Citizens Against Wal-Mart In Marina

www.NoWalmartInMarina.org

2006-06-16T14:08:00.000-07:00

Our website has moved and improved!

Go to www.NoWalmartInMarina.org for the latest news on Wal-Mart’s attempt to open a store in Marina, CA and how you can help prevent it.

What You Can Do Today to Stop Wal-Mart in Marina

2006-05-22T09:24:00.000-07:00

When I'm out in the community, be it shopping in Marina, attending an event in Monterey, eating at a restaurant in Carmel, or walking on a local beach, people tell me how disappointed they are that Wal-Mart is trying to come to Marina, to the Monterey Bay. They ask what they can do to stop it. How do you stop the world’s largest retailer with the most predatory business practices in modern history?

Simple, tell Wal-Mart you won’t spend your money with them. You won’t shop at their store.

Wal-Mart is all about money and this message will hit home with them. Call their California 800 number and simply tell them that they are not welcome in Marina or on the Monterey Bay and you will not spend a penny with them. Call 1-800-793-6522 today. It will just take a few seconds and have a huge cumulative impact.

For more information on why Wal-Mart is so bad for any community, go to WalmartWatch.com, Sprawl-Busters.com, WakeUpWalmart.com, and BattleMart.com.

Important Article on Wal-Mart & A Small Town’s Fight

2006-05-22T09:21:00.000-07:00

Following is a link to an article from today's San Francisco Chronicle about the small (pop. 24,000), waterfront, East Bay town of Hercules' fight to keep Wal-Mart out. There are many similarities between Hercules and Marina, and one major difference—the hercules City Council is fighting for their city.

http://sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2006/05/22/MNGO6IVUTP1.DTL

WakeUpWalMart.com Releases Crime Report

2006-05-03T11:12:00.000-07:00

"…Wal-Mart parking lots are a virtual magnet for crime." - Judge L. Starcher

Today, WakeUpWalMart.com released the first national study detailing the problem of crime at Wal-Mart store locations called “Wal-Mart & Crime: Is Wal-Mart Safe?” We requested the official police reports (ie. calls for service) from 551 Wal-Mart store locations throughout the U.S.

The results are shocking and outrageous. In 2004, at just those 551 Wal-Mart stores, police were called to respond to over 148,331 police incidents, including over 2,900 reports of serious or violent crimes:

1,145 Assaults
153 Sex Crimes
23 Kidnappings (or Attempts)
9 Rapes (or Attempts)
4 Homicides (or Attempts)

Based on this sample, nationally in 2004, we estimate police responded to nearly 1 million reported police incidents at Wal-Mart stores costing American taxpayers $77 million.

For a complete copy of the report please go to:

www.WalMartCrimeReport.com

There is no explanation why Wal-Mart, despite knowing it has a high level of crime at some of its stores, has not taken the necessary steps to improve public safety and address the serious threat to customers, employees and the community.

As early as 1994, Wal-Mart actually conducted its own crime study and found nearly 80% of the crimes were being committed in its parking lots. A 1996 confidential, internal Wal-Mart memo warned, “We are now on notice of the violence that is happening on our parking lots in the Houston area.”

And yet, even with horrific examples of violent crimes and even rapes at Wal-Mart stores, Wal-Mart has not publicly adopted a company-wide policy of installing staffed security cameras and instituting roving security patrols at all of its stores. In fact, according to a Wal-Mart official in 2000, Wal-Mart failed to put in roving security patrols at 83% of its stores even though internal Wal-Mart studies showed these patrols could reduce crime to near zero levels.

Today, WakeUpWalMart.com is sending a letter to Wal-Mart’s CEO Lee Scott calling on Wal-Mart to immediately take the necessary steps to protect its customers, employees and the community by adopting a nationwide policy to make its stores safer, including: putting in security cameras at all its stores, actually having an employee watch those security cameras and implementing roving security patrols in all of its parking lots.

As part of this campaign, WakeUpWalMart.com calls on Wal-Mart to announce this new public safety initiative before Mother’s Day, May 14th 2006.

Please sign our letter calling on Wal-Mart to adopt a nation-wide policy to make its stores safer by Mother’s Day:

http://www.walmartcrimereport.com/letter.html

KSBW's Editorial & Our Rebuttal

2006-04-25T14:47:00.000-07:00

KSBW Editorial: Wal-Mart Marina?
April 21, 2006

The brouhaha continues in Marina over a proposed Wal-Mart. Some zealots would have you believe that Wal-Mart is as great a threat to the free world as al-Qaeda. Thankfully, the Marina City Council seems to be diligent in asking the right questions, but at least they're moving the project forward. Our Editorial Board just hopes they don't concoct so many restrictions and requirements that Wal-Mart nixes the deal.

The fact is Marina has a big, empty retail space doing nothing to serve the people or generate taxes. Kmart moved out and Wal-Mart wants in. It's not like Marina has Costco and Target fighting over the opportunity to snatch up this empty building. Wal-Mart draws criticism, but it's success is not based on bullying tactics or illegal accounting, it's based on customers actually deciding to shop there.

There are some people who hate going to Costco: They say it's just too big. Some people love Target and its trendy marketing; some deride the store calling it "Tar-zhay." Some people think the fancy, chamancy Tiffany's in Carmel is an overpriced jewelry store chain. Heck, some people don't like KSBW. But that's the best part of this great country: choice. Our point is, if you don't like Wal-Mart, don't shop there ... don't apply to work there. The fact is many across our country are thankful that a Wal-Mart with its wide selection and low prices is available. Tens of thousands are proud to work for Wal-Mart and have made life-long careers from their experience. High-handed activists should not decide for the rest of us whether a Wal-Mart comes to Marina or not, the Marina City Council should. And we hope the Council is fair in treating Wal-Mart just as they would any other new big store hoping to fill the old Kmart space.

#####################################################

April 25, 2006

Dear Mr. Heston and Ms. Wright:

We were disappointed to see KSBW’s April 21st editorial. We are long-time KSBW viewers and enjoy KSBW’s news coverage. However, the April 21 editorial seems to serve Wal-Mart more than the public.

