SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATE

March 20, 2012

Contact us at info@opposewalmart.com or go to

opposewalmart.com or saveatascadero.com

P O BOX 1524, ATASCADERO CA 93423

(Please notify us of email address changes)

Editor:  Lee Perkins

VIEW PAST SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATES, AT

saveatascadero.com

*******

ATTENTION

PLAN TO ATTEND THE ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL (CC) MEETING

ON TUES., MARCH 27 AT 6 AT CITY HALL TO VOICE

YOUR COMMENTS TO THE CITY COUNCIL ABOUT THE

DEL RIO COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT AREA

PARTIALLY RE-CIRCULATED EIR

****************

I. SEND YOUR COMMENTS IN ON THE “PARTIALLY RE- CIRCULATED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (PRDEIR)

II. WAL MART STATUS IN ATASCADERO

AS PER TT AND A NEWS

III. SEND YOUR COMMENTS RE DEL RIO RD COMMERCIAL AREA SPECIFIC PLAN TO WARREN FRACE

IV. Dec 2, 2011 SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATE AND HISTORY OF WM IN ATASCADERO

V. FUNDING SAVE ATASCADERO

VI. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS

**************

1. SEND YOUR COMMENTS IN RE THE “PARTIALLY RE-CIRCULATED DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (PRDEIR)

The PRDEIR just released by the City of Atascadero will circulate for public review between Thurs. March 15 and Monday, April 30, 2012.  It is up to you to take this opportunity to respond to this PRDEIR during this window or forever hold your peace.

PRDEIR availability:  The PRDEIR is available in print form at the Atascadero Branch Library at 6850 Morro Road, Atascadero and at the address below, and online at the City of Atascadero website:

Contact: Warren Frace, Dir.

city of Atascadero, Community Dev. Dept.

6907 El Camino Real, Atascadero CA  93422

Phone:  4703488, Fax 4703489

email: wfrace@atascadero.org

When you send and email, be sure and ask for a reply to be sure your comments are received.

II. WAL MART STATUS IN ATASCADERO

AS PER TT AND A NEWS

March 21st Atascadero News’ story today gives no new information except how to view the PRDEIR (although they do not mention PRDEIR) and how to give public comment.  There is no info in the article about the City of Atascadero using City funds/tax payer/current business fees to help bring us a WM supercenter.

——-

ATASCADERO:  City could help pay for Walmart, Annex street upgrades

Study divvies up costs of roads for retailers

By Tonya Strickland tstrickland@thetribunenews.com

The city of Atascadero could front nearly half the cost of road improvements that would be needed if a Walmart and neighboring shopping center are built on the city’s north end, according to an amended project study released Thursday.

For about seven years, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and The Annex have proposed shopping centers with housing across from each other in a largely rural area at Del Rio Road and El Camino Real.

The developments, which aren’t approved yet, went in together on an environmental study last year to determine how their projects would affect roads, noise and the environment. The city plans to use that study, along with Thursday’s update, this summer to help determine whether to approve the plans.

The city allowed the update, which Walmart paid for, after the retail giant and The Annex’s Santa Barbara based developer, The Rottman Group, couldn’t agree this past summer on how to fund $4.5 million in estimated road improvements.

“The way the first EIR was written, it said ‘the project’ (or ‘the applicant’) would be responsible for constructing the interchange,” said Warren Frace, community development director.

Because the report didn’t define whether the phrasing meant both developers or just Walmart, Frace said that the shopping centers disagreed on the cost share.

In order to move past the developers’ impasse, the update now suggests that the city build roundabouts on the overpass instead of “the project” fronting those costs.

Consultants say future development, as defined by city growth estimates through 2025, would reimburse the city.

The consultants used a calculation to determine that the builders of future development would be responsible for 47 percent of the road improvements, while Walmart and The Annex would be responsible for 53 percent.

Of that, Walmart would be responsible for about 29 percent, or nearly $1.3 million, and The Annex would need to contribute about 24 percent, or about $1.1 million, according to the report.

Those costs come from a new type of fee to be collected from Walmart and The Annex to specifically fund the roundabouts, Frace said.

That fee would be collected in addition to traffic impact fees that developers normally pay: about $1.7 million from Walmart and about $1.2 million from The Annex.

Those traffic impact fees would combine with other fees historically collected from developers that fund a list of other traffic improvements planned throughout the city. The City Council will then be able to vote on whether it wants to move the Del Rio Road interchange project higher on that list.

Transportation money– The road improvements are two roundabouts on the Highway 101 overpass. Consultants estimate that Walmart and The Annex would bring more traffic to the area and the improvements would quell the traffic increases.

Walmart is already funding a third roundabout at El Camino Real and Del Rio Road where a traffic light stands today.

A Walmart-only option, also considered in the update, said roundabouts would still be required without The Annex, but only after future developments are built.

If the city funds the remaining share of the roundabouts, it will do so from its transportation fund, which would need additional money to cover the $4.5 million cost. A figure representing the amount of money in that fund wasn’t immediately available.  The council would need to approve borrowing from other city funds to cover roundabouts.

Plan scaled back- Walmart is going forward with a plan that has been scaled back from the failed proposals that were put forth in 2007. Walmart’s proposed center would now include 123,000 square feet of retail and grocery space plus about 6,500 square feet of outdoor garden services.

The Annex would have more than 120,000 square feet of commercial space, with the option for a single family residential development.

Walmart’s parcel also includes about 10,000 square feet for two commercial lots and space for a 44-unit multifamily residential development.

The public can comment on the update through late April and can find the study in the Community Development section via the City Departments tab online at www.atascadero.org or viewing same at the Atascadero City Hall.

III. Dec 2, 2011 SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATE AND HISTORY OF WM IN ATASCADERO

In 2006, Wal-Mart purchased the property for the WM SUPER CENTER from the Rottman Group. At that point, Wal-Mart publicly stated it would take the lead on its own project, would pay for the environmental impact report (EIR) needed to support it, and stated publicly (as reported by OPPOSE WM and the TT reporting from Atascadero City Council Meeting 10/07) that Wal-Mart would fund the traffic mitigation measures, once they were identified in the EIR. Concurrently, Rottman would proceed with their plan to develop a second property on Del Rio.  It appeared all plans were moving forward.

Wal-Mart changed its plans 16 times over five years, responding to a changing economy. Wal-Mart ultimately decided to build a smaller store. As of the end of 2011,Wal-Mart wanted to change the rules by limiting its contribution on the traffic mitigation measures, and compel the city and/or Rottman to pay the difference (approximately $2 million).  This put the project in an impasse.  At the June 13, 2011, CC Mt., the Council voted to have the City Staff go forward with “discussion” on solving the impasse between WM and Rottman.

The Wal-Mart project has dragged on for years and has cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars as well as countless staff hours. Wal-Mart knows Atascadero wants this store.

Fast forward to this last week when the above article appeared in the TT and today’s A News and THE CITY OF ATASCADERO STANDS UP TO PAY HALF THE COST OF ROAD IMPROVEMENTS.

We had projected from the start that WM’s template was to make the City pay for their development.

As per the PRDEIR, The city of Atascadero could front nearly half the cost of road improvements that would be needed if a Walmart and neighboring shopping center are built on the city’s north end.

So, WM the richest corporation in the world, who originally agreed to foot the bill, with the help of the City Staff has shifted the cost to the City taxpayers and other businesses .  This means a free ride for WM who will now be paying far less than their “fair share” of the development.

How did the EIR go from the “project” developers paying for their road improvements, round-abouts, and overpass improvements for their development to the City fronting nearly half the cost of road improvements.  Did the City Staff decide this?  Did the City Council approve this?  Is this what came out of the “discussion” the CC directed the Staff to begin with WM and Rottman?

So basically, we the taxpayers and current City of Atascadero businesses are paying for the development.  Is this OK with you?

And this is at a time when our City is carrying on business with a deficit.  The plan to recoup the funds the City spends by Traffic Impact Fees from current and future business fees or from robbing the City mitigation fund is unconscionable.  The sales tax from WM is a big ‘MAYBE.’  AGAIN, THE CITY OF ATASCADERO DOES NOT HAVE A PLAN, BUT A HOPE!

IS THIS HOW OUR CITY IS RUN?

PLEASE TAKE A MOMENT TO BOTH RESPOND TO THE PRDEIR AS WELL AS WRITE A LETTER TO THE EDITOR.  THIS IS ELECTION YEAR.  LET THE CITY COUNCIL KNOW THAT THIS IS AN ELECTION ISSUE.  WM CAN EASILY AFFORD THESE DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS.  ALSO LET YOUR CITY COUNCIL KNOW YOUR COMMENTS ON THE CITY PAYING FOR THE DEVELOPMENT IMPROVEMENTS.

FOR THE A NEWS EMAIL:  editor@atascaderonews.com (400 WORDS)  For TT:  letters@thetribunenews.com (200 words)

For New Times:  letters@newtimeslso.com (250 words)

Ask for a reply to your email to be sure your Letter to the Editor is received for all papers.  And you may need to follow up as well.

IV. FUNDING SAVE ATASCADERO $$$

PREVIOUSLY OPPOSE WALMART, NOW SAVE ATASCADERO, HAS EXISTED ON A SHOE STRING BUDGET BASICALLY JUST RENEWING ITS WEBSITE THE LAST COUPLE OF YEARS.  WE ARE NOW IN NEED OF REFUNDING FROM THOSE THAT SUPPORT US.

PLEASE SEND US ANY CONTRIBUTION YOU CAN AFFORD, $1 TO WHATEVER.  WE KNOW ALL OUR SUPPORTERS HAVE BEEN AFFECTED BY THE ECONOMY SO WE WOULD APPRECIATE ANY CONTRIBUTIONS YOU CAN MAKE AT THIS TIME.

MAKE OUT CHECK TO OPPOSE WALMART AND SEND CONTRIBUTIONS TO:

SAVE ATASCADERO

1. O. BOX 1524

ATASCADERO CA  93423

1. COMMUNITY ANNOUNCEMENTS

• Fashion Show & luncheon fundraiser for Hospice Partners and CASA

Sat., March 31, 11 am, San Luis Obispo Golf & Country Club

For more information call Cathy Cooley 709-1770.

