Taken from Wal Marts website:
Last Modified: Friday, November 14, 2008
Real Estate
As of August 2008, Wal-Mart's presence in California includes:
Supercenters: 33
Discount Stores: 139
Neighborhood Markets: 0
Sam's Clubs: 36
Distribution Centers: 7
Average store size (national average)
Supercenter: 185,000 sq. ft. with approx. 142,000 items
Discount Store: 101,000 sq. ft. with approx. 120,000 items
Neighborhood Market: 41,000 sq. ft. with approx. 29,000 items
Sam's Club: 130,000 sq. ft. with approx. 5,500 items
People
As of November 2008, the total number of Wal-Mart associates in California is 73,776.
The average wage for regular, full-time hourly associates in California is $11.43 per hour (Wal-Mart Discount Stores, Supercenters, and Neighborhood Markets). Additionally, associates are eligible for performance-based bonuses.
In recent years, Wal-Mart has contributed four percent of an associate's eligible pay to their combined Profit Sharing and 401(k) Plan.
Suppliers
In FYE 2008, Wal-Mart Stores, Inc spent $26,667,718,003.00 for merchandise and services with 3,743 suppliers in the state of California. As a result of Wal-Mart's relationship with these suppliers, Wal-Mart supports 249,175 supplier jobs in the state of California.
Supplier figures provided by Dun & Bradstreet.
Taxes and Fees
Wal-Mart collected on behalf of the state of California more than $831.5 million in sales taxes in FYE 2008.
Wal-Mart paid more than $147.4 million in state and local taxes in the state of California in FYE 2008.
Community Involvement
In 2007, Wal-Mart Stores and Sam's Club gave $16,739,615.00 in cash and in-kind donations to local causes and organizations in the communities they serve in the state of California. Through additional funds raised through stores and Clubs throughout the state, Wal-Mart contributed and raised a grand total of $21,563,229.00 as a result of its presence in California.
Monday, November 24, 2008
Wednesday, November 12, 2008
More on Sanders
Reaction from WMAT in response to Jim Sanders' recent activity:
When a sitting City Council member takes tens of thousands of dollars
in donations from wealthy developer interests, things can get pretty
messy! I'm sure there's more dots to connect; see attached for
Sanders' campaign filings if you want to find some yourself. Here are
two examples.
Doug Fluetsch and EDAC
1. Doug Fluetsch's group, the Citizens for the Betterment of Merced
County, donated at least $3,500 to Sanders' campaign for Supervisor.
2. Fluetsch was one of three people to apply for an open seat on the
city's Economic Development Advisory Committee (attached). Fluetsch
writes under "community-related activities" that he is "involved in
supporting the Wal-Mart D.C." and acts as chair of something called
the Merced County Jobs Coalition, which, according to the County
Chamber's newsletter, is a "committee.. .supporting such projects as
the Wal-Mart Distribution Center."
3. Sanders nominates Fluetsch for EDAC and is the only Councilmember
to vote for Fluetsch in the final 6-1 vote for Paul Lundberg of
Atwater Baptist Church.
Brookfield Castle
In Sanders' campaign filings, you'll see a $500 donation from
Brookfield Castle, LLC.
Brookfield Castle, LLC wants to develop Castle Farms into a giant
residential development between Merced and Atwater (Brookfield is part
of an international real estate conglomerate based partly in Roseville
and Del Mar). Brookfield previously donated tens of thousands of
dollars to Measures A and G, which would have raised taxpayer money to
pay for the Atwater-Merced Expressway, which would service Castle
Farms at build-out. Brookfield also gave a $1.5 million loan to MCAG
to pay for Expressway expenses, which MCAG paid back in April '07
after paying interest at the rate of $10,000/month.
As part of its General Plan update, the City is considering whether to
include Castle Farms in the City's sphere of influence, and eventually
negotiate things like sewer and water hook-ups. When the City
discusses its updated General Plan and finalizes its Sphere of
Influence, will Sanders disclose the donation from Brookfield he
received in his campaign for Supervisor?
When a sitting City Council member takes tens of thousands of dollars
in donations from wealthy developer interests, things can get pretty
messy! I'm sure there's more dots to connect; see attached for
Sanders' campaign filings if you want to find some yourself. Here are
two examples.
Doug Fluetsch and EDAC
1. Doug Fluetsch's group, the Citizens for the Betterment of Merced
County, donated at least $3,500 to Sanders' campaign for Supervisor.
2. Fluetsch was one of three people to apply for an open seat on the
city's Economic Development Advisory Committee (attached). Fluetsch
writes under "community-related activities" that he is "involved in
supporting the Wal-Mart D.C." and acts as chair of something called
the Merced County Jobs Coalition, which, according to the County
Chamber's newsletter, is a "committee.. .supporting such projects as
the Wal-Mart Distribution Center."