First, we would like to let you know that we are leading a movement to stop Wal-Mart in Marina. We are not “zealots” or “high-handed activists.” We are Marina residents, supported by hundreds of other Marina residents. We own a home and a small business in Marina. We vote in every election. We give back to the community. We have never led an “activist” cause. However, when it was announced in the Monterey County Herald on March 4 that Wal-Mart was coming to Marina, we knew we had to do something and shortly thereafter formed a grassroots citizens group called Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina.

Second, yes, Wal-Mart does draw criticism — and rightfully so on many counts. We believe that it is wrong for a company to do things like discriminate against women for pay and promotions, or make people work off-the-clock, or violate child labor laws, or violate the Clean Water Act. Other people do too, like the U.S. government, for example. Wal-Mart doesn’t need to blame to activists or unions for tarnishing its image; Wal-Mart is doing a fine job tarnishing its own image.

Third, we agree with you that one of the best parts of this great country is choice, and county residents can choose to shop at the existing Wal-Mart in Salinas. The problem is that Marina was NOT given a choice. An out-of-town developer bought the Kmart building and parking lot last October. They signed a lease with Wal-Mart in February, without bothering to tell anyone in Marina. Marina’s City Council and citizens were informed a Wal-Mart was coming to Marina by the Monterey County Herald article on March 4. We have repeatedly been told, “It’s a done deal.” Where was our choice?

Further, the vision for the Marina Landing Shopping Center (the site of the former Kmart) was discussed in great detail at the Oct. 13, 2005 Marina Planning Commission meeting. The vision our City Council and Planning Commission had for the site was MULTIPLE retailers. In fact, the Planning Commission specifically told the developer that Marina did NOT want a Wal-Mart or any single general discount retailer coming in and occupying the whole building.

Should an out-of-town developer and Wal-Mart have more say in the direction of Marina than its own city officials and citizens? Certainly not. Marina citizens and city leaders (not a developer or Wal-Mart or KSBW or even citizens from other local cities) should decide if a Wal-Mart comes to Marina.

Fourth, if the developer had followed through with the plans that were discussed for the site at the Oct. 13 meeting and secured multiple retailers, both the developer and the city would make MORE money than they would with a Wal-Mart. And Marina citizens would have MORE choice which, again, is one of the best parts of this country.

Fifth, comparing the threat that Wal-Mart poses to the threat al-Qaeda poses is ridiculous and irresponsible. We are dismayed that anyone would make such a comparison.

Finally, in the interest of fairness and full disclosure, we think KSBW should disclose in its editorials if the company it is praising is a paid advertiser on the station — particularly when touting the company’s “wide selection and low prices.”

Sincerely,

Steve and Tina Zmak
Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina
831-883-4459
cawim@earthlink.net

Planning Commission Grants a Public Hearing! - April 27

2006-04-23T15:07:00.000-07:00

Say No to Wal-Mart

Come to the Marina Planning Commission Public Hearing Thursday, April 27, 6:30 p.m. at City Hall, 211 Hillcrest Avenue

Our Planning Commission voted to have a public hearing to decide whether or not they will consider revoking the permit that was granted at the Oct. 13, 2005 Planning Commission meeting.

Planning Commissioners stated repeatedly at the Oct. 13 meeting that they specifically did not want a Wal-Mart. So why did we get a Wal-Mart, rather than the multiple retailers discussed for the site? Did Tallen & Keshen negligently provide false material information at the Oct. 13 meeting?

”…Once we close on the property we will immediately come in and start spending money. We will spend several hundred thousand dollars. We will improve the parking lot. We will replace the damaged light standards. … We will clean up the physical plant in all manners. …”
—Terrence Tallen [approx. 53 minutes into the meeting]

This was not done. Why

”…Then when everything’s looking good, we’ll go out to the retail real estate community. We hope to have our work completed by the first of April. At that point in time, there’s ...a very large International Council of Shopping Centers conference here in Monterey every year, and we plan to have a special event at that conference at that time. We’ll invite the retailers out and have a little event on-site and say here’s your next big opportunity. What we’re doing that’s different than everybody else that’s come to buy this property, everyone else said I’m not going to close unless I know I have a use, unless I know I have a tenant, we’re stepping up now without a tenant to buy the property, spend the money, and then get it done. And that’s how you reposition retail real estate….”
—Terrence Tallen [approx. 55 minutes into the meeting]

This was not done. Why?

“…I think we can put together a tenant mix and I would love to meet with you and the commission to talk about tenant mix but what we need to do now is be able to get the approvals in place…” —Terrence Tallen [approx. 1 hour into the meeting]

This was not done. Why?

Based on this testimony and more, our Planning Commission on April 27 will decide whether or not to hold a hearing to consider modifying or revoking the permit, and SAY NO TO WAL-MART in MARINA!

The Public Hearing on April 27 is YOUR opportunity to voice your concerns and objections to a Wal-Mart in Marina. Tell the Commissioners why you think the permit should be modified or revoked, and ask them to hold the next hearing to consider modifying or revoking the permit. Reaffirm our city’s vision for multiple retailers for the Marina Landing Shopping Center.

Letter to the Editor

2006-04-23T14:32:00.000-07:00

Why not a Wal-Mart on Beach Road, as opposed to any other retailer? Wal-Mart customers feel personally maligned for their choice of store. It doesn’t help that to date no real debate has been allowed, only a post announcement discussion upon which no action was taken. Wal-Mart detractors take the City Council’s lack of opposition as evidence Marina is slipping further away from goals of higher wages and upscale demographics. How many other communities would allow a Wal-Mart located within a quarter mile of the coast, at the main entrance to the city? The regional context has certainly changed since 1992 with 4 major developments proposed within 5 miles: Marina Heights, University Villages, Marina Station, East Garrison. Not to mention the infill development already occurring. Today there will be an opportunity to view the documentary “The High Cost of Low Price” 7:00 at the VFW Hall, 3131 Crescent Ave., Marina. By taking advantage of this free screening, even just for the sake of curiosity, the pro Wal-Mart people may come to a better understanding of what drives the opposition’s fears.

