are proud of our accomplishments in educating neighbors, raising funds for expert assistance, and contributing to a record-breaking number of comments received during the public review process.

Many thanks are due to members of the community who have contributed time, energy, and hard-earned money to our campaign. As we celebrate a victory during this phase of the permit application process, we must also look ahead to the next steps. Wal-Mart now has 12 calendar days to file an appeal, which would be heard by the Hearings Officer. The local appeal process must be completed no later than October 29, 2005. Further appeal would be brought before the State Land Use Board of Appeals (LUBA).

Fundraising efforts have been crucial in providing an independent traffic consultant, whose thorough review of existing traffic conditions and the proposed development impacts were submitted to the City Planner during the public comment period. Traffic concerns were the basis for denial, as recommended by Greenlight Engineering and the consultant hired by the City, DKS.

Our land use attorney, Chris Cook, will handle both the City and State appeal hearings if necessary. Fundraising will continue to ensure the best possible legal defense of the land use concerns and zoning violations. Greenlight Engineering will also provide testimony of traffic impact findings and recommendations during any hearing.

Our next event is this Saturday, August 20 as we host ANOTHER RUMMAGE SALE, this time at Pleasant Valley Grange on Foster Road. We are still seeking goods and volunteers to help make this event a success. Please email greshamfirst@hotmail.com or call Javon at 503.756.7206 to schedule pickup of your items, or to volunteer for a shift. We will be at the Grange starting at 4pm on Friday taking donations and setting up. The sale will be held Saturday from 9-4, and we must clear out by Saturday night. Any help would be greatly appreciated!

Thanks again for your support, and enjoy the success.

Javon Gilmore
Gresham First Campaign Coordinator

Over the weekend, there were a number of news stories about communities across the country who are fighting to protect themselves against the negative impact of Wal-Mart. Here is a sampling of the stories:

Central Point, OR - Article

New York City - Article

Newport News, VA - Article

Independence Township, MI - Article

If your community is currently fighting against a proposed Wal-Mart, or if you already have a Wal-Mart and want to organize and educate your community about Wal-Mart's negative impact on your community, visit our new community forum, where you can discuss all Wal-Mart related issues with others in your community:

http://forum.wakeupwalmart.com

From DailyPress.com, we learn that Wal-Mart has pulled its proposal for a Supercenter in Newport News, Virginia, citing overwhelming community resistance:

Blistering community opposition forced retail giant Wal-Mart today to yank its proposal to build a superstore on 30 acres near Harpersville Road in Newport News.

"It's over with," Mayor Joe Frank said after a morning meeting with company representatives. "They felt it was just not a project they wanted to pursue. You don't put off the community you want to do business in."

The request for a zoning change to permit the massive store with a grocery, gas station and pharmacy -- to be open around the clock -- was formally withdrawn in a letter faxed to the city in the early afternoon.

Community hostility to the project put city council approval in doubt, and Wal-Mart officials "saw the writing on the wall, that the citizens were so opposed," Frank said. "They didn't think they could win, so why antagonize the community?"

Visit our new Community Fights section of our site to learn more on how you can protect your community from the negative impact of a Wal-Mart.

You can also visit our brand new forum to find others in your community who are working to change Wal-Mart or stop a proposed Wal-Mart in their community.

To read the rest of the article about Newport News, click here.

This article from the Boston Herald leaves one to think, when Wal-Mart says that they support the communities that they have stores in, what do they actually mean by support?

Lynch and his wife Karen, who gave birth to the four boys on Monday, want to expand their small ranch-style house to make room for their growing clan. Their one-story home has two tiny bedrooms and a mere 750 square feet of living space.

In order to expand their home, the Lynches would have to increase the size of their septic system.

But state law prohibits them from expanding their septic system because they live within 400 feet of a public drinking water well. Avon officials denied their request.

But there was one other solution: hooking up to the sewer system of a nearby Wal-Mart, which has a line running from the store to the Brockton sewer system.

The couple, who spent $2,700 on an engineer to design a septic system, asked the giant retail chain for help. Wal-Mart said no.

Wal-Mart was researching the situation but didn't have an immediate response yesterday to why it rejected the request, according to a spokesman.

``I always heard they do things for the community but I guess not this community,'' Chris Lynch said.

Avon Health Agent Barry Perkins said the town probably would have approved the family's addition if Wal-Mart had given the OK.

``We are sympathetic to this problem,'' Perkins said.

To read the entire Boston Herald article, click here.

From WNYT in Albany, NY:

David Stern is concerned, partly because he lives right across the street. But he's also worried that the big box store could turn life up side down in the entire community. That's why he's running for town supervisor as an Independence Party candidate.