3. Sanders nominates Fluetsch for EDAC and is the only Councilmember
to vote for Fluetsch in the final 6-1 vote for Paul Lundberg of
Atwater Baptist Church.
Brookfield Castle
In Sanders' campaign filings, you'll see a $500 donation from
Brookfield Castle, LLC.
Brookfield Castle, LLC wants to develop Castle Farms into a giant
residential development between Merced and Atwater (Brookfield is part
of an international real estate conglomerate based partly in Roseville
and Del Mar). Brookfield previously donated tens of thousands of
dollars to Measures A and G, which would have raised taxpayer money to
pay for the Atwater-Merced Expressway, which would service Castle
Farms at build-out. Brookfield also gave a $1.5 million loan to MCAG
to pay for Expressway expenses, which MCAG paid back in April '07
after paying interest at the rate of $10,000/month.
As part of its General Plan update, the City is considering whether to
include Castle Farms in the City's sphere of influence, and eventually
negotiate things like sewer and water hook-ups. When the City
discusses its updated General Plan and finalizes its Sphere of
Influence, will Sanders disclose the donation from Brookfield he
received in his campaign for Supervisor?
Sanders tries to help Financial Backer
Merced Councilman Jim Sanders tried to appoint to a city economic committee a donor connected to his supervisor campaign without disclosing the ties -- a move a public advocacy group called "troubling."
Sanders, who lost to Hub Walsh last week, asked that the City Council appoint Doug Fluetsch, with Fluetsch and Busby Insurance, to the vacancy on the Economic Development Advisory Committee.
The 11-member group advises the City Council, Redevelopment Agency and staff on business matters. The motion failed, with only Sanders supporting him on the final vote.
Instead, Paul Lundberg, a minister with Atwater Baptist Church, was appointed to the eight-year term.
While Sanders didn't break any political disclosure laws because he would have had no direct financial gain had the appointment succeeded, an open-government group official said it's more evidence that elections should be funded with public money.
Sanders said he discussed financial contributions with the city attorney and believes there isn't a conflict, which is why he didn't mention it during the Nov. 3 meeting.
"I'm usually fairly conscientious about that stuff," he explained. "I believe people need to know where support comes from."
At the same meeting, Sanders made a point of stating that he lives near the G Street underpass that's going to be built. He asked City Attorney Greg Diaz whether he should recuse himself from a vote. It wasn't necessary, Diaz said.
Fluetsch is a major donor to Citizens for the Betterment of Merced County, a political action committee that endorsed Sanders and gave $2,583 to his campaign and another $3,750 worth in signs.
From the beginning of the year to June, Fluetsch donated $600 to the political action committee, records show.
While Sanders' vote for Fluetsch doesn't violate any political campaign rules, it still highlights a system in which donors may appear to get special favors, said Derek Cressman, the Western states regional director of Common Cause, a nonpartisan nonprofit accountability group.
"It's a blurry line between donating and buying access," he explained. "It casts doubts on the merit of the appointment."
It's unusual for politicians to point out their dealings with campaign donors, he said. They're only required to file disclosure reports listing contributions, which Sanders did.
Leaders aiming for public office look to their friends for financial support and often turn to them to fill some appointed positions, he said. "It's certainly the way the game is played," he added.
Cities and counties should adopt public financing of elections so there aren't any questions about paybacks, he said.
Sanders has known Fluetsch for years through the Rotary Club and because Fluetsch's business provides insurance to Sanders' nonprofit, the Merced Community Action Network.
Sanders said he's also supported Fluetsch's bids for other committees. He noted he didn't receive any contributions in his bid for Board of Supervisors from the Lyons family, which owned the land where Wal-Mart wants to build a distribution center.
That, he said, would be a donation he'd feel compelled to note before voting on the controversial project.
Sanders, who lost to Hub Walsh last week, asked that the City Council appoint Doug Fluetsch, with Fluetsch and Busby Insurance, to the vacancy on the Economic Development Advisory Committee.
The 11-member group advises the City Council, Redevelopment Agency and staff on business matters. The motion failed, with only Sanders supporting him on the final vote.
Instead, Paul Lundberg, a minister with Atwater Baptist Church, was appointed to the eight-year term.
While Sanders didn't break any political disclosure laws because he would have had no direct financial gain had the appointment succeeded, an open-government group official said it's more evidence that elections should be funded with public money.
Sanders said he discussed financial contributions with the city attorney and believes there isn't a conflict, which is why he didn't mention it during the Nov. 3 meeting.