Tina Walsh
Marina

FREE Screening: “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price”

2006-04-19T08:49:00.000-07:00

Public Invited to Screening of “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price”
April 23 at 7 p.m. in Marina

Lisa Smithline from Brave New Films to Lead Discussion Following the Film Screening

The Reel Work May Day Labor Film Festval I exitd tobring Special Guest and Screening of the full-length documentary “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price,”Sunday, April 23 7 p.m. at the Veterans of Foreign Wars (VFW) Post 811, located at 3131 Crescent Avenue in Marina. Lisa Smithline, vice president of marketing and political distribution at Brave New Films (the production company ) and executive director of Brave New Foundation, will lead a discussion on the effects Wal-Mart has on communities and what citizens can do about it. Admission is free; donations are accepted at the door. This film is unique
In that its released by passed the traditional theater outlets and instead was released to hundreds of home vewing parties, churches , schools and other locations via coordiantions over the internet. Tens f thousands participated and discussed the concerns raised regarding Wal-Mart’snegative mpact on local communities and having the architech of this unique strategy makes this a real opportunity for Marina residents.

The educational screening is sponsored by the Reel Work May Day Film Festival, Monterey Bay Central Labor Council, and Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina! Seating is limited and will be available on a first-come, first-served basis.. For more information about this event, please contact Jim Kelly, 831-427-2535, Reel Work May Day Film Festival, or Patty Cramer, 831-384-6058, Citizens Against Wal-Mart In Marina!.

(Note: The film festival organizers are renting the VFW facility for this event. The VFW does not endorse any position on the Wal-Mart issue.)

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

WHAT: Free screening of “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price” and discussion by…

WHO: Lisa Smithline, vice president of marketing and political distribution at Brave New Films (the production company that released the film)

WHEN: Sunday, April 23 at 7 p.m.

WHERE: Veterans of Foreign Wars Post 811, 3131 Crescent Avenue in Marina

April 18 City Council - Agenda Item 10c

2006-04-19T08:46:00.000-07:00

Councilmember Morrison asked that an agenda item be added to a future City Council meeting to discuss setting minimum wage and benefit standards for Wal-Mart. After some discussion, this request was withdrawn and resubmitted as part of Councilmember McCall's agenda item request (see below).

Councilmember Gray asked that an agenda item be added to a future City Council meeting to discuss passing an ordinance in Marina similar to one passed in Turlock that has been upheld in California courts. The main point was that a retailer occupying more than 100,000 square feet could not have more than 5% of the store dedicated to grocery. This would prevent Wal-Mart from expanding into a Super Center but may allow them to build out from 92,000 square feet (the existing Kmart footprint) to 100,000 square feet. Please see attached SF Chronicle article on Turlock ordinance.

Councilmember McCall asked that an agenda item be added to a future City Council meeting to discuss forming an ad hoc committee, possibly consisting of 2 City Council members, City staff, and a Wal-Mart representative, to meet as needed to address items such as citizens' concerns and employees' concerns pertaining to Wal-Mart, partner on donations from Wal-Mart within the City, and partner on bringing other retail to the Marina Landing Shopping Center and downtown. After several comments during the broader discussion disagreeing with Councilmember Morrison's proposal for regulating wages and benefits, Morrison requested and McCall agreed to consider the topic as part of the proposed committee's agenda.

These items may not necessarily appear on the next City Council meeting agenda. Staff now have to go do their research and make recommendations to City Council.

My personal note: While I appreciate our City leaders attempts to mitigate the threat and problems caused by Wal-Mart, and their recognition that Wal-Mart comes with negative impacts on our community that need to be addressed, in my opinion, these actions need to go much further to protect our City and citizens. By invading our City, Wal-Mart is derailing Marina's General Plan and we as citizens need to work to protect the plan in which our City has invested so many years of time, energy and careful thought. Nonetheless, I always encourage debate of issues in a public forum and therefore spoke in favor of adding these items to a future meeting agenda. This just continues to allow us to voice our objections and present more substantive ideas for stopping Wal-Mart in its tracks.

Our primary goal is to still present our case to the Planning Commission that Tallen & Keshen may have negligently provided false material information at the Oct. 13, 2005 Planning Commission meeting on which the Commission based their decision to amend the use permit, and therefore, the Planning Commission should modify or revoke the use permit pursuant to the Marina Municipal Code. The Planning Commission has set a public hearing for their April 27 meeting, 6:30 pm, 211 Hillcrest Ave. to hear testimony, ask questions, evaluate their findings, and decide whether or not to have a second hearing to modify or revoke the use permit. This is what we've been fighting for and massive public participation is more important than ever. If you have not yet seen the October 13, 2005 Planning Commission meeting, we have it available on DVD and VHS for your convenience. Please watch it and decide for yourself.

Dear Marina Planning Commissioners

2006-04-11T16:32:00.000-07:00

April 10, 2006

Marina Planning Commission
211 Hillcrest Ave.
Marina, CA 93933

Dear Commissioners:

We implore you to finish what began at your October 13, 2005 meeting in which the commission, at the urging of city staff and Tallen & Keshen Holdings, amended the use permit for 150 Beach Road (The Marina Landing Shopping Center) and adjourned the meeting with confidence that a synergistic, multi-use shopping center would be developed that Marina could be proud as part of our city’s downtown revitalization, the cornerstone of our tourism trade, and concurring with the Marina General Plan.

Many arguments have been put forth that Tallen & Keshen, at the very least, negligently provided false material information in their testimony at that meeting which led to your decision to amend the use permit. Conversely, arguments have also been put forth that Tallen & Keshen acted in good faith and within the letter of the law by leasing the property to Wal-Mart.
Only you, our Planning Commission, can ultimately decide the truth pursuant to Marina Municipal Code, Sections 17.48.010 and 17.48.060 (see Appendix A: Applicable Marina Municipal Code).

When Tallen & Keshen presented testimony concurrent with the Marina General Plan and City Council directives, to you, our Planning Commission, they were providing testimony to all Marina citizens. As our representatives and legislative body tasked with implementing our city’s General Plan and vision for our future, you have our confidence and trust that those comprehensive and well-conceived plans will be implemented.

Unfortunately, Marina city staff and City Council have repeatedly attempted to make this determination for you, referring to you only as an “advisory body to the City Council.” The Marina Municipal Code clearly provides the Planning Commission with full authority to act on behalf of its citizenry. The possibility of litigation resulting from your action either way is immaterial and should not enter into your decision-making process.