"Now I’m stepping up to listen to the interests of the citizens,” Stern said.

Republican J.D. Wood and Democrat Patty Southworth feel the same. They're both Town Council candidates.

All three have come together on the issue to try to defeat the Republican incumbents in a town that's two to one Republican.

To read the rest of the WNYT article, click here.

There have been a few news stories over the past couple of days describing some of Wal-Mart's new tactics as they try to enter into communities that don't want them there. Among these tactics are full page advertisements in local newspapers as well as glossy fliers mailed out to residents' homes.

But Wal-Mart's big-money tactics do not guarantee them a victory, as witnessed in a couple of other articles. For example, a planning comission in Monroeville, PA agreed to postpone consideration for a proposed Wal-Mart until Wal-Mart provides more details on how it will manage traffic and stormwater.

A group in Portsmouth Township, MI recently filed a lawsuit, seeking to have a judge overrule the Planning and Zoning Board's "arbitrary and capricious" approval of a plan for a proposed Wal-Mart and issue an injunction preventing the construction of the store.

There are community fights like these going on every day across the country. Today, we are launching a new tool to help communities work together and communicate with each other as you try to protect your communities from the ills of Wal-Mart.

Please visit our brand new Wake-Up Forum today and get in touch with other Wake-Up Wal-Mart supporters in your area and all across the country:

http://forum.wakeupwalmart.com

From The Neighborhood Retail Alliance in NYC comes the following:

The Post also reports that the company has yet to find suitable sites (disingenuously, we might add). As Mia Masten says, “We still don’t have a site … But we are still interested,” This is, of course, poppycock since the Richmond Valley location on S.I. is very much theirs and the developer has been trying to negotiate a site plan that accommodates the views of City Planning as well as Wal-Mart. In typical big box fashion, neither the store nor the developer wants to publicly be identified with the site before they are ready to go full speed ahead.

To read the rest of this article, click here.

It's Wal-Mart's big money vs. the community again in a story from NY1:

Wal-Mart isn't giving up its fight to open up a store in New York City – and the retail giant is taking its campaign straight to the public.

According to the New York Post, Wal-Mart plans to spend hundreds of thousands of dollars on newspaper, radio and television ads aimed at gaining support for building a store somewhere in the five boroughs.

The ads tout local landmarks in each borough - then go on to say that the only thing missing is "everyday low prices."

Earlier this year, Wal-Mart scrapped plans to build a store in Rego Park, Queens.

In addition, plans to build a store on Staten Island have already met opposition.

In an article from the Times Reporter (OH), we learn that Wal-Mart is trying to almost halve the amount of property taxes they pay for a store in New Philadelphia. As the article mentions, about 70% of the property taxes go to the school district, meaning Wal-Mart is trying to leave this school district with significantly less funding. So much for Wal-Mart being a good corporate citizen. Here is an excerpt:

Representatives of Wal-Mart again are asking Tuscarawas County officials to dramatically lower the amount of property taxes the company pays for its New Philadelphia retail store.

The New Philadelphia City School District is challenging the request, which is similar to one made by Wal-Mart for tax year 2001.

An attorney for Wal-Mart asked the county Board of Revision Monday to lower the value of the store to $4,910,000, according to county Auditor Matt Judy, who is a board member.

The county lists a fair market value for the property at 223 Bluebell Dr. NW at $8,642,910. That value was determined as of Jan. 1, 2004, during the reappraisal process, and taxes are based on 35 percent of the market value.

Wal-Mart currently pays $113,712 annually in property taxes. Generally, about 70 percent of that amount, or $79,598, goes to the school district, Judy said. State law requires any school district that faces a loss of at least $17,500 annually to be notified.

To continue reading this article, click here.

Faced with the prospect of a Wal-Mart just outside of our downtown our Council voted unanimously to send a letter to the City of Portland opposing the construction of a Wal-Mart. We have spent years and millions as a region with the understanding that a transit center for light rail would be built on that site, the construction of a Wal-Mat would eliminate this potential.

We have also spent millions working to redevelop our downtown and open up our riverfront with the hope someday of attracting a niche grocery store and retail outlets. This plan would severely reduce the potential to attract and develop our downtown.