• Talk on Global Warming by Dr. Ray Weymann

at Cal Poly, April 11 (Wed), 6:30 pm, Spanos Theatre.

For more info: ray.climate@charter.net

• Second Annual Atascadero Library Children’s Classic at Portola Inn

Save the date:  Sat., June 23, 10-3:30 pm

This special event is for children ages 3-10 and their parents, grandparents and friends and offers a day full of activities based on storybook favorites.  Tickets will be available at the Atascadero Library.  For more information go to:  www.atascaderofriendsofthelibrary.org.

SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATE

December 2, 2011

Contact us at info@opposewalmart.com or go to

opposewalmart.com or saveatascadero.com

P O BOX 1524, ATASCADERO CA 93423

(Please notify us of email address changes)

Editor:  Lee Perkins

VIEW PAST SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATES, AT

saveatascadero.com

WAL MART STATUS IN ATASCADERO

1. ARTICLES IN TT AND A NEWS

These recent articles in the TT and A News indicate the level of animosity between so called co-developers of the Del Rio Development.  There may be suits filed based on the final outcomes of the development negotiations.  The City is right in the middle of everything.  If the City leans on the side of Wal Mart, Rottman could sue the City and Wal-Mart.

It is SAVE ATASCADERO’S observation that it would be a good time for the City of Atascadero to step back and out of the middle of these Rottman/Wal-Mart disagreements.

Let your Council know your thoughts and come to the next Atascadero City Council Meeting on Tues., Dec. 13 at 6 pm and join the voices asking for the City who represents us, the taxpayers and business owners, to ask the City Staff to cease negotiations until Rottman and Wal-Mart come to a resolution.

Viewpoint Nov. 15, 2011

Wal-Mart holding project plans hostage

By Steven Rottman

The proposal to bring a Walmart store to Atascadero has been in the works for more than six years and now that it is time to move ahead in earnest, Wal-Mart is trying to backpedal on commitments it made with respect to the traffic mitigation for the project.

You might find the preceding statement a curious one, coming as it does from the very people who introduced Wal-Mart to Atascadero: namely me, Steven Rottman, and my partners at the Rottman Group. As longtime developers we are often caught in crossfire and peppered with accusations. That comes with the territory.

But what doesn’t come with the territory are Wal-Mart’s actions regarding the proposed development at the corner of Del Rio and El Camino Real. I am writing this Viewpoint to explain a long and torturous process that has left us in an untenable situation.

Some background: In 2005, the Rottman Group began working with Wal-Mart to locate a 200,000-plus-square-foot store on Del Rio in Atascadero. The Wal-Mart proposal generated great public debate, but in the end, residents voted overwhelmingly to support it. Actually, of those that voted, and the voting was low, voters voted “no” on restricting Wal-Mart to

sf with a maximum of                         groceries.  Of those that voted 2/3’s were in favor of not restricting Wal-Mart’s size and groceries.  However, 3,000 of those that voted wanted to restrict Wal-Mart…

In 2006, Wal-Mart purchased the property for the store from the Rottman Group. At that point, Wal-Mart told us that Wal-Mart would take the lead on its own project, would pay for the environmental impact report (EIR) needed to support it, which they did, and stated publicly that Wal-Mart would fund the traffic mitigation measures, once they were identified in the EIR. Concurrently, Rottman would proceed with our plan to develop a second property on Del Rio.  It appeared all plans were moving forward.

So what’s the problem? Wal-Mart changed its plans 16 times over five years, responding to a changing economy and in essence revising its business plan. Wal-Mart ultimately decided to build a smaller store. We have no problem with that decision, but we do object to Wal-Mart now wanting to change the rules by limiting its contribution on the traffic mitigation measures, and compel the city, Rottman or other property owners to pay the difference (approximately $2 million).

Wal-Mart argues that there is nothing in writing that requires it to fund the traffic mitigation measures, but we relied on Wal-Mart’s assurances (and perhaps the city did too).

The Wal-Mart project has dragged on for years and has cost the city hundreds of thousands of dollars as well as countless staff hours. Wal-Mart knows Atascadero wants and needs this store, and is now holding both the city and Rottman hostage.

Wal-Mart should stop trying to save itself $2 million and should fund the traffic improvements that have been identified in the EIR. While every market is unique, Wal-Mart certainly has the financial ability to pay for the improvements. Wal-Mart’s CEO discusses the company’s 2011 performance on its website ( walmartstores.com/sites/ annualreport/2011/letter): “Wal-Mart delivered solid financial performance for fiscal year 2011. … We continued to deliver a stable return on investment of over 19 percent. We closed out the year with almost $11 billion in free cash flow.”

Wal-Mart should quit pressuring the city to assign increased fees to the adjacent properties and encumber future developments with liens that may impede progress in the City. Wal-Mart should fund the improvements.

Some readers may tell me we should have expected an unsavory outcome when we first began this process. All that aside, the facts are that Rottman has met its commitments and will continue to work with the city and Wal-Mart to ensure that this project moves forward with appropriate traffic improvements. Nonetheless, we believe Wal-Mart should now do what it said it was going to do. I sincerely hope residents will speak up and tell Wal-Mart to fund the traffic mitigation measures.

Steven Rottman is the CEO of Santa Barbara based Rottman Group, developers of projects throughout the Central Coast.

Developers’ road-fee dispute goes to council – July 2011

At issue tonight is who will pay how much and whether money will come out of traffic funding

By Tonya Strickland

tstrickland@thetribunenews.com

About four months after the release of an environmental review of Atascadero’s long debated and controversial Walmart proposal, the developers continue to disagree on how to pay for traffic improvements.

The Atascadero City Council will be asked tonight to mediate between the two groups on how to fund a $3 million to $4.5 million Del Rio Road freeway interchange at Highway 101, a traffic improvement that consultants say is needed if the retail giant opens on the north side of town.

Three roundabouts on Del Rio Road are also recommended, as well as additional improvements.

The applicants are Wal-Mart Stores Inc., proposing a commercial and residential project, and the Santa Barbara-based Rottman Group, which wants to build an adjacent shopping center called The Annex.

While the projects are separate, the applicants submitted a joint specific plan that consultants used to determine what environmental impacts the developments could have on roads, noise and the environment.

In the original deal, Wal-Mart said it would pay for the entire environmental review and the traffic improvements it recommended, said Keith Mathias, Rottman’s senior vice president. But now Wal-Mart is asking to split those costs, he added.

“Rottman had an understanding with Wal-Mart that they would pay … since they’re the much bigger store,” Mathias said. “But now they’re looking at us since our square footages are about the same after they downsized.”

On Monday, a Wal-Mart spokeswoman said the retailer remains committed to paying its “full fair share” — estimated to be more than $1.7 million — toward the construction of traffic improvements.

But what remains in question is where that money would come from. The city could use the developers’ already-planned traffic impact fees. Developers pay those fees to the city to fund regional road improvements where development occurs.

Whether Wal-Mart’s estimated $1.7 million contribution would come from traffic impact fees was not clear Monday. Mathias said the combined traffic impact fees from both developers would total around $3 million. His impact fees total about $1.5 million, he said.

Meanwhile, Wal-Mart critics fear city funds could be used.

A group called Save Atascadero says it’s “adamantly opposed to using taxpayers money” to fund any part of required traffic improvements.

Wal-Mart is going forward with a scaled-back plan compared with failed proposals in 2007. The development is now slated to have 123,000 square feet of retail and grocer y items plus about 6,500 square feet of outdoor garden services.

The Annex would have more than 120,000 square feet of commercial space with the option for a single-family residential development.

Don’t Subsidize Big Boxes at Local Shops’ Expense

When governments use public money to woo national chains, economic growth and job creation are negligible. Independent retailers also suffer.

By Stacy Mitchell

Sifting though the postmortem news of Borders Group’s demise, I came across a local newspaper story about a California town that had spent $1.6 million to lure a Borders bookstore to a local shopping center. According to the paper, government officials in Pico Rivera in 2003 agreed to pay part of a new Borders store’s operating expenses by providing a $10,833 monthly subsidy for the next 15 years.

That might seem like an astonishing amount of public money to give a retail shop, but what’s truly remarkable about the deal is just how unexceptional it actually is. Handing out multimillion-dollar subsidies to large chains has become commonplace in much of the country. These deals are premised on the idea that new shopping centers and big-box stores expand employment and create economic growth. The trouble is, these giveaways have done little more than help large retailers at the expense of small businesses.

No one knows exactly how much public money has flowed to chains. These subsidies take different forms—property tax exemptions, sales tax rebates, job tax credits—and most states do not keep a central record of every municipal and county development incentive. But Good Jobs First, a nonprofit research group that tracks these deals, estimates that large retailers have received at least several billion dollars over the past 15 years. Its executive director, Greg LeRoy, says the giveaways have continued through the recession, despite budget shortfalls and a glut of vacant retail space.

BIG BENEFICIARIES

Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) has been a frequent recipient. From 2008 through 2009, the company pocketed $7.9 million in tax exemptions from local development agencies in New York, according to data from the state comptroller. Wal-Mart also received $1.8 million in tax credits and rebates in 2009 to build five super centers in Louisiana, records kept by the state’s Board of Commerce & Industry show. Last year, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that the city of Bridgeton, Mo., approved a $7.2 million deal to finance construction of a single Wal-Mart super center.

Other big retailers have been at the public trough, too. Target (TGT) picked up $1.4 million in local tax breaks to build a store in the small town of Kenner, just outside New Orleans, according to the Times-Picayune. Amazon (AMZN) secured a five-year sales tax exemption from the South Carolina legislature in exchange for opening a distribution center in the state.

Subsidy recipients and government officials often justify these deals on the basis of job creation and economic growth. While Wal-Mart and Amazon did not respond to requests for comment, Molly Snyder, a Target spokeswoman, says the “Kenner Target store created more than 200 new jobs.” She notes: “The business development agreement was a key factor in helping to get the project built.”