This issue began with our Planning Commission and we believe it must end with our Planning Commission. In accordance with the California Brown Act, Section 54954.2 (see Appendix B: Applicable California Brown Act), any single member of the Planning Commission may “direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda.” Nowhere in the Brown Act, the Marina Municipal Code, or Commission procedures is this right subject to review or consent by city staff, legal counsel, or City Council.

We believe that due process has not been afforded the Marina citizenry and city officials, and Tallen & Keshen Holdings to fully present their arguments before the appropriate authority, the Marina Planning Commission. We have many unanswered questions as to the expectations of the Planning Commission upon amending the 150 Beach Road use permit, the intentions and actions taken by Tallen & Keshen to improve the property and solicit tenants, and city staff’s awareness of Wal-Mart’s possible interest in that property earlier in 2005. We, as citizens, look to you, our government representatives, to ask questions and demand answers where we, as citizens of Marina, have no power individually or as part of a citizens collective to do so.

2005 Planning Commission Chairperson Bob Drake stated to Tallen & Keshen upon passing the amendment to the use permit, “Go forth and do good things in our community…If you fail we have ways.” On behalf of Marina citizens, we ask you to exercise your rights as our civic representatives by placing a hearing on your agenda to hear testimony by all sides, ask questions, evaluate the findings, rule on this issue, and explore those “ways.”

Thank you for your consideration of this pivotal matter in our community’s future.

Appendix A: Applicable Marina Municipal Code

17.48.010 Generally.

A. Use permits, revocable, conditional, or valid for a term period may be issued for any of the uses or purposes for which such permits are required or permitted by the terms of this title.

B. The planning commission shall have the power to hear and decide applications for, and issue use permits, for all uses for which a use permit is required or permitted.

C. As used in this chapter, the words “appropriate authority” means the planning commission when the application for a use permit is one which is within its power to issue. (Zoning ordinance dated 7/94 (part), 1994)

17.48.060 Revocation.

A. Where one or more of the conditions of the granting of a use permit have not been, or are not being complied with, or when a use permit was granted on the basis of false material information, written or oral, given wilfully or negligently by the applicant, the appropriate authority may revoke or modify such use permit following a hearing thereon. Notice of such hearing shall be given in writing to the permittee at least ten days prior to said hearing. Notice of such hearing shall be given as described in Section 17.48.030. Following the hearing, the appropriate authority may revoke or modify the use permit.

B. An appeal may be taken from such revocation or modification in the same manner as described in Section 17.48.050.

C. All use permits issued by the appropriate authority shall be valid until the date of expiration stated on the permit, or if no date of expiration is stated, or unless otherwise specified by the appropriate authority, all such permits shall expire one year from the date of granting said permit unless construction on, or use of the subject property has started within this period. (Zoning ordinance dated 7/94 (part), 1994)

Appendix B: Applicable California Brown Act

54954.2. (a) At least 72 hours before a regular meeting, the legislative body of the local agency, or its designee, shall post an agenda containing a brief general description of each item of business to be transacted or discussed at the meeting, including items to be discussed in closed session. A brief general description of an item generally need not exceed 20 words. The agenda shall specify the time and location of the regular meeting and shall be posted in a location that is freely accessible to members of the public.

No action or discussion shall be undertaken on any item not appearing on the posted agenda, except that members of a legislative body or its staff may briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by persons exercising their public testimony rights under Section 54954.3. In addition, on their own initiative or in response to questions posed by the public, a member of a legislative body or its staff may ask a question for clarification, make a brief announcement, or make a brief report on his or her own activities. Furthermore, a member of a legislative body, or the body itself, subject to rules or procedures of the legislative body, may provide a reference to staff or other resources for factual information, request staff to report back to the body at a subsequent meeting concerning any matter, or take action to direct staff to place a matter of business on a future agenda.

MARINA CITY COUNCIL TUESDAY, APRIL 4!!

2006-04-03T15:42:00.000-07:00

Continue to voice your concerns and objections to the Marina City Council at the council meeting Tuesday, April 4, 6:30 pm, 211 Hillcrest Ave. This is not an agenda item so each person may address the council during the Communications from the Floor part of the meeting which occurs close to the start. Each person has 3 minutes to speak.

Speak from your heart and to the points that you feel strongest.

Thanks for your continued commitment and resolve to better our community!

Appeal to Planning Commission

2006-03-31T08:39:00.000-08:00

Following is our written application to the Marina Planning Commission submitted on March 30 appealing the interpretation of the Marina Municipal Code by Marina city staff submitted to the Marina City Council as part of the agenda for the March 21 City Council meeting.

The Marina Municipal Code provides a clear procedural blueprint for dealing with the issuing, modification, and revoking of zoning use permits by the Planning Commission, and we expect our city leaders to follow it.

APPLICATION:

March 30, 2006

Marina Planning Commission
211 Hillcrest Ave.
Marina, CA 93933

Dear Commissioners:

Pursuant to Marina Municipal Code, Sections 17.56.010, 17.56.020, 17.56.030, 17.48.010, and 17.48.060, I am formally submitting an application for appeal and interpretation by the Marina Planning Commission of city staff’s interpretation of the Marina Municipal Code provisions (namely, Sections 17.48.060.A, 17.56.010, and 17.56.020) from the March 21 Staff Report, “Frequently Asked Land Use Questions Related to the Marina Landing Shopping Center and the Proposed Wal-Mart,” specifically Question #4, submitted under Agenda Item 10a at the March 21, 2006 Marina City Council meeting.

Although staff did not cite Section 17.48.060.A by number in the staff report, it is clear that the language of paragraph 3 from their answer to Question 4 (on pages 133 and 134 of the staff report) speaks directly to Section 17.48.060.A, not Section 17.26.130, in particular staff’s statement, “it is our position that where it is clear a discretionary permit has been granted in whole or in part on the basis of misleading information or information falsely given, the agency should have inherent authority to reconsider. The important caveat here is that, in our view, it must be clear and convincing that the information is false, fraudulent, or the like, and that it was relied on.” In no other place in the Marina Municipal Code will you find reference to revocation or modification of a use permit based on false information. I believe this interpretation is wrong and I appeal to the Planning Commission to make a decision (either upholding or denying) this interpretation in the context of the Marina Landing Shopping Center and the October 13, 2005 Planning Commission hearing testimony.