Jim Bernard
Mayor of Milwaukie, OR

Here is the letter I sent to the Mayor of Portland:

Dear Mayor Potter,

The City of Milwaukie, after hearing from many residents from Milwaukie and Portland, has several concerns regarding the proposed construction of a Wal-Mart store at Southeast Tacoma Street and McLoughlin Boulevard. The facility would be built on the border between our two cities adjacent to neighborhoods and streets we hold in common. This particular site has been identified as a future light rail station and park and ride to serve the transit needs of both our cities. We have all invested time and money in working with our citizens to gain local support for these transit projects. In addition, we have been studying and planning for the expansion of industrial uses in the area adjacent to the proposed Wal-Mart site. These plans will be jeopardized by this proposed project.

The City of Milwaukie has been working very hard to rebuild its downtown and protect and enhance our taxpayer investments in this community. As part of revitilization efforts in our city, we are researching the opportunities of attracting a full-service grocery store in our downtown along with mixed commercial, small business and residential developments. A Wal-Mart superstore sited just a mile from our downtown at Tacoma Street and McLoughlin Boulevard will have serious consequences toward those efforts. If businesses must compete with Wal-Mart, they'll choose to locate elsewhere.

The City of Portland and the City of Milwaukie have recently completed a collaborative multi-year and multi-million dollar reconstruction of Johnson Creek Boulevard. A significant portion of Wal-Mart shoppers would travel the Boulevard and other neighborhood streets adding to the already overburdened capacity of those residential roads. In particular, the Ardenwald and Sellwood Neighborhoods would experience first-hand the negative impacts of increased traffic volumes, diminished neighborhood livability, reduced property values, and displaced local businesses.

The City of Milwaukie is open for business, even big-box business, when they are remotely located from our downtown. Our goal for our City is to create a thriving and lively downtown core for our community through the establishment of smaller, locally owned and operated businesses.

Thank you, Mayor Potter, for your prompt attention to this matter. We are ready and willing to work with you to address this threat to neighborhood livability and small business development in our communities. Your support is greatly appreciated.

Sincerely,

Jim Bernard
Mayor

Recently, the Washington State Education Association (WEA) adopted a policy that teachers would no longer reimburse school employees for charitable items purchased from Wal-Mart (unless Wal-Mart is the only retail operator in their area). The WEA charity offers an easy way for school employees to help students who come to class without coats, jeans, shoes, boots or other basic school supplies.

Retail workers and others in Washington state have praised the WEA for its leading role in educating the public about Wal-Mart's failing record for our children, our communites and our country. United Food and Commercial Workers leaders presented the WEA Children’s Fund with $6,500 in contributions at WEA’s Board of Directors meeting on June 10 in support of the charity’s stand against Wal-Mart’s harmful employee practices.

UFCW International Vice President Geralyn Lutty said, “The policy adopted by WEA regarding not providing reimbursement for items bought at Wal-Mart is commendable. We know that Wal-Mart is not good for Washington and threatens the future of all our children.”

In addition to the decision by the Children’s Fund board to discontinue payments for Wal-Mart purchases, WEA members at the Association’s annual convention in May voted overwhelmingly to recommend that school employees do not shop at the retail giant.

The National Education Association (NEA) Executive Committee has also recently endorsed the Wake-Up Wal-Mart campaign, stating that "the company has drained billions of dollars from public coffers -- money that could otherwise fund schools."

It is time to send Wal-Mart Back-to-School. To sign the pledge, click here.

Dave Schmitz, UFCW Local 1001 Pres, Sharon McCann, UFCW Local 1105 Pres, and Geralyn Lutty presenting the checks on behalf of all of the locals to Dave Scott, Vice Pres of WEA at their Executive Board meeting.

What does Wal-Mart do when a community tells them they are not welcome? Well according to The Miami Herald, they hire an ad firm (coincidentally one of President Bush's ad firms) and blitz the community with campaign literature until they get their way:

Wal-Mart is using glossy color brochures in an effort to persuade hostile neighbors that they really do want to live next to a new Supercenter at the corner of Miramar Parkway and Flamingo Road.

The brochures were custom-made for Miramar by a Texas firm that has also worked on ad campaigns for President Bush.

So far in Miramar, hundreds of residents have turned out at city meetings to protest the proposed store, saying it would bring more traffic, and even attract crime and hurt property values. Homeowners have started an anti-Wal-Mart website and held a protest at the proposed site.

But the company's mailers tell a different story, promising a stronger tax-base, good jobs with benefits, and one-stop shopping for everything from groceries to garden supplies.

The glossy fliers show a smiling mother and daughter hugging, as the child's ponytail swings in the sunshine. An African-American father and son fishing. A senior couple embracing as the wife holds a flowerpot.