SCANT ECONOMIC GROWTH

A recent study, however, indicates that subsidizing retail development produces neither job gains nor new tax revenue. Earlier this year a consortium of local governments in the St. Louis metro area found that cities and counties in the region had diverted more than $5.8 billion in public tax dollars to finance private development. More than 80 percent of these funds supported the construction of new chain stores and shopping centers.

Yet the region has seen virtually no economic growth. “The number of retail jobs has increased only slightly and, in real dollars, retail sales per capita have not increased in years,” the authors of the study wrote, noting that many of the region’s municipalities are now broke. According to the study, more than 600 small retailers have closed in the St. Louis metro area. The resulting job losses have offset the job gains from the new development.

These findings should prompt other cities and regions to reconsider the wisdom of giving big retailers tax breaks and subsidies. Not only is evidence of a public benefit lacking, but local businesses shouldn’t see their tax dollars used to boost their biggest competitors.

A more prudent, and fairer, way for cities to support economic development would be to invest in infrastructure, education, and other community assets that are broadly beneficial to a wide variety of businesses and potential entrepreneurs.

Had Pico Rivera taken such an approach, it might still have a bookstore. In the years since the city began funding Borders, more than 400 new independent bookstores have opened nationwide, according to the American Booksellers Assn. Virtually all did so without the benefit of public funding, staking their success instead on smart business skills and the kind of community support that must be earned one customer at a time.

AND REGARDING WAR-MART’S GREENING??????????????

Sustainability as growth strategy

by Stacy Mitchell

Walmart’s growth has been go-go-go ever since it launched its sustainability initiative.

Walmart adopted sustainability as a corporate strategy in 2005. It was struggling mightily at the time. Bad headlines stalked the chain, as its history of mistreating workers and suppliers finally caught up with it. One analysis found that as many as 8 percent of Walmart’s customers had stopped shopping at its stores. Grassroots groups were blocking or delaying one-third of its development projects. Stockholders were growing nervous. Between 2000 and 2005, Walmart’s share price fell 20 percent.

As then-CEO Lee Scott told The New York Times, improving labor conditions would cost too much. It would also mean ceding some control to employees and perhaps even a union. Going green was a better option for repairing the company’s image. It offered ways to cut costs and, rather than undermining Walmart’s control, sustainability could actually augment its power over suppliers. Environmentalism also had strong appeal among urban liberals in the Northeast and West Coast—the very markets Walmart needed to penetrate in order to keep its U.S. growth going.

Since Scott first unveiled Walmart’s sustainability program, the company’s head office in Bentonville, Ark., has issued a steady stream of announcements about cutting energy use, reducing waste, and, more recently, selling healthier food. Most of these announcements declare goals, not achievements. But the goals sound audacious enough to reliably produce sweeping headlines and breathless accounts of how Walmart could remake the world by bending industrial production to its will.

By 2010, the number of Americans reporting an unfavorable view of Walmart had fallen by nearly half, from a peak of 38 percent in 2005, to 20 percent.

What the news media haven’t reported

As I started to work on this series, I looked back at the coverage of Walmart’s sustainability campaign over the last six years and was shocked by just how much of a public relations boost the media have given the company and how little public accountability they have demanded in return.

Some of the most serious environmental consequences of Walmart’s business model simply aren’t on the table. Walmart doesn’t talk about them and, despite expending a lot of ink and airtime on the company’s green activities, the news media don’t either. Indeed, journalists rarely stray beyond the parameters of what Walmart has put in front of them.

More surprising is the absence of basic information essential to evaluating what Walmart is actually accomplishing. Take, for example, the share of Walmart’s electricity that comes from renewable sources. There have been thousands of news stories and blog posts on the company’s renewable energy activities since 2005, so one would think this number would be reported often. I couldn’t find it anywhere. (I did eventually dig up enough data to figure it out myself. The answer: less than 2 percent of the company’s electric power in the U.S. comes from its wind and solar projects.)

Or take the case of the Sustainability Index, Walmart’s much-publicized effort to put a green rating on every product it sells. Two years after the media fanfare surrounding the announcement, no journalist, as far as I can tell, has investigated what progress, if any, Walmart has actually made. (According to my research: not much.)

This series aims to fill in some of these gaps and, hopefully, inspire other writers and journalists to take a closer look at what Walmart is and isn’t doing.

What environmentalists haven’t paid attention to

“Walmart is here to stay”—that’s the refrain I often hear from the many environmental organizations and green-business advocates who have applauded the company’s sustainability efforts. The world’s largest retailer isn’t going away, the thinking goes, so anything it does to reduce its footprint is a good thing.

But Walmart circa 2005 is, in fact, long gone. Today’s Walmart is much, much bigger. It sells 35 percent more stuff in the U.S., and its international store count has almost tripled, from about 1,600 to 4,600 stores.

For Walmart, sustainability is a growth strategy—and a highly effective (and darkly ironic) one at that. Six years ago, Walmart was facing widespread opposition, including legislation that would have required better labor practices and limited the company’s growth. Thanks at least in part to its sustainability campaign, and the warm reception from many environmentalists, those roadblocks have eroded and Walmart’s expansion is once again rolling at full speed.

As it grows, Walmart pushes out existing enterprises and local economic systems and replaces them with its own, often far more polluting, global supply chain and sprawling stores. If any single fact could sum up what’s at stake, it would be that Walmart now controls one-quarter of our country’s grocery sales and aims to capture half—a prospect with disastrous implications for the environment, social justice, and local economies.

So far, though, most mainstream environmental organizations have focused on the small bits of good that Walmart could do—reduce PVC in packaging, for example—while ignoring the much larger consequences of its ever-expanding business model.

This series will mark, we hope, the beginning of a more comprehensive and critical response to Walmart’s sustainability initiatives. We’ll be publishing new pieces once or twice a week through early December, so keep an eye on the menu at right—and share your own insights in comments below.

Read the articles in the series so far:

1. Walmart by the numbers: Green vs. growth
2. Is your stuff falling apart? Thank Walmart
3. Think Walmart uses 100% clean energy? Try 2%
4. Walmart’s promised green product rankings fall off the radar
5. Can you say ‘sprawl’? Walmart’s biggest climate impact goes ignored

Stacy Mitchell is a senior researcher with the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, where she directs initiatives on independent business and community banking.  She is the author of Big-Box Swindle and also writes a popular monthly newsletter, the Hometown Advantage Bulletin.  She lives in Portland, Maine, and has lately joined Twitter.

SAVE ATASCADERO

(FORMERLY OPPOSE WAL-MART) UPDATE

September 17, 2011

Contact us at info@opposewalmart.com or go to

opposewalmart.com or saveatascadero.com

P O BOX 1524, ATASCADERO CA 93423

(Please notify us of email address changes)

Editor:  Lee Perkins

VIEW PAST SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATES, AT

saveatascadero.com WEBSITE or OPPOSE WALMART

1. WALMART STATUS IN ATASCADERO

1. CA SB469 – impact on Big Box developments

1. Subsidize Big Boxes at Local Shops’ Expense

IV. GROCERY STRIKE EMMINENT

V. Community Announcements

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

1. WALMART STATUS IN ATASCADERO

Walmart is again delaying, this time implementing the EIR directive.  Walmart is saying its “fair share” is $1.5 M versus the $3 M or so that the Walmart/Annex road/over-change improvements will cost.  The Rottman Group says they cannot afford to pay a share of these improvements.  A TT editorial suggested, the City should not cross the line between “discussions” and “negotiations” in talks now ongoing re funding of traffic improvements for a new Walmart center.  “In this case, we [TT] firmly believe the developers should pay their own way–which is what they offered to do practically from the start.”

NO CITY FUNDS SHOULD BE SPENT ON THIS DEVELOPMENT!!!

Another reason for delay could be the CA Legislature’s Bill, SB 469, which is now on Gov Brown’s Desk.  Please see below.  This will require the city or county considering the superstore application to hire a qualified consultant to conduct an economic impact study. The cost of the study is paid by a fee levied on the applicant.  This is in addition to what the traditional EIR mandates for an economic study.

II. CA SB469 – impact on Big Box developments

Economic Impact Review - California

BILL NUMBER: SB 469 ENROLLED BILL TEXT
PASSED THE SENATE MAY 31, 2011

PASSED THE ASSEMBLY SEPTEMBER 1, 2011
INTRODUCED BY Senator Vargas FEBRUARY 17, 2011
An act to amend Section 65950 of, and to add Section 65957.3 to, the Government Code, relating to land use.

On September 2, 2011, the California Legislature passed the following bill, which requires cities and counties to have an economic impact analysis prepared before deciding whether to approve an application to develop a large superstore.

Governor Jerry Brown has until October 9, 2011, to sign or veto the bill.  PLEASE BE IN TOUCH WITH GOV BROWN TO LET HIM KNOW THAT YOU WANT HIM TO SIGN SB 469 ASAP TO SAFEGUARD OUR CITIES BUSINESSES.  YOU CAN REACH HIM AT:  Mailing address:  Governor Jerry Brown
c/o State Capitol, Suite 1173
Sacramento, CA 95814

Phone: (916) 445-2841
Fax: (916) 558-3160 (preferred contact other than phone)

Emails could take up to 90 days to respond

The legislation defines a superstore as a retail store of at least 90,000 square feet that devotes 10 percent or more of its space to groceries. It will affect Walmart and Target, both of which operate large stores that include groceries.

Under the law, the city or county considering the superstore application must hire a qualified consultant to conduct an economic impact study. The cost of the study is paid by a fee levied on the applicant.

