Last Updated: Thursday, May 27, 2010
|
Last Updated: Thursday, May 27, 2010 |
|
newrules.org Independent America: Big Box Mart
Garth Brooks Parody
(walmartworkersrights.org) The Bully Of Bentonville How Wal-Mart Is Destroying
America (and the World), Slam-Dunking Wal-Mart, Death By Discount, Megamall On The Hudson « Big
Box Backlash
|
BIG BOX CAMPAIGNERS EMAIL Please send event information and announcements to Trina Tocco at trina.tocco@ilrf.org or (202) 347-4100, x103. The Big Box Campaigners Email is a regular update, compiled by the Big Box Collaborative, on campaigns, reports, and events. Please use these emails to spread information about your big box campaigning. The Big Box Collaborative is the hub for organizations seeking to fundamentally transform Wal-Mart and the other “big box” retail stores. The Collaborative includes organizations drawn from multiple sectors and focused on a variety of issues. It provides a space where organizations can develop shared demands and coordinate different campaign strategies. WEEKLY FEATURE: Wal-Mart Reputation Drops in New Study In this update you will find: U p c o m i n g . E v e n t s Big Box Campaign Environmental Group Coordinator Job Announcement Are you planning anything? W o r t h . a . L o o k Like Clock Work: Wal-Mart Faces 80 Class-actions, Most From Off-the-clock Allegations (Morning News) Home Depot Offers Recycling for Compact Fluorescent Bulbs (New York Times) State's highest court rules against big box voter initiative (KTUU) When Wal-Mart Moves In, Neighborhood Businesses Suffer. Right? (Washington Post) Supermarkets Failing to Adopt Sustainable Seafood Buying Practices: Report (Green Biz) India: Wal-Mart's Drug Connection (Huffington Post) R e s o u r c e s Carting Away the Oceans: How Grocery Stores are Emptying the Seas BigBox Toolkit: Countering Mega-Retailers - Rebuilding Local Businesses Wal-Mart Reputation Drops in New Study India: Impact of Organized Retailing on the Unorganized Sector Consensus Standards for Big Box Retailers Released Discounting Rights: Wal-Mart's Violation of US Workers’ Right to Freedom of Association Wal-Mart's Sustainability Initiative: A Civil Society Critique produced by 23 organizations G e t . I n v o l v e d & T a k e . A c t i o n Consumerist's "Worst Corporation in America" Vote Wal-Mart into the Corporate Hall of Shame! Tell TIAA-CREF to Put Pressure on Wal-Mart and Divest BBC Working Groups Trina Tocco The Stealth Campaign at the World Trade Organization to Preempt Local Control Over Land Use To download the entire report. http://www.citizen.org/documents/Zoning_Memo_Final.pdf As communities across the United States and elsewhere are increasingly successful in their effort to limit “big box” store expansion and destructive retail practices through transparent and accountable measures at the local level, Wal-Mart and other retailers have pursued rules at the World Trade Organization (WTO) which threaten to preempt, or at the very least chill, these local laws. These rules are part of the General Agreement on Trade in Services (GATS). In 1994, the United States committed retail and wholesale distribution, as well as the hotel and restaurant sectors, to the terms of the GATS, one of 17 Uruguay Round agreements enforced by the Geneva-based World Trade Organization (WTO). The GATS expansive “market access” rules are geared toward facilitating the entry of foreign service providers into the U.S. market by incorporation or acquisition of U.S. firms. These GATS rules forbid limits on the number of services suppliers, as well as measures that would reduce the value of a service transaction or limit the number of employees. Policies containing economic needs tests, like that in the city of Los Angeles for very large retail operations, are explicitly forbidden. Unless the United States takes action to fix this problem in the current round of negotiations, local governments could see challenges to state and local land use laws brought before WTO tribunals, which are empowered to authorize trade sanctions against countries that refuse to conform their domestic policies to WTO dictates. Across the country, state and local officials are working to put laws in place to protect their communities, their environment, their wage base and tax dollars by putting land use limits on “big box” retailers, as well as retail chains and other development projects they deem destructive to the community or the environment or out of step with local needs and planning. Among the local laws threatened by GATS rules are those that impose: size and height restrictions on big box stores; limits on hours of operation; economic needs tests before stores can be approved; and limits on development to protect the environment or protect historic and cultural sites. Trade negotiators are now working behind closed doors to add more service sectors and expand the scope of the GATS rules even further. This WTO expansion of power means a group of trade officials, rather than democratically elected policy-makers, will be making decisions about local laws that affect our communities. Write to your governor and request that your state be “carved out” from any GATS commitments implicating zoning and land use laws (including retail distribution, wholesale distribution, hotel and restaurant sectors). Ask that your state be carved out from future GATS commitments as well; Contact your Member of Congress, and request that WTO GATS commitments be clarified to exempt existing and future zoning and land use laws. For sample materials or for more information, see www.tradewatch.org or contact Saerom Park at 202.454.5127 or spark@citizen.org