Wal-Mart will stop at nothing to continue their expansion. It was witnessed in Flagstaff, AZ, where Wal-Mart dumped hundreds of thousands of dollars into a campaign, which included using Nazi imagery to denigrate their opponents. And now it is seen in Florida. Arm yourselves with the facts, your community could be next.

An excellent op-ed from The Seattle Times about how to protect your community from the ills of Wal-Mart:

PORTLAND — Nothing I have written in the past three years has drawn the response of a Feb. 17, 2004 column deploring the Wal-Marting of America. I still get e-mails from people who have seen it on various Web sites, usually asking how to stop a Wal-Mart in their town.

My answer is simple: Organize.

It is possible to beat the Wal-Mart lawyers and shortsighted local politicians who see immediate property taxes but ignore the long-term flight of local businesses.

The Arkansas behemoth is having trouble right now in Oregon, where a combination of land-use laws, neighborhood activists and a few farsighted politicians are placing hurdles in the expansion path. Wal-Mart isn't on its knees, but it has some bloody shins.

More:

The key to opposition is organization on multiple fronts.

Neighborhood organization is essential. In the Portland area, each proposed Wal-Mart has generated Web-based neighborhood opposition, linked to other groups with similar issues. Petitions are circulated, rallies and fund raising planned. In Portland's Westmoreland neighborhood, the local True Value Hardware generated more than 500 signatures in less than two weeks, just from walk-in customers.

To continue reading this article, click here.

What is your community doing to keep Wal-Mart out?

From the AP:

CENTRAL POINT, Ore. (AP) — Just 24 hours after the state Land Use Board of Appeals upheld a city decision to reject plans for a new Wal-Mart store, the retail giant bought the proposed site.

"I have to believe the fact that Wal-Mart is willing to purchase the property at this stage of the game tells the community that they're willing to do whatever is necessary to be able to have a store there," said Portland land-use attorney Greg Hathaway, who is handling planning phases of the store.

A clerk for the Jackson County assessor's office confirmed that the $6.131 million sale for the 21-acre site was recorded about 3 p.m. Friday.

From an article in The Herald just sent in from a community leader in Washington State:

In a surprise anticlimax, the Wal-Mart controversy in Stanwood died on the vine. At the beginning of a much-anticipated City Council meeting Thursday night for a vote on a controversial Wal-Mart-inspired rezone, a late-arriving letter from developer Brent McKinley of Vine Street Group in Arlington cut off the debate.

Councilman Gil Powell read from McKinley's letter, which arrived at City Hall on Wednesday: "Please accept this letter as my formal withdrawal."

The council then pulled the issue off the agenda, thereby avoiding a vote on the matter.

By pulling out, McKinley cut short a rezone process initiated in November 2002 for a project first presumed to be a grocery store and strip mall on 23 acres at the northeast corner of Highway 532 and 72nd Avenue NW.

The proposal drew strong opposition - including a petition with more than 3,000 signatures - after McKinley revealed in a letter last fall that Wal-Mart was interested in the property. Opponents feared the world's largest retailer would drive out local businesses.

From This Week (OH):

Liberty Township-Powell Neighborhood Watch Foundation is celebrating a May 19 magistrate's ruling that the group can be a party to the federal lawsuit over a proposed Wal-Mart Supercenter.

Magistrate Judge Norah McCann King of the U.S. District Court -- Southern District of Ohio wrote that the foundation "is entitled to intervene ... when it demonstrates a legal interest in the subject matter of the pending action, establishes that disposition of the action may impair or impede its ability to protect that legal interest, and demonstrates that the existing parties to the action cannot adequately protect the proposed intervenor's interest."

Full article available here.

From Liza Featherstone's piece in The Nation yesterday:

Wal-Mart is famous for trying to circumvent local zoning regulations, but in Dunkirk, Maryland, the retailer got particularly creative. The small hamlet had a rule against stores larger than 75,000 feet--so the company proposed to build two Wal-Mart stores side by side. Fortunately, this bit of Amelia Bedelia literalism was emphatically rejected by a community outcry, and Wal-Mart backed down last week.

To read the full article, click here.

When the Jonquiere Wal-Mart closed because workers voted for Union representation, a group of protestors had a message for Wal-Mart:

From today's Washington Post:

Wal-Mart has abandoned plans for a controversial pair of side-by-side stores in Calvert County designed to skirt a local zoning ordinance limiting the size of big-box retail outlets.

The Bentonville, Ark.-based company said it was scrapping the unconventional proposal, which it had called one of the first arrangements of its kind in the country, in the face of widespread opposition from residents and elected officials.

Continue reading here.