The study must assess a range of impacts enumerated in the law, including:

• the extent to which the proposed superstore retailer will capture a share of retail sales in the market area.
• how the construction and operation of the proposed superstore will affect the supply and demand for retail space in the market area.
• how the construction and operation of the proposed superstore will affect employment in the market area, including an analysis of whether the proposed superstore will result in a net increase or decrease in employment in the market area.
• the effect on wages and benefits of employees of other retail businesses, and community income levels in the market area.
• the costs of public services and public facilities resulting from the construction and operation of the proposed superstore retailer and the incidence of those costs.
• the effect that the construction and operation of the proposed superstore retailer will have on retail operations, including grocery or retail shopping centers, in the same market area.
• the effect that the construction and operation of the proposed superstore will have on average total vehicle miles traveled by retail customers in the same market area.
• the potential for long-term vacancy of the property on which the superstore is proposed in the event that the business vacates the premises

The “market area” is defined as an area around the store large enough to support its operation, but which may not extend further than 25 miles from the store.  After the study is complete, the city or county must invite public comment on the study and the application at one of its meetings.

History
In 2010, San Diego enacted a ordinance requiring an economic impact review of superstores. The measure was repealed in early 2011, after Walmart threatened to organize a referendum campaign to overturn the law.

The repeal prompted San Diego Senator Juan Vargas to introduce the statewide bill. Vargas has said that the legislation does not violate local control; cities are still free to approve superstore applications, regardless of the study’s findings. “They will know what they are doing is wrong but at least they will have the facts,” he said. “Before they were acting in the dark.”

San Diego Assemblyman Ben Hueso, who presented the bill in the house, said that it provides decision-makers “with facts, not hearsay.” Walmart and other large retailers often claim their stores will increase employment, but studies indicate these stores often cause more job losses than gains.

By making the requirement apply statewide, the new law ensures that cities that would like to consider economic impacts are not placed at a disadvantage. The preamble to the bill notes: “Currently, local governments that desire to perform due diligence for their constituents by performing an economic analysis are placed at a disadvantage because a neighboring city or county may not perform an economic analysis. This a situation may result in the shifting of sales tax and destruction of the business community in a city or county that simply wants to study the impacts of the development project before making a final approval.

III. Don’t Subsidize Big Boxes at Local Shops’ Expense

When governments use public money to woo national chains, economic growth and job creation are negligible. Independent retailers also suffer

By Stacy Mitchell

Sifting though the postmortem news of Borders Group’s demise, I came across a local newspaper story about a California town that had spent $1.6 million to lure a Borders bookstore to a local shopping center. According to the paper, government officials in Pico Rivera in 2003 agreed to pay part of a new Borders store’s operating expenses by providing a $10,833 monthly subsidy for the next 15 years.

That might seem like an astonishing amount of public money to give a retail shop, but what’s truly remarkable about the deal is just how unexceptional it actually is. Handing out multimillion-dollar subsidies to large chains has become commonplace in much of the country. These deals are premised on the idea that new shopping centers and big-box stores expand employment and create economic growth. The trouble is, these giveaways have done little more than help large retailers at the expense of small businesses.

No one knows exactly how much public money has flowed to chains. These subsidies take different forms—property tax exemptions, sales tax rebates, job tax credits—and most states do not keep a central record of every municipal and county development incentive. But Good Jobs First, a nonprofit research group that tracks these deals, estimates that large retailers have received at least several billion dollars over the past 15 years. Its executive director, Greg LeRoy, says the giveaways have continued through the recession, despite budget shortfalls and a glut of vacant retail space.

BIG BENEFICIARIES

Wal-Mart Stores (WMT) has been a frequent recipient. From 2008 through 2009, the company pocketed $7.9 million in tax exemptions from local development agencies in New York, according to data from the state comptroller. Wal-Mart also received $1.8 million in tax credits and rebates in 2009 to build five supercenters in Louisiana, records kept by the state’s Board of Commerce & Industry show. Last year, the St. Louis Post-Dispatch reported that the city of Bridgeton, Mo., approved a $7.2 million deal to finance construction of a single Wal-Mart supercenter.

Other big retailers have been at the public trough, too. Target (TGT) picked up $1.4 million in local tax breaks to build a store in the small town of Kenner, just outside New Orleans, according to the Times-Picayune. Amazon (AMZN) secured a five-year sales tax exemption from the South Carolina legislature in exchange for opening a distribution center in the state.

Subsidy recipients and government officials often justify these deals on the basis of job creation and economic growth. While Wal-Mart and Amazon did not respond to requests for comment, Molly Snyder, a Target spokeswoman, says the “Kenner Target store created more than 200 new jobs.” She notes: “The business development agreement was a key factor in helping to get the project built.”

SCANT ECONOMIC GROWTH

A recent study, however, indicates that subsidizing retail development produces neither job gains nor new tax revenue. Earlier this year a consortium of local governments in the St. Louis metro area found that cities and counties in the region had diverted more than $5.8 billion in public tax dollars to finance private development. More than 80 percent of these funds supported the construction of new chain stores and shopping centers.

Yet the region has seen virtually no economic growth. “The number of retail jobs has increased only slightly and, in real dollars, retail sales per capita have not increased in years,” the authors of the study wrote, noting that many of the region’s municipalities are now broke. According to the study, more than 600 small retailers have closed in the St. Louis metro area. The resulting job losses have offset the job gains from the new development.

These findings should prompt other cities and regions to reconsider the wisdom of giving big retailers tax breaks and subsidies. Not only is evidence of a public benefit lacking, but local businesses shouldn’t see their tax dollars used to boost their biggest competitors.

A more prudent, and fairer, way for cities to support economic development would be to invest in infrastructure, education, and other community assets that are broadly beneficial to a wide variety of businesses and potential entrepreneurs.

Had Pico Rivera taken such an approach, it might still have a bookstore. In the years since the city began funding Borders, more than 400 new independent bookstores have opened nationwide, according to the American Booksellers Assn. Virtually all did so without the benefit of public funding, staking their success instead on smart business skills and the kind of community support that must be earned one customer at a time.

Stacy Mitchell is a senior researcher with the Institute for Local Self-Reliance, where she directs initiatives on independent business and community banking. She is the author of Big-Box Swindle.

IV. GROCERY STRIKE EMMINENT

According to the TT today, Unionized grocery workers may vote for a strike tonight.  Grocery workers have been negotiating and without a contract for eight months.  The issue is over benefits reduction including health care.  In 2003 the Grocery workers settled a 4 month strike and compromised with Grocery owners reducing benefits for new incoming workers.  To maintain a head-of-household wage and health care, the Grocery workers have reached a limit for compromise.  It is likely, if the strike is voted to go forward, that Albertson’s will close temporarily. We hope you will not cross the picket line for Ralphs, Vons and Albertson’s if they open and the strike continues.

While the TT taks about the loss in business for the Grocers, it does not talk about what a difficult decision it is to strike.  Striking means a dramatic loss of pay for Grocery workers.

Please support your local family and neighbors who are grocery store workers and must take a stand now to provide for themselves and families.

Other options in Atascadero are Spencer’s and Food For Less.

IV. Community Announcements:

A TASTE OF ISLAM

An Introduction to the Faith of Muslims

Come and learn about a faith tradition that many of us know little about. A day long seminar will be held at the Lake Pavilion on Saturday, October 29th from 10 a.m. to 4 p.m.. It will be led by Dr. Stephen Lloyd-Moffett, the chair of religious studies at Cal Poly University, Dr. Rushdi Abdul-Cader, a local Muslim physician, and Rev. Jane Voigts from SLO United Methodist Church.

This seminar was held in SLO to rave reviews and a standing room only crowd, so we have invited them to the North County. The way to create peace in our world is through understanding and building relationships, and it begins here in our own communities.

We are suggesting a $20 donation at the door to cover the costs of the hall and lunch, which will be provided.

For more information, contact:

Rev. Susan Brecht, (805) 466-9108 or sincerelysusan@sbcglobal.net

Rev. Jane Voigts, (805)543-7580 or pastor@sloumc.com

ATASCADERO MOVING PLANET RALLEY- a single day to move away from fossil fuels.  Sat., 9/24 at the Atascadero Lake Park, 3-9:00 pm

3RD ANNUAL FOOD BANK HUNGER WALK, SUN., 9/25 at Lake Park, 2:00 pm

BENEFIT FOR SLO FILM FESTIVAL & WOMEN’S LEGACY FUND

“MISS REPRESENTATION” a new film by Jennifer Siebel Newsom

Wed, Oct 5, 5-6:30 wine tasting and Tapas at Luna Red, 1009 Monterey, SLO. www.slofilmfest.org or 546-3456 for $50/person tickets. AND/OR

7-9:00 Movie & Q & A at the Fremont, free screening, suggested $15 donation at door at 6:00 pm.  Tickets can be reserved by email:  sloiffl@yahoo.com

Bill McKibben (new book Eaarth) to speak at Fremont on Oct. 30-get tickets on line:

http://cc4justice.eventbrite.com and use your credit card.

SAVE ATASCADERO

(FORMERLY OPPOSE WAL-MART) UPDATE

July 12, 2011

Contact us at info@opposewalmart.com or go to

opposewalmart.com or saveatascadero.com

P O BOX 1524, ATASCADERO CA 93423

(Please notify us of email address changes)

Editor:  Lee Perkins

VIEW PAST SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATES, AT

saveatascadero.com WEBSITE

1. WAL MART IS AGAIN ORGANIZING ITS SUPPORTERS TO PRESSURE CITY COUNCIL TO SUBSIDIZE TRAFFIC MIDIGATIONS AND/OR OVERRIDE EIR RECOMMENDATIONS AT SHOCKLEY’S AT 6:00 P. M. ON JULY 21–BE THERE AS PER ROBO CALLS!

II. WHEN WILL THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA HAVE THE RESULTS OF THE “DISCUSSIONS” BETWEEN CITY STAFF AND WALMART/ROTTMAN?

III. WHAT CAN YOU DO TO KEEP THE CITY FROM GIVING YOUR TAX MONIES TO WALMART FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT?

1. New Procedures for the Community Forum
2. A PHOTOGRAPHIC RECEPTION PLANNED FOR JOE SCHWARTZ’S ON 7/28

——–

I. WAL MART IS AGAIN ORGANIZING ITS SUPPORTERS TO PRESSURE CITY COUNCIL TO SUBSIDIZE TRAFFIC MIDIGATIONS AND/OR OVERRIDE EIR RECOMMENDATIONS AT SHOCKLEY’S AT 6:00 P. M. ON JULY 21–BE THERE!