Trip Generation
Characteristics of Free-Standing Discount Supercenters WALMART Real
Wage and Turnover Study November 2005 warnwalmart.org/fileadmin/WARNstorage/walmart_study_-_v2__1_.pdf What Do We Know About Wal-Mart? An Overview of Facts and Studies for New Yorkers As Wal-Mart continues to expand across New York State, growing attention is being focused on the company’s employment practices and local economic impact. In this policy report, we provide a comprehensive overview of the available information on Wal-Mart’s wages and health benefits, compliance with workplace laws, cost to the taxpayer, and impact on local economies. http://www.brennancenter.org/programs/downloads/aboutwalmart.pdf Shameless: How Wal-Mart Bullies Its Way Into Communities Across America As the world’s largest corporation, Wal-Mart behaves shamelessly in the way it forces itself on American communities. Its aggressive bullying of American communities occurs because Wal-Mart’s growth is central to its business model; it has to grow to sustain its profits, $10 billion in 2004 alone. Analysts have noted that Wal-Mart’s growth efforts are nothing short of a "massive undertaking." This special report reviews Wal-Mart’s bullying tactics through a series of local case studies. Using highly publicized examples like Inglewood, California and Chicago, Illinois alongside less well-known stories from cities like Stoughton, Wisconsin and Lewiston, Maine, the findings reveal patterns: Wal-Mart’s use of local front groups, their reliance on a SWAT team of corporate mouthpieces, aggressive litigation tactics, outright bait-and-switches, and a trail of broken promises. Today, as more American communities rise to fight back against the retail giant, this report offers a strategic map of the company’s tactics. This report is a tool for those who share our belief that the power of this wealthy corporation can be put to better use, and that American communities must be allowed to decide for themselves how best to sustain their vibrant economies court documents BAKERSFIELD REPORT Wal-Mart
Opponents Hit CEQA Home Run An appellate court has overturned separate environmental impact reports and project approvals for two Bakersfield shopping centers with Wal-Mart supercenters as anchors. The court ruled that the city must address the potential for the projects to cause urban decay, consider the combined impacts of the two shopping centers, and correlate the projects' air quality impacts to effects on human respiratory health. The published opinion - the first regarding a Wal-Mart supercenter - appears to be a home run for Wal-Mart opponents, who are making similar arguments in numerous locations. Attorney Steven Herum, who represented a group of project opponents called Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control, said the court "correctly identifies the fact that Wal-Mart supercenters have unique impacts and that the EIR is going to have to reflect this." Attorney Stephen Kostka, author of numerous California Environmental Quality Act practice treatises, called the decision an "atomic bomb." The Fifth District demanded that an EIR contain an analysis of something that most analysts would call speculative, namely the impact that a Wal-Mart supercenter could have on specific other retailers and business locations, said Kostka, of Bingham McCutchen. How, he asked, do you mitigate the impact of lower prices? Kostka, who is not involved in the litigation, also questioned how an EIR could correlate a tiny increase in cumulative air pollution to ultimate impacts on human health, as the court required. Bakersfield City Attorney Virginia Gennaro said city officials were still evaluating the ruling and deciding how to proceed. "Here in the City of Bakersfield, we don't think urban decay will be a problem," Gennaro commented. "We are growing at such a rate that it isn't a concern." The fact that both shopping centers are partially built complicates the situation. At one site, a Lowe's Home Improvement Warehouse is complete and in business, and at the other location a Kohl's department store has opened. At both locations, Wal-Mart supercenters sit partially complete. A trial court judge earlier halted further construction of the Wal-Mart stores. Four days after the Fifth District issued its ruling, project