"I'm usually fairly conscientious about that stuff," he explained. "I believe people need to know where support comes from."
At the same meeting, Sanders made a point of stating that he lives near the G Street underpass that's going to be built. He asked City Attorney Greg Diaz whether he should recuse himself from a vote. It wasn't necessary, Diaz said.
Fluetsch is a major donor to Citizens for the Betterment of Merced County, a political action committee that endorsed Sanders and gave $2,583 to his campaign and another $3,750 worth in signs.
From the beginning of the year to June, Fluetsch donated $600 to the political action committee, records show.
While Sanders' vote for Fluetsch doesn't violate any political campaign rules, it still highlights a system in which donors may appear to get special favors, said Derek Cressman, the Western states regional director of Common Cause, a nonpartisan nonprofit accountability group.
"It's a blurry line between donating and buying access," he explained. "It casts doubts on the merit of the appointment."
It's unusual for politicians to point out their dealings with campaign donors, he said. They're only required to file disclosure reports listing contributions, which Sanders did.
Leaders aiming for public office look to their friends for financial support and often turn to them to fill some appointed positions, he said. "It's certainly the way the game is played," he added.
Cities and counties should adopt public financing of elections so there aren't any questions about paybacks, he said.
Sanders has known Fluetsch for years through the Rotary Club and because Fluetsch's business provides insurance to Sanders' nonprofit, the Merced Community Action Network.
Sanders said he's also supported Fluetsch's bids for other committees. He noted he didn't receive any contributions in his bid for Board of Supervisors from the Lyons family, which owned the land where Wal-Mart wants to build a distribution center.
That, he said, would be a donation he'd feel compelled to note before voting on the controversial project.
Saturday, November 1, 2008
The Proposed Underpass
from Saturdays Sun Star
City will map out underpass work Monday
By SCOTT JASON
sjason@mercedsun-star.com
Merced's City Council, in broad brush strokes, will paint a picture Monday night of how it wants the G Street underpass designed.
The finer points of the project will be shaded in during the coming year.
The council will meet 5:30 p.m. Monday for a public workshop on the $18 million project that's been one of the city's top goals for years.
The city, with $9 million from the state, will build an underpass so traffic can go below the train tracks even if a locomotive is barreling through town. An average of 70 trains go across the northern set of tracks.
Work is scheduled to begin in 2010 and end in 2011. Residents are fretting about what'll happen in between those dates and in the years to come.
In the short-term, construction will inconvenience people and tax nearby streets. In the long run, G Street will likely see more traffic as residents use it to avoid train delays.
The city has been meeting with area schools and neighbors to find solutions to their concerns, acting Development Services Director David Gonsalves said.
He declined to discuss any plans that have been discussed. "We're still getting input," he said. "We have a year to work (the details) out."
The council is faced with three main choices as the long-awaited project moves forward.
First, should G Street at the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway crossing be closed during construction, expected to last about 18 months?
If the street's closed, it means the 31,000 daily car trips across that section of G Street will be using M and R streets to move north and south in Merced.
For an extra $2 million to $3 million, the city could build a detour. It would tack an extra six months on the project. G Street would only be closed for six months.
Some businesses worry that the closure could hurt their bottom line.
Second, how should Santa Fe Drive, just north of the train tracks, connect to G Street?
The city can close the street entirely and turn it into a cul-de-sac. It's the cheapest option, at $40,000, but it'll increase traffic on nearby streets as residents leave their homes. On average, there are about 2,800 car trips daily on that part of the road.
The city can keep the road connected to G Street in two ways.
It can get rid of some garage access and buy a section of land. That option would cost about $600,000.
It could curve the road to the south, keep garage access and still buy a chunk of land. It'd cost $400,000.
The cost of buying the land is not included in those estimated costs of the other construction.
Both options suggest low to moderate impacts on traffic because left turns from Santa Fe Drive to G Street wouldn't be allowed for safety reasons. Right turns would be allowed.
Third, the council must decide how West 23rd, 24th and 25th streets should connect to G Street. According to the city engineer, 23rd Street can stay connected with only right turns. However, West 24th and 25th need to be closed and turned into cul-de-sacs.
It's possible that West 25th Street could stay open for emergency vehicles.
During an informational meeting last week, residents worried about how the project would keep taxing Merced's main roads as the city grows northward. Many vocal residents consider the underpass a temporary fix to a much larger problem.
Quieter residents filled out comment cards praising the city for moving forward on the projects. The two groups have a middle ground:
They'd rather not wait for a train to pass.
Reporter Scott Jason can be reached at (209) 385-2453 or sjason@mercedsun-star.com.