Wal Mart is hosting a meeting at Shockley’s–again spending in Atascadero some of its vast resources to organize Atascaderans against themselves by calling and inviting them to a meeting at Shockley’s, 6:00 p.m. on JULY 21ST.  Please attend and see how they justify their dramatically reduced “fair share”of the cost of mitigation that Rottman and WM are totally responsible.. Send us your observations.

WM wants the city to help with the overpass/road work and development of their proposed store at Del Rio and El Camino.  It appears that Rottman, WM’s partner in this development, cannot pay their “fair share” and WM considers their “fair share” half of what they promised to pay.

In spite of a 2005 email in which WM promises to pay for the traffic impact costs, Warren Frace and Gerry Clay, at the June 13 CC Mt., said WM was offering to pay half the cost of the road improvements as mandated by the EIR, $1.7 M,              was WM’s “fair share.”  That was prior to the CC directing the City Staff to “discuss” with WM options for paying for the Del Rio overpass/roundabouts/road improvements mandated by the EIR.

1. WHEN WILL THE CITY COUNCIL AGENDA HAVE THE RESULTS OF THE “DISCUSSIONS” BETWEEN CITY STAFF AND WALMART/ROTTMAN?

The “discussion” between WM/Rottman and the City Staff was approved to go forward by the City Council (CC) at the June 13 CC Mt.  As Oppose WalMart predicted, WM is now backtracking on their statements and email that they would pay for the interchange costs [October 2007 public meeting--as reported by TT].  At the 6/13 mt, WM’s attorney Berkowitz said WM’s “fair Share” is estimated to be $1.7 M versus the estimated cost of road improvements and roundabouts at “between $3 and $4.5 million” [Atascadero News].  Frase’s estimated costs for Rottman and WM are $2.63 million.  So what does WM mean by their “fair share?”

At the Tues., July 12 CC Mt., City Manager said “discussions” had not yet begun with Walmart.  No date has been set to agendize this issue.

An TT editorial in the June 16th edition, wrote:

“We [TT] firmly believe the developers [Walmart] should pay their own way–which is what they offered to do practically from the start.

As Tribune writer Tonya Strickland reported, at a public meeting in October 2007, Wal-Mart Stores Inc. and the Annex clearly indicated that they would pay for the environmental impact review (EIR) and for any improvements recommended by that review.

Now, however, Wal-Mart has backed away from that offer and is instead expressing a willingness to pay its “fair share” of $1.7 M…

Regardless of whether or not the project has been downsized, the EIR makes it clear that the current plan will still generate a substantial increase in traffic.  And, that will will still require expensive improvements to the Del Rio Road freeway interchange, as well as new roundabouts on Del Rio Road.

We don’t believe the city, which like every local government is struggling to maintain a decent level of services for its citizens, should be on the hook to step in and bail out the world’s largest retailer.”

Lon Allen also wrote on the WM/Rottman issue in his June 21 column in the TT:

“My argument is not with Wal-Mart.  I’d have the same concerns with any other big-box store or major commercial project going there, or anywhere else in the community.

If the project is going to require that improvements be made to the local infrastructure to reduce its negative impacts on the city [noise, light, environmental traffic pollution], then those costs must be fully paid by the applicant or applicants.”

1. WHAT CAN YOU DO TO KEEP THE CITY FROM GIVING YOUR TAX MONIES TO WALMART FOR THEIR DEVELOPMENT?

CC Meetings in July and August are ONLY on the 2nd Tues. of the months.  The WM issue is not on the CC agenda for Tues., July 12  Although calls to City Hall have not been returned as to when it will be, we expect it will be on the Tuesday, August 9 agenda and we need YOU to attend this meeting to let the City know that WM needs to pay their full “fair share” which is at least double the $1.7 M they are offering to pay now.

You can also write letters to the editor expressing your views:

editor@atascaderonews.com, 400 words

letters@newtimes.com, 250 words

letters@thetribunenews.com, 200 words

We know the CC wants WM to come to Atascadero.  We know that WM wants the City to use its Development Fees for the WM project.  This may be OK with the CC, but it is not OK with the Business Community and taxpayers of Atascadero.  WM/Rottman need to pay their full “fair share” as promised in writing and at public meeting re WM.

Contact your CC members and let them know your concerns.  We have elected the CC to work for our City not WM.

1. NEW PROCEDURES FOR THE COMMUNITY FORUM AT CITY COUNCIL MEETING

At the CC Mt. tonight (July 12), several citizens spoke at Community Forum to items not on the agenda and asked questions to be answered by the CC.  Instead, after the Community Forum, the Mayor advised those that spoke that “questions will not be a subject of discussion. Any members of the pubic who have questions may contact City Clerk Marcia Torgerson.  Her card is in the back of the chamber.”

The City Council Agenda under Community Forum used to read, “The Council may take action to direct the staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda.”

Please consider that citizens are attending the CC Mt. to address the CC at Community Forum with a concern/question which is not on the agenda.  Now those questions meant for the CC and City Staff are to be redirected to Marcia Torgerson, City Clerk.  This means there is no way for an item of concern of a citizen to be placed on the agenda, but instead responded to by the City Clerk.

This raises concerns that the CC is further isolating themselves by not responding to citizens who are using Community Forum to address their elected CC.  It also raises concerns about transparency of the City government.

V. A PHOTOGRAPHIC RECEPTION PLANNED FOR JOE SCHWARTZ’S ON 7/28 

You are invited to Joe’s PHOTOGRAPHIC RECEPTION/98^th birthday celebration which will be held on Thursday, July 28^th from 4:00 – 6:00 PM at the SLO Unitarian Fellowship – 2074 Parker Street in SLO. Approximately 25 pieces will be displayed from his 80 year photographic career.

These photos will also be on display for viewing at this location from July 17 – August 28 (9 AM – 1 PM) or call 544-1669 or 227-4246.

This exhibit is a preview of his upcoming Washington, DC. African-American Smithsonian Museum of Art, which is due to open in 2015, where Joe’s work will be featured during the opening exhibit!

The Unitarian Fellowship on Parker St. is located between High St. & South St., 1 block over from Higuera (on the side street near Smart & Final store).

This reception is open to the public if you have friends that are interested in attending.

The Motlos

SAVE ATASCADERO

(FORMERLY OPPOSE WAL-MART) UPDATE

October 9, 2010

Contact us at info@opposewalmart.com or go to

opposewalmart.com or saveatascadero.com

P O BOX 1524, ATASCADERO CA 93423

(Please notify us of email address changes)

Editor:  Lee Perkins

VIEW PAST SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATES, AT

saveatascadero.com WEBSITE

ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL ELECTION UPDATE

1. CITY COUNCIL FORUM 9/21/2010
2. SAVE ATASCADERO QUESTIONNAIRE SENT TO CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES AND RESPONSE
3. THIS IS THE ELECTION YEAR OF “WHERE ARE THE CANDIDATES?”
4. LEGACY OF GEORGE LUNA–FINANCIAL HEALTH
5. REVIEW OF WAL-MART MYTHS, RECENT PRESS & STUDIES

IF YOU HAVE ANY QUESTIONS ABOUT THE NOVEMBER ELECTION, EMAIL US AND WE WILL PROVIDE YOU WITH RESOURCES TO CANDIDATES AND PROPS.

********************

1. CITY COUNCIL FORUM 9/21/2010

BASED ON THE PAST AND PRESENT PERFORMANCE OF NEW CANDIDATES AND INCUMBENTS, SAVE ATASCADERO CANNOT RECOMMEND ANY CANDIDATE FOR THE CITY COUNCIL.

Tom Comar and I attended the candidate forum and our impressions were that

all the candidates are strongly in favor of building a Wal-Mart Super-Center  in spite of community concerns such as environmental, noise, and safety to name a few.  These were some of their comments:

Chuck Ward believes city financial problems will be solved if we”stem the flow of sales tax” going outside the city.  He was concerned about pollution caused by “cars coming through 101” but what about the cars coming into Atascadero for their Wal-mart shopping.  See graph at the end of myths.

Tom O’Malley believes the proposed Wal-Mart “fits our economic development goals.”

Sandy Jack said Wal-Mart will kick-start the city’s economy.

Brian Stutevant asked that we work together to make Wal-Mart happen.

Bret Heinemann is in favor of Wal-Mart.

The candidates were asked about California Green Building Codes to go into effect 2011.  There was a Lack of serious grasp of the importance of embracing environmental steps such as these codes.  We are concerned if Wal-Mart goes forward that these candidates will not ask Wal-Mart to implement, for example, the use of solar panels and porous parking lots for better water trainage to name a few high tech environmental friendly building adjustments.

Not a single CC member or candidate has noticed that the Colony Design of the proposed Wal-Mart at the Just Listening has been scraped for the unattractive big box design for our city.

The candidates were also asked about Eagle Ranch.  For this development some candidates addressed “full cost recovery” from developers and responsiveness to possible traffic problems.  Yet, during the Wal-Mart discussion, there was no reference or discussion of how traffic, noise, expansion of roadways, overpass at Del Rio, environmental issues, property rights problems for the Del Rio residential neighbors, water run off, sewers, need for additional emergency services such as fire and police would be addressed and who would pay for them.

II. SAVE ATASCADERO QUESTIONNAIRE SENT TO CITY COUNCIL CANDIDATES AND RESPONSE

SAVE ATASCADERO 2010 ATASCADERO CITY COUNCIL

ELECTION QUESTIONNAIRE

HOW IMPORTANT TO YOU AS A COUNCIL MEMBER REPRESENTING THE CITY OF ATASCADERO IS:

1. Balancing the “moving forward” of the Wal-Mart/Annex development against:

1. Impact on neighborhoods in the Del Rio area–noise, safety?

1. An EIR with unmitigatable impacts–With the power of the City Council, will you direct Wal-Mart to make this development an environmental model along state building guidelines?  For example, implementing solar panels and porous parking lot materials to protect against run-off which would affect neighbors?