opponents asked the Fifth District to halt all construction at the two shopping centers until litigation is resolved. Nearly three years ago, developer Panama 99 Properties LLC filed an application for a 370,000-square-foot shopping center on Panama Lane in southwestern Bakersfield. At the time, the empty site was zoned for low-density residential uses and open space. The new center would feature a Wal-Mart supercenter, Lowe's and a gas station. The proposed supercenter would replace an existing, smaller Wal-Mart 1.4 miles away. One week later, developer Castle & Cooke Commercial-CA (C&C) filed an application for a 700,000-square-foot shopping center called Gosford Village. Zoned for service industrial uses, the site was 3.6 miles away from the Panama Lane project site. Although the Gosford Village EIR said no tenants had been identified, it was common knowledge the project would have a supercenter, Kohl's, a Sam's Club and numerous other stores and restaurants. Two separate EIRs were prepared. The Panama Lane EIR identified significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality and noise. The Gosford Village EIR found significant and unavoidable impacts on air quality, both individually and cumulatively. The Bakersfield City Council considered both projects on February 12, 2003. The council certified both EIRs and adopted statements of overriding considerations, with all actions occurring under the City Council's consent calendar. Later in the meeting, the council conducted a public hearing to approve general plan amendments and rezonings for the projects. Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control (BCLC), a group associated with grocery store labor unions, filed separate lawsuits over the EIRs. In January 2004, Superior Court Judge Kenneth Twisselman ruled the documents inadequate because they did not study the question of whether the two shopping centers, individually or cumulatively, could trigger a series of events leading to urban decay. However, Judge Twisselman left the project entitlements intact and allowed construction to proceed - except for the Wal-Mart supercenters, construction of which Twisselman halted. The Wal-Mart opponents appealed parts of the decisions in both cases; C&C appealed part of the decision regarding Gosford Village. The Fifth District combined the appeals and then ruled squarely for BCDC. Wal-Mart opponents and regulatory bodies across the country have pressed the urban decay argument. The BCDC presented a study by San Francisco State University economics Professor C. Daniel Vencill that identified 29 businesses, many of them grocery stores, that were at risk of closing if the projects went forward. Those closures could lead to long-term or permanent vacancies, building deterioration and "then culminate in physical effects associated with blight-light conditions," Vencill concluded. The opponents also submitted studies and news reports from California and nationally about the effects on a market that is saturated with supersized retailers. The Fifth District ruled that the environmental studies' lack of a discussion regarding potential urban/suburban decay violated CEQA. "[T]he economic and social effects of proposed projects are outside CEQA's purview," Justice Timothy Buckley wrote for the court. "Yet, if the forecasted economic or social effects of a proposed project directly or indirectly will lead to adverse physical changes in the environment, then CEQA requires disclosure and analysis of these resulting physical impacts." "[W]hen there is evidence suggesting that the economic and social effects caused by the proposed shopping center ultimately could result in urban decay or deterioration, then the lead agency is obligated to assess this indirect impact," Buckley continued. "Many factors are relevant, including the size of the project, the type of retailers and their market areas, and the proximity of other retail shopping opportunities. The lead agency cannot divest itself of its analytical and informational obligations by summarily dismissing the possibility of urban decay or deterioration as a 'social or economic effect' of the project." The court said the record contained "a great deal of evidence" regarding potential urban decay. "This evidence cannot be cavalierly dismissed as 'hit pieces' designed to disparage a specific corporation. Studies discussing the experiences of other communities constitute important anecdotal evidence about the way the proposed shopping centers could serve as a catalyst for urban deterioration and decay in the city. The Vencill report is extremely significant and it strongly supports BCLC's position that CEQA requires analysis of urban decay," the court ruled. Furthermore, the Fifth District said the city must address the unique nature of giant stores that operate 24 hours a day. "[T]o simply state as did the Gosford EIR that 'no stores have been identified' without disclosing the type of retailers envisioned for the