City will map out underpass work Monday
By SCOTT JASON
sjason@mercedsun-star.com
Merced's City Council, in broad brush strokes, will paint a picture Monday night of how it wants the G Street underpass designed.
The finer points of the project will be shaded in during the coming year.
The council will meet 5:30 p.m. Monday for a public workshop on the $18 million project that's been one of the city's top goals for years.
The city, with $9 million from the state, will build an underpass so traffic can go below the train tracks even if a locomotive is barreling through town. An average of 70 trains go across the northern set of tracks.
Work is scheduled to begin in 2010 and end in 2011. Residents are fretting about what'll happen in between those dates and in the years to come.
In the short-term, construction will inconvenience people and tax nearby streets. In the long run, G Street will likely see more traffic as residents use it to avoid train delays.
The city has been meeting with area schools and neighbors to find solutions to their concerns, acting Development Services Director David Gonsalves said.
He declined to discuss any plans that have been discussed. "We're still getting input," he said. "We have a year to work (the details) out."
The council is faced with three main choices as the long-awaited project moves forward.
First, should G Street at the Burlington Northern Santa Fe Railway crossing be closed during construction, expected to last about 18 months?
If the street's closed, it means the 31,000 daily car trips across that section of G Street will be using M and R streets to move north and south in Merced.
For an extra $2 million to $3 million, the city could build a detour. It would tack an extra six months on the project. G Street would only be closed for six months.
Some businesses worry that the closure could hurt their bottom line.
Second, how should Santa Fe Drive, just north of the train tracks, connect to G Street?
The city can close the street entirely and turn it into a cul-de-sac. It's the cheapest option, at $40,000, but it'll increase traffic on nearby streets as residents leave their homes. On average, there are about 2,800 car trips daily on that part of the road.
The city can keep the road connected to G Street in two ways.
It can get rid of some garage access and buy a section of land. That option would cost about $600,000.
It could curve the road to the south, keep garage access and still buy a chunk of land. It'd cost $400,000.
The cost of buying the land is not included in those estimated costs of the other construction.
Both options suggest low to moderate impacts on traffic because left turns from Santa Fe Drive to G Street wouldn't be allowed for safety reasons. Right turns would be allowed.
Third, the council must decide how West 23rd, 24th and 25th streets should connect to G Street. According to the city engineer, 23rd Street can stay connected with only right turns. However, West 24th and 25th need to be closed and turned into cul-de-sacs.
It's possible that West 25th Street could stay open for emergency vehicles.
During an informational meeting last week, residents worried about how the project would keep taxing Merced's main roads as the city grows northward. Many vocal residents consider the underpass a temporary fix to a much larger problem.
Quieter residents filled out comment cards praising the city for moving forward on the projects. The two groups have a middle ground:
They'd rather not wait for a train to pass.
Reporter Scott Jason can be reached at (209) 385-2453 or sjason@mercedsun-star.com.
Friday, October 31, 2008
From Loose Lips....
....this from the Sun Star today:
Big-box, big oops
Councilman and supervisor candidate Jim Sanders supports the Wal-Mart distribution center!
Or maybe not.
Or ... it's just too soon to say.
Merced's other newspaper ran a profile about Sanders last week that said he's an advocate of bringing big-box stores and the proposed distribution center to Merced. (Remember his campaign is about jobs, and your Cracker Jack decoder ring will tell you what that means.)
The city would have little to gain by turning a frowny face to the smiling retailer, Sanders told the paper.
He set the record straight in the latest edition by explaining that the center is something he could support but doesn't want his comments to cloud his judgment on the project because all is not known about it.
After all, that nagging little environment impact report -- which will either spell out Merced's ecological ruin or merely note that a few more residents might develop a cough -- hasn't yet come out.
Once it's released and hits the best-seller list, the project will go before the Merced City Council for a vote. It's a meeting that could challenge the Riverside Motorsports Park vote for the controversy record. Remember that "project"?
Anti-Wal-Mart activists seized on Sanders' endorsement, sending a mass e-mail about the story. "It doesn't matter what Merced residents say, or how badly we'll be impacted by Wal-Mart's high-polluting distribution center -- his door is closed, his mind is made up," it reads.
The e-mail goes on to note his opponent, Hub Walsh, has plans to improve air quality.
Though supervisors won't vote on the distribution center, he has stayed out of the fray, saying it's too early to support or oppose the project. It's at least tacit support of Walsh for supervisor.
But let's pull out our political whiteboard. Sanders sounds as if he's bought into the project, and he's trying to move from the City Council to the Board of Supervisors.
So ... you'd think the Stop Wal-Mart team would support his campaign and lobby for Walsh to fill his spot on the council.
Big-box, big oops
Councilman and supervisor candidate Jim Sanders supports the Wal-Mart distribution center!