1. Traffic problems that will be created by the potential of 12,000 car trips on any given day as you would for the Eagle Ranch Development generating far less traffic.

1. How aggressive will you be in seeking “full cost recovery” for the Wal-Mart/Annex Development–having the developers carry their own weight.  Please be specific on traffic control, Del Rio overpass cost, water, widening of roadways to the development, and sewers.

1. Will you as a City Council monitor the Wal-Mart/Annex project to see that union wages are paid and that local workers/contractors are utilized in the project?

1. How important are the “property rights” of the neighbors to the Wal-Mart/Annex development and how will you protect these neighbors from noise, traffic and safety?  Please be specific.

III. THIS IS THE ELECTION YEAR OF “WHERE ARE THE CANDIDATES?”  The Atascadero City Council (CC) race is no exception.  The Chamber didn’t even have a forum but substituted with 6 general questions in their Election 2010 Business Report in the Atascadero News instead.

The above questionnaire was sent to all the CC candidates. Only two gave the courtesy of a reply:

Bret Heiemann said, “I am reviewing the questions.  However, since all of the other candidates are either incumbents of either the city council or planning commission and are therefore under the Brown Act I’m not sure whether it’s fair for me to be the only one responding in detail since I’m the only non-incumbent.”

IN RESPONSE:  ACTUALLY, SENDING A QUESTIONNAIRE TO ALL CANDIDATES AND THEIR RESPONSE HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THE BROWN ACT.

Sandy Jack also responded with an email and request to meet.  We settled on a phone interview and discussed the above questions.  The bottom line remains, however.  He is in favor of the Wal-Mart/Annex project.  While recognizing our concerns for “property rights” for the neighbors, noise, traffic, environmental design and safety, he did not commit to any stands he might take.  He did say he doesn’t have “all the answers” and he would “listen to everyone.”

IV. LEGACY OF GEORGE LUNA — FINANCIAL HEALTH

Let us not forget that for the twelve years that George Luna was on the council, he positively and directly influenced the management of the city budget and general finances.  In earlier times during his tenure when the city was in a financial pinch, he personally sat down with the City Manager and helped balance a workable budget without layoffs.

V. REVIEW OF WAL-MART MYTHS, RECENT PRESS & STUDIES

Myth: Wal-Mart will bring more jobs to our community.

Facts: Multiple academic and economic studies reveal that despite Wal-Mart’s mantra of adding jobs and improving the local and national economy, the reality is exactly the opposite.

• Between 1992 and 2002, the grocery industry lost 13,000 stores and thousands of jobs. For each Wal-Mart Super Center that opens, two grocery stores will close.
  Source: Retail Forward

Today Wal-Mart uses over 3,000 Chinese factories to produce its goods—almost as many factories as it has stores in the U.S. (3,600). Wal-Mart is America’s largest importer. U. S. companies have moved operations overseas, while imports flood into the U.S., a combination that has cost millions of lost American manufacturing jobs.
Source: L A Times/Associated Press

Myth: Wal-Mart will bring more money to our community.

Facts: Money spent at Wal-Mart does not stay in the community.

• “Three times as much money stays in the local economy when you buy goods and services from locally-owned businesses compared to chain stores.”
  Source: Institute for Local Self-Reliance (ILSR), 2003
• Chains return only 14.1% of its revenue to the local economy, mostly in the form of payroll. The rest leaves the state, flowing to out of state suppliers or back to corporate headquarters.”
  Source: ILSR
• Local businesses rely on local services and suppliers (banks, manufacturers, accountants, lawyers, farmers, newspapers, internet providers, etc.). Wal-Mart uses international suppliers and corporate services.  Source ILSR
• Local business owners live here. They care about our people and our future. In mid-coast Main, for example, local businesses make charitable donations at four times the rate of Wal-Mart.  Source: Main State Planning Office Statistics
• Small businesses are particularly hurt by Walmart’s entry.

The presence of big box stores, such as Walmart, causes “a substantial reduction in net employment growth at smaller retailers, which is mostly accounted for by an increase in job destruction from store exit” according to a 2009 study by the U.S. Census Bureau Center for Economic Studies⁴.

Walmart makes taxpayers pay for the consequences of its low wages.

• Public assistance used by Walmart associates cost California about $86 million a year, according to a 2004 study⁵.

Wal-Mart doesn’t care what your community thinks.

• In 2005, Wal-Mart real-estate manager Jeff Doss spoke about an oft-cited remark by company founder Sam Walton that Wal-Mart would not build stores in towns if the residents did not want them. “Were that the case,” he said, “we’d never build a store anywhere”⁶.

Myth: Wal-Mart has the lowest prices.

Facts: “Wal-Mart’s match its rivals on average.”

• The key principle behind Wal-Mart’s “Everyday Low Pricing (EDLP)” is that prices are based on the level of competitions in that given community at that given time. As these competitors close, due to Wal-Mart’s low-balling of prices, the pressure on pricing eases up, allowing Wal Mart’s prices to float higher.  Source: The Case Against Wal-Mart, 2004
• Wal-Mart which advertises itself as the everyday low price leader isn’t necessarily so. A shopping survey was conducted over a one-month period from a list of 19 household items at six stores. Of the 19 items purchased, Wal-Mart’s was the cheapest for only 2 of the 19 items.
  Source: Carroll County News Staff, Arkansas
• In a 2007, issue of Consumer’s Report, Wal-Mart was ranked 45th among national grocery stores based on service, perishables, price and cleanliness. Trader Joe’s was number 2 and Costco was number 7.

Myth: Wal-Mart Casts Itself as a Good Corporate Citizen.

Facts: As the largest private employer in the US, Wal-Mart has come under particular scrutiny for its labor practices.

Wall Street Journal, April 27, 2010

By ANN ZIMMERMAN And NATHAN KOPPEL

A federal appeals court ruled Monday that a gender discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. can go forward as a class-action case, in one of the biggest class-action lawsuits in history.

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco voted 6-5 to affirm a federal judge’s decision to award class-action status to potentially one million women or more. The ruling increases the pressure on Wal-Mart to either settle claims of unfair pay brought by the women or risk going to trial.

Wal-Mart faces Minn. labor law trial
Boston Globe
July 2, 2008—Wal-Mart Stores Inc. broke Minnesota labor laws, a state judge ruled, handing the world’s largest retailer its third straight defeat in a wage-class action trial and the possibility a jury may order it to pay $2 billion.

There is a history of numerous class action lawsuits for wage and hour violations against Walmart.

• Walmart reported in January 2009 that the company was involved in at least 73 class action lawsuits alleging wage-and-hour violations¹. According to The New York Times, the suits include allegations Walmart forced “employees to work unpaid off the clock, eras[ed] hours from time cards and prevent[ed] workers from taking lunch and other breaks that were promised by the company or guaranteed by state laws.²“

Walmart’s settlement is worth little to workers and less to the company.

• In December 2008, Walmart announced it would settle 63 of the outstanding class action suits over wage-and-hour violations for an amount between $352 million and $640 million.³
• Walmart’s settlement represents the company’s 2008 sales for a mere 13 hours and 56 minutes.⁴

Myth: Wal-Mart cares about its employees.

Facts: Wal-Mart Associates don’t earn enough to support a family.

• Walmart’s national average wage of $11.75 an hour² is 2.5% below the average wage of $12.04/hour for Retail Sales persons, the largest retail industry occupation, as reported by the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS)³.Source: 2006 HHS Poverty Guidelines
• Walmart has plan options with cheap premiums – but they come with high deductibles.

• Walmart’s 2010 health care offerings include cheap premiums of $27 per pay period for family coverage, or $702 per year, however this plan has a high annual deductible of $4,400¹.
• In addition, Walmart associates covered by the health plan face a $10,000 out-of-pocket maximum¹.Wal-Mart has the highest employee turnover rate of industry, over 50% the first year. This translates into approximately 50,000 employees per month. In Wal-Mart’s business model, high employee turnover is not a bad thing since it lowers payroll cost and means fewer employees qualify for benefits.
  Source: New York Times

Wal-Mart Settles 63 Lawsuits Over Wages
The New York Times
December 24, 2008— Wal-Mart said on Tuesday that it would pay at least $352 million, and possibly far more, to settle lawsuits across the country claiming that it forced employees to work off the clock. Several lawyers described it as the largest settlement ever for lawsuits over wage violations.

Wal-Mart and Poverty
St. Louis Business Journal
May, 2007—One year ago this month, the Social Science Quarterly releases a study examining Wal-Mart and poverty rates. “The study found that nationwide an estimated 20,000 families have fallen below the official poverty line as a result of the chain’s expansion… During the last decade, dependence on the food stamp program nationwide increased by 8 percent, while in counties with Wal-Mart stores the increase was almost twice as large at 15.3 percent.”

Cal. Supreme Court Bolsters Local Authority to Control Retail
The Hometown Advantage
June 8, 2007—In a unanimous decision, the California Supreme Court fortified efforts by cities to limit big-box stores, favor small-scale retailers, and protect the vitality of downtowns. The ruling strongly affirms the authority of cities to enact zoning rules that regulate economic competition to achieve valid public purposes.

SAVE ATASCADERO

(FORMERLY OPPOSE WAL-MART) UPDATE

May 12, 2010

Contact us at info@opposewalmart.com or go to

opposewalmart.com or saveatascadero.com

(Please notify us of email address changes)

Editor:  Lee Perkins

TO VIEW PAST SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATES, PLEASE

GO TO saveatascadero WEBSITE

1. WAL-MART OPEN HOUSE AT ATASCADERO CITY HALL 5/5/10
2. SCOPING FOR WAL-MART/ANNEX EIR (Environmental Impact Report), TUESDAY, MAY 25 AT 6:00 P. M.
3. GENERAL PLAN INFORMATION

**********

1. WAL-MART OPEN HOUSE AT ATASCADERO CITY HALL

THE CITY OF ATASCADERO SPONSORED A WAL-MART/ANNEX OPEN HOUSE ON WEDNESDAY MAY 5 AT THE CITY HALL.