In short, I am appealing to the Planning Commission (pursuant to 17.48.010 and 17.48.020 of Marina Municipal Code) to “hear and decide” an appeal of the “interpretation of provisions” of the Marina Municipal Code, Section 17.48.060.A, within the context of the October 13, 2005 Planning Commission hearing testimony. I ask the Planning Commission to acknowledge through this process that it is ultimately (at some future hearing date) the Planning Commission’s responsibility (not city staff’s) to determine whether or not information has been wilfully or negligently given that is both false and material. That is what we are asking you to do specifically by this appeal, not to determine now at this time whether information was false, material, and negligently given.

It should also be added, with respect to paragraph 1 from city staff’s answer to Question 6, where staff states that “unless additional permitting (a use permit, for example) is required by local regulation, then we cannot advise, under current law and regulation, that there is any room to review and modify.” I believe this is a false statement because it interprets Municipal Code in such a way that it ignores the following provisions as if they do not exist or are not applicable:

17.56.010 Planning commission authority.

The planning commission shall have the power to hear and decide appeals based on the enforcement of this title or the interpretation of the provisions thereof. (Zoning ordinance dated 7/94 (part), 1994)

17.56.020 Application.

Application for appeal or interpretation shall be made in writing to the planning commission. (Zoning ordinance dated 7/94 (part), 1994)

The city staff’s interpretation referenced can be seen in the final paragraph in the answer to Question 4:

Q4: Was the City, i.c., the Planning Commission and Council, misled, by the applicants or others during the Fall 2005 amendment process?

A: Staff has reviewed the application, meeting minutes, and other materials submitted and considered, and the City Manager, Assistant City Manager and City Attorney have all reviewed the DVD of the October 13, 2005 City Planning Commission meeting. Staff members report that nowhere in any of that is there an indication of the applicants or others having submitted false materials or made false statements, or having misled any decision makers or other interested parties. It appears to have been a straightforward application, a simple request, all resulting in a simple change.

It has been asserted that applicants knew or must have known that Wal-Mart was a probable tenant for the large commercial space. That may or may not have been the case, but they were under no obligation to volunteer the information. We are not aware, and there is nothing in the record that indicates, that the applicants withheld that or any other related or pertinent information in the face of a direct question.

(We note that Section 17.26.130 of the Marina Municipal Code provides for revocation of a zoning permit in the limited circumstances of a failure to comply with permit conditions. That is not the case here. However, it is our position that where it is clear a discretionary permit has been granted in whole or in part on the basis of misleading information or information falsely given, the agency should have inherent authority to reconsider. The important caveat here is that, in our view, it must be clear and convincing that the information is false, fraudulent, or the like, and that it was relied on. It would be a serious accusation to make, the burden of proof would be on the City, and thus any proposed action to reconsider or revoke should be undertaken only where the evidence is virtually unassailable.)

The Marina Planning Commission is the appropriate authority, not city staff, and it is up to the Commission to interpret the testimony given at the October 13, 2005 Marina Planning Commission meeting and decide whether it was wilfully or negligently misleading.

Cited sections of the Marina Municipal Code follow:

17.56.010 Planning commission authority.

The planning commission shall have the power to hear and decide appeals based on the enforcement of this title or the interpretation of the provisions thereof. (Zoning ordinance dated 7/94 (part), 1994)

17.56.020 Application.

Application for appeal or interpretation shall be made in writing to the planning commission. (Zoning ordinance dated 7/94 (part), 1994)

17.56.030 Action by planning commission.

The planning commission shall consider application and render its decision within sixty days after the receipt thereof. (Zoning ordinance dated 7/94 (part), 1994)

17.48.010 Generally.

A. Use permits, revocable, conditional, or valid for a term period may be issued for any of the uses or purposes for which such permits are required or permitted by the terms of this title.

B. The planning commission shall have the power to hear and decide applications for, and issue use permits, for all uses for which a use permit is required or permitted.

C. As used in this chapter, the words “appropriate authority” means the planning commission when the application for a use permit is one which is within its power to issue. (Zoning ordinance dated 7/94 (part), 1994)

17.48.060 Revocation.

A. Where one or more of the conditions of the granting of a use permit have not been, or are not being complied with, or when a use permit was granted on the basis of false material information, written or oral, given wilfully or negligently by the applicant, the appropriate authority may revoke or modify such use permit following a hearing thereon. Notice of such hearing shall be given in writing to the permittee at least ten days prior to said hearing. Notice of such hearing shall be given as described in Section 17.48.030. Following the hearing, the appropriate authority may revoke or modify the use permit.

B. An appeal may be taken from such revocation or modification in the same manner as described in Section 17.48.050.

C. All use permits issued by the appropriate authority shall be valid until the date of expiration stated on the permit, or if no date of expiration is stated, or unless otherwise specified by the appropriate authority, all such permits shall expire one year from the date of granting said permit unless construction on, or use of the subject property has started within this period. (Zoning ordinance dated 7/94 (part), 1994)

Was the applicant’s testimony false, material, and given negligently, and did the Planning Commission base their decision on it? My assertion is that yes it was with regards to improvements and tenant mix, but it is not up to my interpretation or city staff’s interpretation, but solely the interpretation of the Planning Commission.

Thank you for your consideration of this matter, and I look forward to the Planning Commission’s review of this appeal.

Sincerely,

Steve Zmak
Citizens Against Wal-Mart In Marina!
3200 Crescent Ave., Marina, CA 93933
831-883-4459
cawim@earthlink.net

Requesting a Public Hearing to Revoke Use Permit

2006-03-24T09:36:00.001-08:00

I quote Terrence Tallen, from the Oct. 13, 2005 Planning Commission meeting where Tallen & Keshen urged the to Commission to modify the use permit which would later allow Wal-Mart to sneak into our community.