Or maybe not.
Or ... it's just too soon to say.
Merced's other newspaper ran a profile about Sanders last week that said he's an advocate of bringing big-box stores and the proposed distribution center to Merced. (Remember his campaign is about jobs, and your Cracker Jack decoder ring will tell you what that means.)
The city would have little to gain by turning a frowny face to the smiling retailer, Sanders told the paper.
He set the record straight in the latest edition by explaining that the center is something he could support but doesn't want his comments to cloud his judgment on the project because all is not known about it.
After all, that nagging little environment impact report -- which will either spell out Merced's ecological ruin or merely note that a few more residents might develop a cough -- hasn't yet come out.
Once it's released and hits the best-seller list, the project will go before the Merced City Council for a vote. It's a meeting that could challenge the Riverside Motorsports Park vote for the controversy record. Remember that "project"?
Anti-Wal-Mart activists seized on Sanders' endorsement, sending a mass e-mail about the story. "It doesn't matter what Merced residents say, or how badly we'll be impacted by Wal-Mart's high-polluting distribution center -- his door is closed, his mind is made up," it reads.
The e-mail goes on to note his opponent, Hub Walsh, has plans to improve air quality.
Though supervisors won't vote on the distribution center, he has stayed out of the fray, saying it's too early to support or oppose the project. It's at least tacit support of Walsh for supervisor.
But let's pull out our political whiteboard. Sanders sounds as if he's bought into the project, and he's trying to move from the City Council to the Board of Supervisors.
So ... you'd think the Stop Wal-Mart team would support his campaign and lobby for Walsh to fill his spot on the council.
Thursday, October 30, 2008
Jim Sanders and WalMart
This from our friends at WMAT regarding Jim Sanders and the article in the Sun Star regarding his support for the WalMart Distribution Center:
"Setting it straight"
Dear Editor,
I was very pleased with your article on my campaign, and how you wove the family's history and my own into the story of my race for County Supervisor, District 2. Thank you.
As a sitting City Council member, who has not yet seen the complete plan nor the EIR for the Wal-Mart distribution center project, I have been trying to toe the legal line by not publicly endorsing or opposing the project without certain qualification.
Your article was correct in quoting my support for the Distribution Center because of the county's needs for better paying jobs for our workforce. However, I have a legal duty to the Office of Council Member and to the public whose business the council takes up, to be certain my public comments and public positions in this supervisor campaign, do not cloud the process.
I should have said it to you thus:
"While it will not solve the entire unemployment situation in the city or the county, the Wal-Mart distribution center and the jobs it can provide us makes it something, at this point, I could support. Unless something becomes apparent to me in the E.I.R. process and the Public Review prior to the council making its decision, it seems like we would be doing more damage to both our environment and our economic situation in the county if they located elsewhere."
Jim Sanders
"Setting it straight"
Dear Editor,
I was very pleased with your article on my campaign, and how you wove the family's history and my own into the story of my race for County Supervisor, District 2. Thank you.
As a sitting City Council member, who has not yet seen the complete plan nor the EIR for the Wal-Mart distribution center project, I have been trying to toe the legal line by not publicly endorsing or opposing the project without certain qualification.
Your article was correct in quoting my support for the Distribution Center because of the county's needs for better paying jobs for our workforce. However, I have a legal duty to the Office of Council Member and to the public whose business the council takes up, to be certain my public comments and public positions in this supervisor campaign, do not cloud the process.
I should have said it to you thus:
"While it will not solve the entire unemployment situation in the city or the county, the Wal-Mart distribution center and the jobs it can provide us makes it something, at this point, I could support. Unless something becomes apparent to me in the E.I.R. process and the Public Review prior to the council making its decision, it seems like we would be doing more damage to both our environment and our economic situation in the county if they located elsewhere."
Jim Sanders
Wednesday, October 29, 2008
A Message from the GVNA
The Central California Valley Band Review (CCBR) will once again be held in our neighborhood on: Saturday, November 8, 2008 from 9:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m.! Volunteers from our Neighborhood Association will be needed to help assure this years event will once again be safe and successful! Here's how you can assist: Thursday, November 6th at: 4:00 p.m. - 6:00 p.m. - Volunteers are needed to help Post "No Parking" signs on the Parade Route. We will assemble at the Golden Valley High School Band Room at 3:45 p.m. then, proceed to the route from there. Saturday, November 8th at: 6:00 a.m. - 12:30 p.m. - Volunteers will be needed to "Monitor Traffic at Neighborhood Intersections". We will be assembling at the Golden Valley High School Volunteer area for our assignments at 6:00 a.m. This is your opportunity to get involved! Please drop me an e-mail and let me know you will be able to participate. You may e-mail or call me at: (209) 761-0635 with any questions. Thanks In Advance! Joel
Election is just days away....