proposed project is not only misleading and inaccurate, but it hints at mendacity," Buckley wrote. The court also found that the city should not have considered the project EIRs in isolation. "There is not merit to the position of city and developers that cumulative impacts analysis does not require consideration of both shopping centers because, in each case, the other shopping center is outside the radius of the 'project area' as defined in the EIRs," Buckley wrote. "Simply put, selection of 'appropriate' geographic areas that just happen to narrowly miss the other large proposed shopping center in every category of impacts despite their overlapping market areas and shared roadways does not constitute the good faith disclosure and analysis that is required by CEQA." Regarding air quality, the court found the EIRs did not acknowledge "the well-known connection between reduction in air quality and increases in specific respiratory conditions and illnesses. ... The health impacts resulting from the adverse air quality impacts must be identified and analyzed in the new EIRs." The court ordered Bakersfield to void certification of the EIRs, the findings of overriding consideration and project approvals. After completing new EIRs, the city "may require completed portions of the projects to be changed or removed," the court noted. Kostka, of Bingham McCutchen, said the decision is worrisome because the court relied heavily on BCLC testimony presented at the City Council public hearing. "It [the ruling] not only allows late hits, it rewards them," Kostka said. "What the case says is that someone can wait until the very, very end of the process, and then pile information and reports on the agency." Herum, however, denied that was opponents' strategy. "That was the first and only time the City Council ever looked at the project," Herum said. "We made the same arguments that we had been making since the scoping session." And the Fifth District did not look favorably on the city's CEQA process, saying the city "improperly segmented environmental review from project approval in contravention of [CEQA] Guidelines § 15202, subdivision (b)." The public may raise new environmental objections until the close of a public hearing on project approval, the court determined. The Case: Bakersfield Citizens for Local Control v. City of Bakersfield, No. F044943, 04 C.D.O.S. 10918, 2004 DJDAR 14768. Filed December 13, 2004. The Lawyers: For BCLC: Steven Herum, Herum, Crabtree & Brown, (209) 472-7700. For the city: Virginia Gennaro, city attorney, (661) 326-3721. For Castle & Cooke California: Craig Beardsley, Jones & Beardsley,(661) 664-2900. For Panama 99 Properties: John Nolan, Gresham, Savage, Nolan & Tilden, (909) 684-2171. © 2005 - California Planning & Development Report
New Jersey Considers Regional Impact Studies for Big-Box Stores Lawmakers in New Jersey have proposed legislation that would require communities to weigh the regional economic impact of proposed big-box stores before........................... further information can be obtained at New Rules Project Pennsylvania State University Wal-Mart and
County-Wide Poverty The presence of a Wal-Mart store hinders a community's ability to move families out of poverty, according to this study....further information at New Rules Project UC Berkeley Labor Center The Hidden Cost of
Wal-Mart Jobs UC Berkeley Labor Center Response to
Wal-Mart statements Mark R. Wolfe Supercenters and
the Transformation of the Bay Area Grocery Industry:
Issues, Trends, and Impacts Project Supervisor: R. Sean Randolph INTRODUCTION EVERYDAY LOW WAGES:
THE HIDDEN PRICE WE ALL PAY FOR WAL-MART
INTRODUCTION The retail giant Wal-Mart has become the nation’s largest private sector employer with an estimated 1.2 million employees.1 The company’s annual revenues now amount to 2 percent of the U.S. Gross Domestic Product.2 Wal-Mart’s success is attributed to its ability to charge low prices in mega-stores offering everything from toys and furniture to groceries. While charging low prices obviously has some consumer benefits, mounting evidence from across the country indicates that these benefits come at a steep price for American workers, U.S. labor laws, and community living standards. Wal-Mart is undercutting labor standards at home and abroad, while those federal officials charged with protecting labor standards have been largely indifferent. Public outcry against Wal-Mart’s labor practices has been answered by the company with a cosmetic response. Wal-Mart has attempted to offset its labor record with advertising campaigns utilizing employees (who are euphemistically called “associates”) to attest to Wal-Mart’s employment benefits and support of local communities. Nevertheless – whether the issue is basic organizing rights of workers, or wages, or health benefits, or working conditions, or trade policy – Wal-Mart has come to represent the lowest common denominator in the treatment of working people. This report reviews Wal-Mart’s labor practices across the country and around the world and provides an overview of how working Americans and their allies in Congress are seeking to address the gamut of issues raised by this new standard-bearer of American retail. WAL-MART’S LABOR PRACTICES WORKERS’ ORGANIZING RIGHTS The United States recognizes workers’ right to organize unions. Government employers generally may not interfere with public sector employees’ freedom of association. In the private....[click here for more] [click here for pdf version]