“…Once we close on the property we will immediately come in and start spending money. We will spend several hundred thousand dollars. We will improve the parking lot. We will replace the damaged light standards. … We’re going to repave, reseal, do the parking lot. ... We will clean up the physical plant in all manners. …” — Terrence Tallen [approx. 53 minutes into the meeting]

“…Then when everything’s looking good, we’ll go out to the retail real estate community. We hope to have our work completed by the first of April. At that point in time, there’s ... a very large International Council of Shopping Centers conference here in Monterey every year, and we plan to have a special event at that conference at that time. We’ll invite the retailers out and have a little event on-site and say here’s your next big opportunity. What we’re doing that’s different than everybody else that’s come to buy this property, everyone else said I’m not going to close unless I know I have a use, unless I know I have a tenant, we’re stepping up now without a tenant to buy the property, spend the money, and then get it done. And that’s how you reposition retail real estate…” — Terrence Tallen [approx. 55 minutes into the meeting]

I quote Commissioner Dangoria at the March 9 Planning Commission meeting, “They lied to us and, there should be consequesnces!” There are.

The Marina Municipal Code 17.48.060A states…
…when a use permit was granted on the basis of false material information, written or oral, given wilfully or negligently by the applicant, the appropriate authority (the Planning Commission) may revoke or modify such use permit following a hearing thereon. Following the hearing, the appropriate authority (the Planning Commission) may revoke or modify the use permit.

We respectfully ask the Marina City Council to direct the City Manager and Planning staff to put the use permit on the agenda before the Planning Commission for revocation or modification, pursuant to City Code, and Commissioner Gallagher's request to do so.

Decide for yourself. See full video, viewable with Windows Media Player, of the Oct. 13, 2005 Planning Commission hearing on this subject at http://www.ampmedia.org/asx/8318.asx -- the first few minutes are preliminary announcements, the substance comes later.

Requesting a Public Hearing to Revoke Use Permit

2006-03-24T09:36:00.000-08:00

MARINA CITY COUNCIL TONIGHT!!

2006-03-21T23:01:00.000-08:00

The public outpouring at tonight's Marina City Council meeting opposing Wal-Mart was enormous, with more than a 2 to 1 ratio of speakers against Wal-Mart. Many spoke deeply from their hearts and others provided a wealth of searing research.

I am proud to stand shoulder to shoulder with all of you in this cause to protect our community.

Thank you for all your dedication, resolve and hard work.

MARINA CITY COUNCIL TONIGHT!!

2006-03-21T00:24:00.000-08:00

TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 6:30 PM

MARINA CITY HALL, COUNCIL CHAMBERS
211 HILLCREST AVE.

We intend to demonstrate to our elected representatives that a majority of Marina citizens and members of the surrounding community do not want a Wal-Mart in or around Marina, or any where on the Monterey Bay, and we expect them to act accordingly within the provisons of the Marina Municipal Code.

Both sides will be presenting their case, and we need as many voices as we can get to make our case. This will be the one opportunity to make your vioce heard!

WAL-MART: LABOR VIOLATIONS, DISCRIMINATION AGAINST WOMEN, ENVIRONMENTAL VIOLATIONS, UNION BUSTING, TURNING SMALL TOWN AMERICA INTO AN ECONOMIC WASTELAND OF 21st CENTURY SHARECROPPERS.

THE COST OF "LOW PRICE" IS SIMPLY TOO HIGH. IT'S BAD BUSINESS AND IT'S BAD FOR MARINA!!

Why Wal-Mart Isn’t Like Other Retailers

2006-03-21T00:18:00.000-08:00

Wal-Mart & Employees

• In December 2005, an Oakland, Calif. jury awarded $172 million to 116,000 current and former employees of Wal-Mart in the first of dozens of wage and hour class-action lawsuits targeting the retailer to go to trial. 1

Wal-Mart & Women

• Wal-Mart pays its women employees an average of $5,200 per year less than it pays men. Women are denied promotions to higher-paying jobs. Men hold 85% of store manager positions and 2/3 of all management jobs, even though 2/3 of its “associates” are women. 2

• 65% of Wal-Mart’s workers are women, but they earn, on average, 22% less than male employees, despite greater average seniority and higher average performance ratings. 3

• Wal-Mart employs a smaller percentage of women in management today than its current competitors did in 1975. Only 33% of managers at Wal-Mart today are women, while women currently hold 56.6% of management positions at Wal-Mart’s competitors. 3

• In June 2004, a federal judge granted class-action status to a massive employment discrimination case filed against Wal-Mart by 1.6 million current and former female employees of the company. 3 This created the largest private civil rights case in U.S. history. 4

• The National Organization for Women (NOW) named Wal-Mart a “Merchant of Shame”—a distinction given to corporations that have a record of abuse and discrimination toward women workers. 5

Wal-Mart & Child Labor

• In February 2005, Wal-Mart agreed to pay $135,540 to settle federal charges that it violated child labor laws in Connecticut, New Hampshire and Arkansas. Labor Department officials said most of the 24 violations covered by the settlement involved workers under age 18 operating dangerous machinery. 6

• Wal-Mart has faced previous child labor charges. In March 2000, Maine fined Wal-Mart $205,650 for violations of child labor laws in every one of the 20 Wal-Marts in the state. 6

Wal-Mart & the Environment

• In May 2004, Wal-Mart agreed to pay a $3.1 million civil penalty to settle allegations that it violated the federal Clean Water Act in nine states, the largest penalty ever for storm-water runoff violations at Wal-Mart store construction sites. 7

• The settlement was the second enforcement action resulting in a settlement with Wal-Mart for violations of the Clean Water Act. In 2001, Wal-Mart and several contractors entered into a settlement with the United States to address storm water violations at 17 sites in several states. 7

Wal-Mart & Health Care and Public Assistance

• Fewer than half of Wal-Mart’s employees participate in the company’s health insurance plan. 3

• Wal-Mart workers in California earn on average 31% less than workers employed in large retail as a whole, receiving an average wage of $9.70 per hour compared to the $14.01 average hourly earnings for employees in large retail (firms with 1,000 or more employees). In addition, 23% fewer Wal-Mart workers are covered by employer-sponsored health insurance than large retail workers as a whole. 8

• At these low-wages, many Wal-Mart workers rely on public safety net programs—such as food stamps, Medi-Cal, and subsidized housing—to make ends meet. The presence of Wal-Mart stores in California thus creates a hidden cost to the state’s taxpayers. 8

• Reliance by Wal-Mart workers on public assistance programs in California comes at a cost to the taxpayers of an estimated $86 million annually; this is comprised of $32 million in health related expenses and $54 million in other assistance. 8

• If other large California retailers adopted Wal-Mart’s wage and benefits standards, it would cost taxpayers an additional $410 million a year in public assistance to employees. 8