Just a friendly reminder to get out and vote! There are crucial issues out there that will affect us all so now is your chance to make a difference!
Thursday, October 2, 2008
Merced's New City Manager
taken from the Merced Sun-Star
Merced Council to vote on new city manager
John Bramble comes from Brighton, Colorado
By Scott Jason
sjason@mercedsun-star.com
John Bramble
Bramble's resume
Merced's City Council will vote Monday on hiring John Bramble as its next city manager.
Bramble serves as city manager in Brighton, Col. and would replace Jim Marshall, who announced his retirement in January. Bramble will not be at the meeting. The city is offering Bramble a five-year contract with a $171,653 salary and four weeks vacation. It also includes a nine-month severance package.
Merced Council to vote on new city manager
John Bramble comes from Brighton, Colorado
By Scott Jason
sjason@mercedsun-star.com
John Bramble
Bramble's resume
Merced's City Council will vote Monday on hiring John Bramble as its next city manager.
Bramble serves as city manager in Brighton, Col. and would replace Jim Marshall, who announced his retirement in January. Bramble will not be at the meeting. The city is offering Bramble a five-year contract with a $171,653 salary and four weeks vacation. It also includes a nine-month severance package.
Monday, September 29, 2008
Just a friendly reminder!!!
The Central California Band Review is coming up!!!! November 8th is the date so circle your calendars and bring the lawnchairs and kids. Remember afterwards Golden Valley High School will host a football game AT the Golden Valley campus so make it a day for the family and support the Cougars! The parade itself will follow the same route as last year. More information will be posted as the date draws near....
Tuesday, September 23, 2008
Letters to the Editor.....
The following Letters to the Editor are taken from recent editions of the Merced Sun Star about, you guessed it, Wal Mart:
Monday, Sep. 22, 2008
Letter: Hoping for better
Editor: Sam Walton founded Wal-Mart in 1962. His idea was to buy products in bulk at the lowest possible price so he could sell below his competition. In the United States, you can expect a Wal-Mart within 60 miles.
This has allowed Wal-Mart to absorb an average of 20 percent of the competition wherever it opens a store.
In small towns it can be as much as 50 percent. The middleman is eliminated because Walmart can sell to retailers below wholesale. Wal-Mart refers to this as "fostering a healthy competitive environment."
Walton decided to cut his overhead by eliminating unions in his business so he wouldn't have to pay wage increases or negotiate for benefits.
What Wal-Mart lacks in moral integrity and ethical values it makes up for in money. In July, Wal-Mart showed $166 billion in sales this year. Currently, there is a lawsuit pending against Wal-Mart for discrimination against women.
Our City Council must decide the value of having a Wal-Mart distribution center in Merced.
Merced could lose higher-paying jobs than Wal-Mart can create with lower-paying jobs. We might lose more than we can regain -- our integrity.
JOAN PORTER
Merced
Letter: Wal-Mart will bring much-needed jobs
Editor: The Wal-Mart distribution center proposed for Merced will bring some badly needed jobs to this area where unemployment is historically high.
And such expansion is merely a part of growth, and cities like ours either grows or stagnates.
If the distribution center is not built here I believe it will be in either the county to our north or to our south, and we will still get the increased traffic, which appears to be the reason many people oppose the project.
LEE PIERCE
Merced
City Council and integrity are two words that don't usually come to mind together at least. Especially when it comes to a big donor like WalMart. As for Mr. Pierce's assumptions, I think he misses the point. Its not that most people don't want a distribution center in Merced, it's that most opponents don't want it so close to elementary schools. We would prefer the center further out away from our children. Does Mr. Pierce disagree with that?
Monday, Sep. 22, 2008
Letter: Hoping for better
Editor: Sam Walton founded Wal-Mart in 1962. His idea was to buy products in bulk at the lowest possible price so he could sell below his competition. In the United States, you can expect a Wal-Mart within 60 miles.
This has allowed Wal-Mart to absorb an average of 20 percent of the competition wherever it opens a store.
In small towns it can be as much as 50 percent. The middleman is eliminated because Walmart can sell to retailers below wholesale. Wal-Mart refers to this as "fostering a healthy competitive environment."
Walton decided to cut his overhead by eliminating unions in his business so he wouldn't have to pay wage increases or negotiate for benefits.
What Wal-Mart lacks in moral integrity and ethical values it makes up for in money. In July, Wal-Mart showed $166 billion in sales this year. Currently, there is a lawsuit pending against Wal-Mart for discrimination against women.