• Wal-Mart’s architectural plan has changed completely along with its size, now down to 123,112 sq ft.  Smaller is better, but we believe this store is still too big for our City.  The new architectural plan, a sequence of boxes, does not reflect a Colony Style or conform to the General Plan as written:

“Programs:

1. Update and maintain the Appearance Review Manual to include provisions for rural

character design features, street trees, landscaping, parking, fencing, screening, and

architectural design (except for single family development), with standards tailored to

specific areas of the City, including commercial corridors, and gateways such as

Highway 101 and Morro Road.”

1. SCOPING MEETING FOR WAL-MART/ANNEX EIR, TUESDAY, MAY 25 AT 6:00 P. M.

Mark your calendars to attend the City Council and the Planning Commission joint EIR scoping session on Tuesday, May 25 at 6:00 p.m. at the City Hall.  THIS IS A CRITICAL MEETING!

Re scoping:  “a scope will be proposed based on public input and the CC’s observations, which outlines what needs to be studied during the EIR.  Traffic, biology and environmental assessment such as noise, light pollution and aesthetics are typical.  There can also be a Retail Sector Strategies Report to assess the Town’s retail sector and recommend measures to proactively preserve and promote economic vitality and growth within the City.  The public needs to raise the issues and any others that are important to them or it will not be addressed in the EIR.

Discussion regarding the Wal-Mart/Annex project has gone on for several years and many concerns over the years have been expressed at the lectern.  The scoping process is like starting over.  Any concerns residents of the City and neighbors have to the development must be expressed during the scoping process meeting May 25 to be considered in the EIR.

Come and speak if you have concerns about:

• Traffic, noise, glare, hazardous dumping
• Night time deliveries, idling big rigs
• Security issues, crime, funding of emergency services and police
• Economic impact to our local stores and sustainability of local grocers and their jobs

EACH PERSON WILL HAVE 3 MINUTES TO SPEAK–MAKE THE MOST OF IT! Use your time to outline what needs to be examined during this EIR process.

The City Council must approve the EIR scoping process.  Only you can express your individual or neighborhood concerns at this meeting.  Organize your neighbors!  If you believe someone else will voice an issue, that issue may not be brought up.  The CC majority is way in favor of the project at all costs, but they must hear from you as a voter about how you want this project to go forward and must be held accountable to deal with the findings, rather than dismissing them for “overriding economic considerations” which the CEQA law allows.

This is our City and this development will affect all residents directly or indirectly.

1. GENERAL PLAN INFORMATION

I recommend to all of you to go to the City website and take a look at the General Plan.  In light of the recent tabling of the Request for Participation in a State Grant Application:  Small cities of San Luis Obispo County Climate Action Plan which would help guide us to a “sustainable” city and which the state is paying the tab.  It is an impressive document which took years of citizen input that IS AN OFFICIAL guide and sets criteria for growth, environmental issues and safety in our town.

I have copied a few statements from the General Plan for your perusal, but suggest you take a look yourself.  We need to hold our CC accountability to its General Plan.

2. Require landscaping and/or screening to buffer non-residential uses from residential areas.

3. Continue to support the Neighborhood Preservation Program.

4. Update and maintain the Sign Ordinance with higher standards for the quality and visual impact of signs.

5. Develop incentives to encourage existing uses to upgrade to contemporary design

standards, including frontage and parking lot landscaping, and the screening of loading and service areas.

Policy 1.4:  Ensure that “darkness” remain a rural characteristic by requiring that all exterior

lighting does not result in significant off-site spillage or glare.

Goal LOC 7. Tree-covered hills shall be preserved to retain the distinctive scenic quality of the community.

Policy 7.1: Ensure that the native trees of Atascadero are protected from new development in

order to retain the natural character of the community.

THESE ARE JUST A FEW THAT AS CITIZENS, WE NEED TO SPEAK TO!

SAVE ATASCADERO

(FORMERLY OPPOSE WAL-MART) UPDATE

APRIL 28, 2010

Contact us at info@opposewalmart.com or go to

opposewalmart.com or saveatascadero.com

(Please notify us of email address changes)

Editor:  Lee Perkins

TO VIEW PAST SAVE ATASCADERO UPDATES, PLEASE

GO TO saveatascadero WEBSITE

1. SAVE ATASCADERO SUPPORTS AND JOINS WITH FOOD BANK FOR ANOTHER FOOD DRIVE SCHEDULED FOR SAT. APRIL 17 AT FOOD FOR LESS.

1. HERE COMES WAL-MART—

1. 1. WAL-MART/ROTTMAN SUBMIT FINAL PLANS
   2. WAL-MART OPEN HOUSE WEDNESDAY, MAY 5/EIR public Scoping

May 25

1. 1. BIAS SUIT ADVANCES AGAINST WAL-MART
   2. LETTER TO THE EDITOR

1. MENTAL HEALTH FORUM IN ATASCADERO, SUNDAY, MAY 16

1. SECOND ANNUAL HUNGER WALK IN ATASCADERO SUNDAY SEPT. 26

___________________

1. SAVE ATASCADERO SUPPORTS AND JOINS WITH FOOD BANK FOR ANOTHER FOOD DRIVE SCHEDULED FOR SAT. APRIL 17 AT FOOD FOR LESS.

Thank you to Food for Less and all who volunteered from the Atascadero Democratic club and Save Atascadero to staff the table at the entrance of Food for Less Saturday, April 17 and to all of you who donated food.  We collected over 840 pounds of food for the North County Food Bank.

1. HERE COMES WAL-MART—

1. 1. WAL-MART/ROTTMAN SUBMIT FINAL PLANS

Wal-Mart’s application has been revised and now proposes a 123,112± square foot commercial retail and grocery building and outdoor garden center of 6,448± square feet store which includes the following:

• General Merchandise Sales Area 63,506± square feet
• Grocery Sales and Support Area 27,894± square feet
• Retail Tenant Space 1,934± square feet
• Stock and Ancillary Area 25,550± square feet
• Pharmacy 759± square feet
• Indoor Garden/Seasonal sales 3,469± square feet

The store includes a pharmacy (not drive-thru) and drive-up “site to store” pick-up on a 19.0± acre site with a 697± space parking lot (refer to attached exhibits). The tire & lube express is no longer proposed as part of the project. The Walmart project also includes 2.0± acres of retail outpads and a 2.8± acre multi-family residential pad on the southern end of the site. The total Walmart project area is 26.1± acres.

The Wal-Mart and the Rottman Group project proposals will be processed under a single Specific Plan and environmental impact report (EIR). The City Council has selected Michael Brandman Associates to prepare the EIR. City of Atascadero Website

The Annex component, 120,900 sq ft of commercial uses includes eating and drinking places (including drive-though eating and drinking places).  So Atascadero will have even more drive-throughs.  Oh, for some nice family style restaurants!

1. WAL-MART OPEN HOUSE WEDNESDAY, MAY 5

The City of Atascadero has scheduled a Wal-Mart Open House for Wed., May 5 at the Atascadero City Hall, Conference Room 4 from 10:00 a.m. to 7:00 p.m.

Notice how dramatically the architectual rendering of the final project for Wal-Mart has changed from the Just Listening Open House in  2006. The Wal-Mart supercenter now is simply a sequence of boxes rather than the Colony style architecture originally proposed.

The first Wal-Mart EIR public scoping meeting is tentatively set for May 25.  I tried to get information on this today from City Hall, but have not heard back from Warren Frace’s office on any further details or confirmation.

NOTE: IF YOU WOULD LIKE TO RECEIVE NOTICE OF UPCOMING WAL-MART MEETINGS, SCOPING, ETC., CALL ANNETTE AT CITY HALL AT 470-3402 and request mail notification.  If she does not answer, leave a message of your information.

1. BIAS SUIT ADVANCES AGAINST WAL-MART – April 27, 2010, Wall Street Journal, front Page. A federal appeals court ruled Monday that a gender discrimination lawsuit against Wal-Mart Stores Inc. can go forward as a class-ation case, in the largest such action in U.S. history.  The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in San Francisco voted 6-5 to affirm a federal judge’s decision to award class-action status to potentially one million women or more.  The ruling increases the pressure on Wal-Mart to either settle claims of unfair pay brought by the women or risk going to trial…  (For the complete article, see Wall Street Journal)

D. LETTER TO THE EDITOR, Atascadero News, April 21, 2010

This letter is in response to Robert Winslow’s letter in the Atascadero News Wednesday, April 14, in response to my letter regarding the La Plaza Cinemas.

I stand corrected, Robert Winslow as he states, no longer works for EDA, but, as he states, is the engineer for the Rottman’s adjourning project at the Annex.  While Rottman and Wal-Mart are separate entities, they are unified under the same EIR and Special Plan.  I see them as joined at the hip.

However, I stand by my words that Mr. Winslow spoke often at City Council meetings touting Wal-Mart/Rottman’s proposed development at Del Rio disregarding the General Plan.  And, ironically, he suggested that La Plaza Cinemas potentially had problems in relation to the General Plan, has traffic issues  and is in need of an EIR (Environmental Impact Report).  The city has criteria to guide them as to whether the La Plaza needs an EIR, etc. or not.  In the past these issues were downplayed by Wal-Mart and its representatives regarding the Annex project.

Slander is a very strong word and I hardly see it as slander to associate Mr. Winslow with Wal-Mart when he was one of their visible representatives until January of 2010.

I attended over two years of Atascadero City Council Meetings while the Wal-Mart issue was before the City and became aware that, in the past, not all contractors were treated equally by the City.  Such mixed messages of unequal treatment were a problem in the past and if the same exists now, are a problem as well.  All contractor/developers must be held accountable to the same rules and regulations the City has on the books.  I cannot speak for the La Plaza Cinema project process.  However, no project, if it meets CEQA obligations can circumvent any steps as required by law in this process.

Editor  Note:  Although Lee Perkins had a letter published less than a month ago, this response is being printed because in Robert Winslow’s letter, he accused her of libel.  Libel is when defamatory remarks are made in print and slander is when defamatory remarks are spoken aloud.