From the Altus Times in Altus, OK:

Over the last two decades, Wal-Mart has marched through communities like Jackson County, Ga., and Jackson County, Oklahoma, putting many small businesses out of business. These were businesses that were part of the daily life of Altus and Jefferson, Ga., the county seat of Jackson County. These businesses were run by locals, employed locals, were covered by local newspapers and, yes, bought advertising in local media.

Then came the Arkansas equivalent of Gen. Sherman, putting mom and pop out of business and turning its nose up at local media. And it wasn't just a matter of advertising. If someone got involved in a fender bender in the Wal-Mart parking lot, employees and managers were absolutely forbidden to speak to a reporter...All reporters are to be referred to the Wal-Mart Media Office, which evidently hires people based on their ability to talk without saying anything.

Full article, which goes on to describe a letter written back to Lee Scott about abuse of local newspapers, is available here.

The Kansas Postal Workers Union passed a resolution supporting the "Love Your Mom, not Wal-Mart" campaign.

The delegates signed a large card with the pledge on it. The presidents of the Kansas, Oklahoma, and Nebraska Postal Workers Unions, as well as Cliff Guffey, Executive Vice President of the American Postal Workers Union, also signed the pledge.

The resolution, as well as some photos, are below the fold.

Photos courtesy of Christine Pruitt, the 2003-2005 KPWU state president and current Vice President for the Wichita Area Local (APWU 735):

Signing the card is C.J. "Cliff" Guffey, Vice President American Postal Workers Union. To his left is William J. Kaczor Jr., Director Health Plan.

Left to right, Marcia Standy (incoming) Kansas Postal Workers Union President; Jeff Deitrich, President Nebraska Postal Workers Union, Paula Jones, President Oklahoma Postal Workers Union.

Here is the resolution that was passed:

Whereas, Wal-Mart is the largest private employer in the world with over $10 billion in profits. Yet, Wal-Mart lowers our wages, ships our jobs overseas, and shifts their health care costs onto American taxpayers. We believe it's time for Wal-Mart to Wake Up and

Whereas, the Wake-Up Wal-Mart campaign is a grassroots campaign, initiated by the United Food and Commercial Workers with the goal of changing Wal-Mart by building local coalitions at every Wal-Mart in America and

Whereas, Wake-Up Wal-Mart launched a “Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart” campaign and

Whereas Mother’s Day is all about honoring our Moms. Unfortunately, Wal-Mart’s idea of honor and respect for women includes unequal wages, fewer promotions, and inadequate health care.

And, whereas Wal-Mart is currently involved in a gender discrimination lawsuit affecting more than 1.5 million women. The case is the largest class action lawsuit in U.S. history. The suit documents Wal-Mart’s systematic discrimination against women for lower pay and unequal promotion.

And whereas, Women earn from 5% - 10% less than men at Wal-Mart for the same work. This equates to nearly 40 cents less per hour for female hourly workers or nearly $5,000 less per year for female managers.

And whereas, Despite making up 72% of Wal-Mart’s hourly workforce, women only account for 33% of managers and only 15% of store managers.

Therefore be it resolved that the Kansas Postal Workers Union endorses the “Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart” campaign and therefore be it further resolved we join in the following pledge:

As a symbol of love and respect for my Mom, and all women across America, we pledge not to shop or buy any gifts for Mother’s Day at Wal-Mart.

Wal-Mart’s company-wide policy of discriminating against so many hard-working women is terribly wrong. We stand with all of the 1.5 million Wal-Mart women who are part of the largest gender discrimination lawsuit in U.S. history.

In our America, Wal-Mart should do better than pay women and mothers less than men for equal work.

In our America, Wal-Mart should do better than disrespect all women and mothers by providing them with poor pay, poor health care, and poor working conditions.

As the largest employer of women in America, Wal-Mart has a responsibility to do the right thing!

We can easily say that our mothers deserves better than Wal-Mart.

Until Wal-Mart changes for the better, I have one thing to say:

“Love Mom...Not Wal-Mart.”

Since we launched WakeUpWalMart.com, I have received dozens and dozens of emails from people who are working, either on their own or with community groups, churches, or other organizations, to keep Wal-Mart out of their town.

I've decided to devote a new section of the website to these groups, which I have begun to build. But I need your help. If you are involved in an effort to keep Wal-Mart out of your town, tell me (and all of us) about it in the comments section. Even if you are not directly involved, if you know of any such groups in your area, ask them to speak out here, or tell us what you know about them.

Feel free to include links to news articles, websites of community groups, personal stories, and anything else you feel like sharing. We want to add your story!

Looking forward to reading about what you are doing,

Brendan