Our City Council must decide the value of having a Wal-Mart distribution center in Merced.
Merced could lose higher-paying jobs than Wal-Mart can create with lower-paying jobs. We might lose more than we can regain -- our integrity.
JOAN PORTER
Merced
Letter: Wal-Mart will bring much-needed jobs
Editor: The Wal-Mart distribution center proposed for Merced will bring some badly needed jobs to this area where unemployment is historically high.
And such expansion is merely a part of growth, and cities like ours either grows or stagnates.
If the distribution center is not built here I believe it will be in either the county to our north or to our south, and we will still get the increased traffic, which appears to be the reason many people oppose the project.
LEE PIERCE
Merced
City Council and integrity are two words that don't usually come to mind together at least. Especially when it comes to a big donor like WalMart. As for Mr. Pierce's assumptions, I think he misses the point. Its not that most people don't want a distribution center in Merced, it's that most opponents don't want it so close to elementary schools. We would prefer the center further out away from our children. Does Mr. Pierce disagree with that?
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
Wal Mart subsidies
The following stats were provided by the web site Good Jobs First and although it comes as no surprise that Wal Mart uses subsidies, the amount of those subsidies was surprising:
LARGEST WAL-MART ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBSIDY DEALS IN EACH STATE
Note: Good Jobs First found deals in 38 of the 50 states; there are no Wal-Mart stores or distribution centers in the District of Columbia. Also note that complete information was not available on some deals. State City Facility Type Year Opened Value of Subsidy
AL Cullman distribution center 1983 more than $12 million
AR Clarksville distribution center 1993 more than $1.1 million
AZ Mesa Supercenter Fall 2007 up to $13.2 million
CA Porterville distribution center 1992 estimated $14 million
CO Westminster Supercenter 2007/2008 $5 million
DE Smyrna distribution center 2004 $4.1 million
FL Arcadia distribution center 2005 more than $23.8 million
GA Douglas distribution center 1987 more than $10 million
IA Mount Pleasant distribution center 1985 $10 million
IL Country Club Hills Supercenter 2006 $12.25 million
IN Gas City distribution center 2007 more than $6.4 million
KS W. Kansas City/Speedway Supercenter undetermined $29.1 million
KY Hopkinsville distribution center 2003 more than $15 million
LA Opelousas distribution center 1999 $33 million
MD Princess Anne distribution center undetermined Up to $12.5 million
ME Lewiston distribution center 2006 $16 million
MI Coldwater distribution center 2001 $2.4 million
MN Mankato distribution center undetermined $2 million
MO Kansas City (Blue Ridge Mall) Supercenter 2007 $26.75 million
MS New Albany distribution center 1996 about $11.5 million
NC Shelby distribution center 2002 at least $2.1 million
NE North Platte distribution center 2003 more than $15.2 million
NJ Audubon discount store 2005 $1.2 million
NM Los Lunas distribution center 1999 about $6.7 million
NY Sharon Springs distribution center 1995 estimated $46 million
OH Grove City distribution center 1992 $19 million
OK Ochelata (Bartlesville) dist center 2005 about $15.9 million
OR Hermiston distribution center 1998 about $2.5 million
PA Woodland distribution center 1993 $8 million
SC Pageland distribution center 1997 $28.2 million
TN Midway distribution center 1997 $5.4 million
TX New Braunfels distribution center 1989 estimated $20 million
UT Hurricane distribution center 1993 estimated $10 million
VA Mount Crawford distribution center 2006 $2.5 million
WA Grandview distribution center 2004 $1 million
WI Beaver Dam distribution center 2007 about $7.7 million
WV Nitro Supercenter 1998 $4.9 million
WY Cheyenne distribution center 2007 estimated $6.275 million
Interesting. The Porterville center was located in an enterprise zone, which made it eligible for state tax credits of up to $31,500 per employee. The exact value of the credits used was not available, but if we assume that credits were received for only one third of the 1,400 employees, the total would be about $14 million
LARGEST WAL-MART ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT SUBSIDY DEALS IN EACH STATE
Note: Good Jobs First found deals in 38 of the 50 states; there are no Wal-Mart stores or distribution centers in the District of Columbia. Also note that complete information was not available on some deals. State City Facility Type Year Opened Value of Subsidy
AL Cullman distribution center 1983 more than $12 million
AR Clarksville distribution center 1993 more than $1.1 million
AZ Mesa Supercenter Fall 2007 up to $13.2 million
CA Porterville distribution center 1992 estimated $14 million
CO Westminster Supercenter 2007/2008 $5 million
DE Smyrna distribution center 2004 $4.1 million
FL Arcadia distribution center 2005 more than $23.8 million
GA Douglas distribution center 1987 more than $10 million
IA Mount Pleasant distribution center 1985 $10 million
IL Country Club Hills Supercenter 2006 $12.25 million