The Andersonville Study of Retail Economics By Civic Economics This compelling study, commissioned by the Andersonville Development Corporation, finds that locally owned businesses generate 70 percent more local economic impact per square further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
Understanding the Fiscal
Impacts of Land Use in Ohio This report reviews and summarizes the findings of fiscal impact studies conducted in eight central Ohio communities between 1997 and 2003. In seven of the eight further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
The Economic Impact of
Locally Owned Businesses vs. Chains: A Case Study in Midcoast Maine
Three times as much money stays in the local economy when you buy goods and services from locally owned businesses instead of large chain stores, according to this analysis... further information can be obtained at New Rules Project The Fiscal and Economic
Impact of a Proposed Shopping Center Project on the City of Leominster This study examines the likely impact of a proposed 510,000-square-foot shopping center, which would include a Wal-Mart supercenter, a Lowe's, a department store such as further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
Santa Fe Independent
Business Report Relying on a Dun & Bradstreet database, this study found that chains are multiplying much faster than independent businesses in Santa Fe, New Mexico, Between 1998 and 2003.... further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
Final Report on Research
for Big Box Retail/Superstore Ordinance This study concludes that big box stores would harm low-income neighborhoods in Los Angeles by reducing competition, creating blight, lowering wages, and forcing new costs further information can be obtained at New Rules Project Time to Switch Drugstores?
"If you're among the 47 percent of Americans who get medicine from drugstore giants such as CVS, Eckerd, and Rite Aid, here's a prescription: Try shopping somewhere else. further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
Economic Impact Analysis: A
Case Study This study examines the local economic impact of two locally owned businesses in Austin, Texas---Waterloo Records and Book People---and compares this with the economic further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
Fiscal Impact Analysis of
Residential and Nonresidential Land Use Prototypes Big box retail, shopping centers, and fast-food restaurants cost taxpayers in Barnstable, Massachusetts, more than they produce in revenue, according to this analysis. The study further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
The Impact of 'Big-Box'
Building Materials Stores on Host Towns and Surrounding Counties in a Midwestern
State This study examines several Iowa communities where big box building supply stores, such as Menards and Home Depot, have opened in the last decade. Sales of hardware and further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
Understanding the Tax Base
Consequences of Local Economic Development Programs The city of Concord, New Hampshire provides an example of what can happen when a community allows massive commercial growth while failing to protect its existing economic further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
The Impact of Big Box Grocers on Southern California:
Jobs, Wages, and Municipal Finances
The most useful parts of this study deal with Wal-Mart's impact on wages. further information can be obtained at New Rules Project What Happened When Wal-Mart
Came to Town? This study examined the impact of Wal-Mart on several Iowa communities. further information can be obtained at New Rules Project St. Albans, Vermont State
Environmental Board Act 250 Decision A cost/benefit analysis of a proposed Wal-Mart store in St. Albans, Vermont, found that the store would cause dozens of existing businesses to close, leading to a net loss of 110,000 square feet of retail space. further information can be obtained at New Rules Project Fiscal & Economic Impact
Assessment of the Proposed Wal-Mart Development This study found that a new Wal-Mart store in Greenfield, Massachusetts, would cost existing merchants $35 million in sales. further information can be obtained at New Rules Project Impacts of Development on
DuPage County Property Taxes Prepared This study demonstrated that the costs of encouraging new commercial development--- further information can be obtained at New Rules Project
|