Sources:
1. “Wal-Mart Workers Win Suit,” Los Angeles Times, December 23, 2005.
2. NOW flyer, “Attention Shoppers: Wal-Mart Workers Need a Voice!” (updated 11/05) [http://www.now.org/issues/wfw/wal-mart.html; downloaded 3/11/06]
3. NOW palmcards, “Who Pays? Wal-Mart: Always Low Prices! …But How?” (updated 11/05) [http://www.now.org/issues/wfw/wal-mart.html; downloaded 3/11/06]
4. “Judge approves record class-action case against Wal-Mart,” The Associated Press, June 23, 2004
5. NOW brochure, “Wal-Mart Merchant of Shame ‘Wal-Mart Always Discriminates’” (updated 11/05) [http://www.now.org/issues/wfw/wal-mart.html; downloaded 3/11/06]
6. “Wal-Mart Agrees to Pay Fine in Child Labor Cases,” The New York Times, February 12, 2005.
7. “U.S. Announces Major Clean Water Act Settlement with Retail Giant Wal-Mart,” U.S. Department of Justice news release, May 12, 2004. [http://www.usdoj.gov/opa/pr/2004/May/04_enrd_315.htm; downloaded 3/11/06]
8. “Hidden Cost of Wal-Mart Jobs: Use of Safety Net Programs by Wal-Mart Workers in California” by Arindrajit Dube, Ph.D., UC Berkeley Institute for Industrial Relations & Ken Jacobs, UC Berkeley Center for Labor Research and Education, August 2, 2004. [http://www.wakeupwalmart.com/research; downloaded 3/11/06]
Note: bold type added for emphasis

Why Wal-Mart Is Wrong for Marina’s Business Community

2006-03-18T20:54:00.000-08:00

Can you take predatory pricing?

“Wal-Mart’s sheer size gives it incredible advantages. … Wal-Mart will engage in ‘predatory pricing’ in an attempt to drive you out of business—fast! A new Wal-Mart on the offensive against its local competition will be willing to take losses on merchandise that those competitors sell. It’ll study what you sell, then offer it for less.” 1

We have small, locally-owned Marina businesses that sell arts and crafts; sewing supplies and fabrics; pet supplies; skateboards; bicycles; music; electronic games; beauty products; grocery items (packaged goods and freezer items); furniture; and more. WAL-MART WILL BE YOUR COMPETITION!

We have locally-owned franchises that sell products such as hardware, paint, plumbing supplies, gardening tools/supplies, and auto supplies. And, we have other stores and chains that sell health/beauty products, prescriptions, school/office supplies, and grocery items (packaged goods and freezer items). WAL-MART WILL BE YOUR COMPETITION!

While some have said that there are no businesses in Marina that compete with any of the merchandise Wal-Mart will offer, clearly that’s not true.

Sucks Revenue from Existing Businesses

• ”Wal-Mart takes its business overwhelmingly from existing businesses. … On average, over one hundred stores eventually go out of business in the area surrounding a ‘Wal-ed’ town.” 1

• “A study of Wal-Mart’s expansion in Iowa found that 84 percent of all sales at the new Wal-Mart stores came at the expense of existing businesses within the same county.” 2

Loses Jobs

• “One of the biggest carrots Wal-Mart holds out to struggling small towns is the promise of more jobs. … According to various studies, at least three jobs are lost for every two jobs created by a Wal-Mart.” 1
Interferes with MARINA’s Business District Revitalization

How can Marina attract and fill its current core business district, as planned, with more retailers if they know they’ll have to compete with a Wal-Mart?

Changes MARINA’s Direction—Without the Voice of MARINA Residents and Businesses

A developer from outside Monterey County bought the Kmart building and parking lot last year. Do they have more voice in the direction of our City than Marina’s own business owners and residents? Other local cities proactively work to determine the types of businesses they want in their city. It’s time we do the same.

Sources:
1. Bill Quinn (2005). How Wal-Mart Is Destroying America (and the World) And What You Can Do About It. Berkeley, CA: Ten Speed Press. Pp. 3-4.
2. National Trust For Historic Preservation, “What Happened When Wal-Mart Came to Town?,” 1996 / “Wal-Mart & Local Economies: Big Box Giant Busts Towns Across America,” September 29, 2005, Wal-Mart Watch [http://walmartwatch.com/home/pages/issues; downloaded 3/14/06]

Free Screening: “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price”

2006-03-18T20:19:00.000-08:00

A GREAT WAY TO SEE THE WAL-MART FILM: We will show the film at the Saratoga Community Center on the CSUMB campus Sunday evening at 6 pm, March 19. There is a big screen TV and there will be free food (lasagna and salad)! Sounds like a community party! Directions to the Saratoga Community Center:

Saratoga Community Center
From Marina, go east on Reservation Rd. towards CSUMB.
Turn right onto Imjin Parkway.
Turn left onto Abrams Dr. (the stoplight before the Ord Market)
Turn left on Bunker Hill Dr.
Turn left on Saratoga Ct.
The Community Center is at the beginning of the court on the right hand side.

GET ALL THE FACTS AND DECIDE FOR YOURSELF.

Protest Rally Saturday

2006-03-17T23:43:00.000-08:00

Come out to the corner of Reservation Road and Del Monte Blvd., Saturday March 18 from 10 am to 2 pm, and demonstrate your objection to a Wal-Mart in our community.

Stop by, sign our petition, and SAY NO TO WAL-MART!

Child labor violations, wage violations, environmental violations, safety negligence—this is the Wal-Mart profile. This is not the kind of business we want in Marina or the Monterey Bay.

A Digital Ally

2006-03-17T19:44:00.000-08:00

We will also be posting information on another website:

http://www.socialsoldier.com/marina.html

So check it out over the next couple days and beyond.

Thanks for speaking out against the Wal-Mart invasion of Marina!

The Monterey Heralds’s Poll

2006-03-16T21:54:00.000-08:00

Today, the Monterey Herald's online poll asked:
Do you think Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina can keep the store out of the city?

As of 10:00 pm PST, we have an overwelming vote of confidence from the community: 61% Yes, 39% No. If you haven't voted yet, there's still a chance to be counted.