IN Gas City distribution center 2007 more than $6.4 million
KS W. Kansas City/Speedway Supercenter undetermined $29.1 million
KY Hopkinsville distribution center 2003 more than $15 million
LA Opelousas distribution center 1999 $33 million
MD Princess Anne distribution center undetermined Up to $12.5 million
ME Lewiston distribution center 2006 $16 million
MI Coldwater distribution center 2001 $2.4 million
MN Mankato distribution center undetermined $2 million
MO Kansas City (Blue Ridge Mall) Supercenter 2007 $26.75 million
MS New Albany distribution center 1996 about $11.5 million
NC Shelby distribution center 2002 at least $2.1 million
NE North Platte distribution center 2003 more than $15.2 million
NJ Audubon discount store 2005 $1.2 million
NM Los Lunas distribution center 1999 about $6.7 million
NY Sharon Springs distribution center 1995 estimated $46 million
OH Grove City distribution center 1992 $19 million
OK Ochelata (Bartlesville) dist center 2005 about $15.9 million
OR Hermiston distribution center 1998 about $2.5 million
PA Woodland distribution center 1993 $8 million
SC Pageland distribution center 1997 $28.2 million
TN Midway distribution center 1997 $5.4 million
TX New Braunfels distribution center 1989 estimated $20 million
UT Hurricane distribution center 1993 estimated $10 million
VA Mount Crawford distribution center 2006 $2.5 million
WA Grandview distribution center 2004 $1 million
WI Beaver Dam distribution center 2007 about $7.7 million
WV Nitro Supercenter 1998 $4.9 million
WY Cheyenne distribution center 2007 estimated $6.275 million
Interesting. The Porterville center was located in an enterprise zone, which made it eligible for state tax credits of up to $31,500 per employee. The exact value of the credits used was not available, but if we assume that credits were received for only one third of the 1,400 employees, the total would be about $14 million
Wal Mart Distribution Center
These drawings were taken from the staff report at the city council meeting. They are for the proposed Wal Mart Distribution Center.
City Staff Report
Here is the link for the staff report for council item regarding Wal Mart Distribution Center for those interested.
http://www.mercedstopwalmart.org/images/SWAT_PDFS/staffreport9152008.pdf
http://www.mercedstopwalmart.org/images/SWAT_PDFS/staffreport9152008.pdf
Wednesday, September 10, 2008
GVNA Meeting
September's meeting was attended by guest speaker Dave Sprinkel from the Merced Gateway Project. Mr. Sprinkel reported that progress is being made on the proposed shopping center on Gerard Ave. with Merced's leaders giving the project another serious look. Funding for additional work on the Campus Parkway has been recently approved and with the opening of the Target Superstore in Atwater, Merced City Council and City Staff have changed their attitude on the project and are trying to work with Gateway. While no tenants have been confirmed as of yet, Mr. Sprinkel was optimistic that once ground was broken, interested companies may start to look at Merced. There are still issues regarding city fees and final plan approval but the income generated and potential jobs for the citizens of Merced would benefit greatly.
In addition to the Merced Gateway Project and jobs, the subject of Wal-Mart's proposed distribution center once again came front and center. In reading between the lines of city officials and examining the current state of Merced's economic situation, the center MAY soon be approved. Issues such as air and noise pollution, truck traffic and the centers proximity to schools may have to take a backseat in order to provide for the 900 jobs WalMart promises as a benefit to the community. Of course exactly how many of those "900" jobs will actually go to Merced residents is still up for debate. If the city planning departments past record (i.e. the Grove Apartments) is any indication that number may not be as close to 900 as some would believe. At least not for Merced residents that is.
In more positive news Lee Pevsner reported that the Central California Band Review will take place November 8 along the same route as last year. Residents living in the Dinkey Creek area should make a note of this date as detours and road closures will be in effect with the review hours lasting from approximately 7:00 until around 1:00. Also, after the band review Golden Valley will play it's football game at Golden Valley High School's football field. It will be a great time to take the family out for a day of marching bands and a good old football game!
With the coming changing of the seasons now would also be a great time to plan a Neighborhood Watch Meeting. With many houses in foreclosure, meeting with your neighbors and planning a strategy to keep empty houses free from vandals and trespassers might be a good idea. If you'd like to plan a meeting you can leave a message at this blog and you will be contacted.
Sunday, July 6, 2008
the GVNA Blog
The purpose of this blog is to keep residents within the Golden Valley Neighborhood Association's boundaries informed of activities relating to our neighborhoods.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