(THE FOLLOWING PARAGRAPHS OF MY LETTER WERE NOT PRINTED IN THE A NEWS DUE TO SPACE)

I do remember that the City bent over backwards to support the Colony Square Project.  And, It is common knowledge that permits approved for this project sat in City Hall ready to be acted on for almost a year.

As far as supporting either the Colony Square and/or La Plaza.  I support both and eagerly await the Colony Square completion!!!  Being supportive of La Plaza and Colony Square supports Atascadero downtown and will increase the City’s attractiveness for all residents, countywide visitors and tourists.

Lee Perkins

1. MENTAL HEALTH FORUM IN ATASCADERO, SUNDAY, MAY 16

A Mental Health Forum A Journey of Hope and Recovery, will be presented at the Atascadero Community Church Fellowship Hall, 5850 Rosario Ave., on Sunday, May 16, 2010 at 2:00 p.m.

Featured: the Acclaimed Documentary “The Shaken Tree:  Families Living with Mental Illness

This is free and open to the public.  The Program includes:

Transitions Mental Health Association-Family Services

National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI)

For more information call:  805-466-9108

MAY IS MENTAL HEALTH MONTH.

1. SECOND ANNUAL HUNGER WALK IN ATASCADERO SUNDAY SEPT. 26

Mark your calendars, walk, volunteer, get your clubs/organizations involved!

Join the Food Bank Coalition

and Central Coast Clergy & Laity for Justice in our 2010

Hunger Walk Sunday, September 26th, 2:00 pm

You and your group can help

fight hunger in SLO County

Participating Communities

Arroyo Grande      Atascadero      Cambria     Cayucos

Los Osos     Morro Bay     Nipomo    Oceano

Paso Robles     San Luis Obispo     San Miguel

How It Works:

TheFoodBankCoalition

•Your organization signs up walkers

Online sign up is available

•Walkers recruit sponsors to donate

•Donations are shared this way:

•50%to the walker’s agency

•25% to the Food Bank

•25% to Church World Service

•Fight hunger at home and worldwide!

For more information call: 805-238-4664www.slofoodbank.org

75% of the funds raised by our Hunger Walk will stay right here in San Luis Obispo County.

Hometown Advantage: Community Banking, Wal-Mart’s Urban Impact, Online Sales Taxes + More?

Sent: Fri 2/12/10 7:36 PM FEBRUARY 10, 2010 | ANALYSIS

Small Business Lending: Big Banks vs. Small

Although small and mid-sized banks control only 22 percent of bank assets, they account for 54 percent of all small business lending. Meanwhile, the largest 20 banks, which command 57 percent of bank assets, devote only 18 percent of their commercial loan portfolios to small business.

This article examines why small banks lend more to small businesses, how banking consolidation has harmed local entrepreneurs, and what can be done to get credit flowing in a recession. READ THE ARTICLE

Charts: Small Business Lending by Bank Size

FEBRUARY 12, 2010 | NEWS
New Rules Project Launches Community Banking Initiative

Our new Community Banking Initiative is building the case for a smaller-scale and more locally rooted financial system. We’ll be posting a growing body of reports, articles, and policy models.

We’re also, through a partnership with the Move Your Money campaign, blogging at Huffington Post about the benefits of going local with your banking. See this recent piece:
Move Your Borrowing Along with Your Money
We’d love to hear your feedback.

FEBRUARY 1, 2010 | OPINION
The Case for Online Sales Taxes

By exempting internet retailers like Amazon.com from collecting sales taxes, lawmakers provide a substantial financial incentive for people to bypass local businesses and shop online instead.

Over the years, there have been four primary arguments made in favor of this inequitable policy. None of them stand up. READ MORE

JANUARY 29, 2010 | NEWS
Wal-Mart’s Urban Impact

Wal-Mart insists that it’s urban stores can reinvigorate city neighborhoods and recapture retail spending leaking to the suburbs. But a new study by Loyola University researchers, who tracked the impact of a Wal-Mart store that opened in Chicago in 2006, found otherwise. Within two years, 25 percent of the businesses within a four-mile radius of the store had closed. For more, visit our Key Studies page.

JANUARY 14, 2010 | NEWS
Holiday Sales Increase at Independent Businesses, National Survey Finds

More holiday shoppers deliberately sought out locally owned businesses this year, according to our survey of more than 1,800 independent businesses. The survey also found that local retailers in cities with active “Buy Local” or “Think Local First” campaigns reported stronger holiday sales than those in cities without such campaigns. READ MORE.

DECEMBER 2, 2009 | SPEECH
A New Deal for Local Economies

This lecture, delivered at the Bristol Schumacher Conference in Great Britain, has been republished in a variety of places in the last month. If you missed it, you can read it online or download a printer-friendly PDF.

Other Hometown Advantage Headlines

Big-Box Lifestyle Center Defeated in Colorado
Voters in Eagle, Colorado, soundly defeated a proposed big-box lifestyle center yesterday in an election that saw the highest turnout in town history.

News Stories We’re Following

A plan to turn a former armory in the Bronx into a shopping mall was soundly defeated after independent retailers, labor unions, and community groups joined forces to block it.
Massachusetts may become the first state to mandate that independent auto repair shops have access to the same repair codes and data dealerships are given. Federal legislation is in the works as well.
Office Depot’s new television ad brings a new twist to local-washing.
More cities are demanding that corporations, including big retailers, repay subsidies when they fall short of their job creation promises.
Sam’s Club is laying off 11,000 workers and closing 10 stores.
A large electronics retailer in New Mexico has returned to local ownership after the company that bought it went bankrupt.
Dan Lutts shares ten lessons he learned living unchained for a year.
A new economic development model of integrated worker-owned enterprises is building momentum in Cleveland.
Bills to extend sales tax to large online retailers are moving forward in Virginia and Colorado.
Bills to close a state tax loophole that benefits big chains are under consideration in Pennsylvania, Iowa, and New Mexico.
Photographer Brian Ulrich has focused his lens on the nation’s growing abundance of dark stores.
CVS is manipulating insurance coverage to steer consumers away from independent pharmacies, according to allegations under investigation by the FTC.
Book publisher Macmillan challenged Amazon’s control of e-book pricing as part of a larger war over the book industry’s future. Read reactions from Shelf Awareness, the Authors Guild, Bill Petrocelli, and Fast Company.
Wal-Mart has created a fake community group to push for a second supercenter in the city of Chicago.

SAVE ATASCADERO

(FORMERLY OPPOSE WAL-MART) UPDATE

February 4, 2010

Contact us at info@opposewalmart.com or go to

opposewalmart.com or saveatascadero.com

(Please notify us of email address changes)

Editor:  Lee Perkins

1. PLEASE JOIN US IN SUPPORTING A MARCH FOR HEALTH CARE AND JOBS FOR ALL
2. MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY OF SERVICE A SUCCESS IN ATASCADERO
3. COPENHAGEN AND CLIMATE CHANGE DEC 09:  IMPRESSIONS FROM TWO STUDENTS WHO ATTENDED AT LAKE PAVILION, WED., 2/10

I. PLEASE JOIN US IN SUPPORTING:

HEALTH CARE REFOM AND JOBS NOW–GET THE JOB DONE!

On February 17th, we’re going to join healthcareforamerica.org  rallying all over the country to demand Congress deliver the change we voted for. We need you to join us. COME TO SLO FOR THE MARCH to DEMAND HEALTH CARE AND JOBS FOR ALL.

In 2008, people from all over the country, all walks of life, all ages and races, voted for change.  So we’re taking it to the streets Wednesday, February 17th. WE ARE going to be big and our voices loud. We’re going to stand together and send an unmistakable message to Congress that they must deliver HEALTH CARE REFORM AND JOBS NOW–finish the job!

We need your help with this march by getting the word out and come with signs. MORE DETAILS–time, start location–ABOUT LOCAL MARCH IN SLO AS SOON AS WE HAVE THEM.

II. MARTIN LUTHER KING DAY OF SERVICE A SUCCESS IN ATASCADERO – A NEWS LETTER TO THE EDITOR

January 20, 2010

Atascadero Day of Service

This last weekend was Martin Luther King, Jr. Day of Service and tribute to the man.  There were three teams in Atascadero who collaborated with Central Coast United for Change (CCUC) and the Food Bank with a food drive to restore the shelves of the County Food Banks after the depletion of the holiday season.

Special thanks go to the Community Church of Atascadero who offered their hall as a collection site along with donations from their congregation donated to the Atascadero Loaves and Fishes.  Midori Feldman was a CCUC captain who organized an area of house to house pickup of food and our team–The Atascadero Democratic Club (ADC), Save Atascadero and SLO Medical Alliance.

Food for Less in Atascadero made our team’s efforts a success by generously supporting the food collection by allowing us to use their front door Saturday,

January 16, to receive food and cash donations.  We were tremendously successful collecting over 997 lbs of food and close to $200 in cash which buys 2000 lbs of food. In all our collection at Food for Less will provide 2250 meals.

And special thanks to the residents of Atascadero who were volunteers in the food drive and/or donated food so our neighbors will not go hungry.  We made the best of Martin Luther King, Jr.’s day of service to our community.

Lee Perkins, Community Outreach, ADC and Save Atascadero

1. COPENHAGEN AND CLIMATE CHANGE:  IMPRESSIONS FROM TWO STUDENTS WHO ATTENDED DEC 09

Copenhagen and Climate Change:

Two Local Student’s Eye-Witness Impressions

Last December, leaders from nearly 200 nations of the world gathered in Copenhagen, Denmark, to discuss how to address Climate Change. A large number of young people from many countries participated. What message do they have for the world?

Join us Wednesday evening Feb. 10th at the Atascadero Lake Pavilion. The event is free and open to the public. Doors open at 6:30 PM and the program starts promptly at 7 PM in the Sarah Grondstrom room, seating is limited.

Atascadero resident and Templeton High Junior  Kayla Clark and Cal Poly Senior Michael Symmes will report on their first-hand experiences at  the UN Global Climate Summit in Copenhagen.

Preceding their presentations, Dr. Ray Weymann will provide a non-technical summary of climate science: What are the scientists who are doing climate research finding out, and why is it important?