Over 100 U.S. cities have stopped Wal-Mart's invasion. Will Marina be the next? This is a question only you can answer. Voice your opinion at the Marina City Council meeting on March 21 at 6:30 pm. at 211 Hillcrest Ave.

Thank you and remember to support your local businesses!

VOTE NOW

2006-03-16T13:13:00.000-08:00

If you believe in our cause, go to the Monterey County Herald’s website:

http://www.montereyherald.com/mld/montereyherald/

…and vote your confidence in our mission to keep Wal-Mart out of Marina and the surrounding community in their daily poll.

Thanks for your support!

Steve Zmak, CAWIM Chairperson

Letter to the Editor

2006-03-16T10:12:00.001-08:00

Underselling competitors using cheap goods designed to wear out quickly Wal-Mart doesn’t help those with low incomes; but increases poverty by paying its employees low wages.

Wal-Mart has more than 3,500 stores in the United States and exploits its workers by paying low wages and using sweatshop labor around the world.

Workers in more than 30 states have sued Wal-Mart for failing to pay overtime wages.

Because Wal-Mart has forced employees to work off the clock and without breaks there are currently lawsuits pending against it in six states.

In California, Wal-Mart illegally denied meal breaks to 116,000 of its employees and was ordered to pay $172 million to those employees.

Although a Wal-Mart store in Marina may be projected to bring in upwards of half a million dollars in tax revenue annually, most of the profits will go to the Wal-Mart corporate office and dispersed to its stockholders, a CEO who receives seventeen million dollars a year, and to the Walton family who hold four of the top ten positions on the Forbes list of wealthiest people.

Don’t think those who are concerned about Wal-Mart are elitist – Wal-Mart, the largest corporation in the world, is elitist.

Ken Armstrong
3010 Lake Court
Marina

Letter to the Editor

2006-03-16T10:12:00.000-08:00

Letter to the Editor

2006-03-15T20:08:00.000-08:00

No to Wal-Mart

As a resident and homeowner in Marina for the past five years, I've heard much talk from City officials about the bright future of Marina. Therefore I was appalled when it was announced last week that Wal-Mart had leased a site in Marina without any public hearings or environmental review. Wal-Mart has a history of paying low wages, hiring undocumented workers, and destroying local businesses. This is not a bright future for Marina. Surely the citizens of Marina are entitled to an environmental review, public comment, and review by the Planning Commission of such a drastic change in the use of the leased property. None of that has been done. What will be the effect on traffic, nearby wetlands and wildlife, homeowners, visitors to the City and beach, local businesses, and so forth. The citizens are entitled to have these issues addressed before another step is taken toward permitting a Wal-Mart in Marina.

Barbara Svetlik
Marina

(You have my permission to print this letter.)

LET YOUR VOICE BE HEARD!

2006-03-15T10:25:00.000-08:00

COME TO THE MARINA CITY COUNCIL MEETING, TUESDAY, MARCH 21, 6:30 PM AND VOICE YOUR OBJECTIONS AND CONCERNS TO A WAL-MART SNEAKING ITS WAY INTO MARINA.

THE MARINA CITY COUNCIL WANTS TO HEAR FROM THEIR CONSTITUENCY.

SAY NO TO WAL-MART IN MARINA!

NEWS RELEASE

2006-03-15T10:21:00.001-08:00

Local residents form “Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina!”
to oppose a Wal-Mart in Marina

Marina, Calif. — March 15, 2006 — From the moment they heard a Wal-Mart was planned for the old Kmart site in Marina, Calif., they each knew they had to do something. Calling themselves Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina!, a grassroots group of Marina residents and concerned citizens from local communities have joined together to oppose the giant retailer's plans to open a store in Marina.

Led by Chairperson Steve Zmak, a Marina resident and small business owner, Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina! is working to educate the public about the threat that they believe Wal-Mart poses to Marina. The group wants to give voice to citizens’ concerns and objections, and share those with city officials as well as the community at large.

“We think a Wal-Mart will hurt Marina residents and businesses. In small towns and cities across the country, Wal-Mart has had a devastating impact on the local community, forcing small businesses that have successfully operated for years to close their doors,” said Zmak. “Across the country, Wal-Mart has faced lawsuits for wage and hour violations, and for discrimination toward women workers, as well as fines for child labor violations and environmental violations. This is not the kind of business we want in Marina.”

More than 30 Marina residents and residents from surrounding communities attended the group’s first organizational meeting on March 13. Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina! is currently planning new activities to generate awareness and build support for their cause. The group urges Marina citizens to voice their concerns at the next Marina City Council meeting on Tuesday, March 21 at 6:30 p.m.

For information about Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina!, contact Steve Zmak at cawim@earthlink.net or 831-883-4459, or visit http://www.marina-ca-news.blogspot.com.

NEWS RELEASE

2006-03-15T10:21:00.000-08:00

Letter to the Editor

2006-03-15T00:34:00.000-08:00

I am a citizen against Wal-Mart in Marina on Monterey Bay.

The U.S has sued Wal-Mart in 9 states for violating the Clean Water Act.
Is this the kind of neighbor we want on Monterey Bay?

From Bozeman to Bangor to Biloxi, over 100 cities have banned Wal-Mart.
Is Marina so desperate for revenue?

Rocklin, near Sacramento, lost an estimated $650,000 annually when a Wal-Mart closed without notifying city officials. Wal-Mart blind-sided Marina city officials once, will they do it again?

Wal-Mart ads tout 'Only in America' and 'Buy American' while sending more jobs to Third World sweatshops than any other American corporation. Over thirty states have labor class-action suits against Wal-Mart.
Is this the kind of employer we want on Monterey Bay?

Wal-Mart shifts health care costs to the government; Wal-Mart workers and children are estimated to cost taxpayers $456 million nationally through their use of public health programs.
Can Monterey County afford this added burden?

Wal-Mart wages breed Wal-Mart shoppers, they need poverty to grow. Their average worker earns below poverty-level annual income of $14,000. A 2000 University of Connecticut showed that Wal-Mart operated primarily in poor and working-class communities.
Are these the kind of jobs that will build Marina's economy?

Luana Conley
180 A Palm Ave.
Marina, CA 93933
884-9662

Cities & Counties that Stopped Wal-Mart

2006-03-14T14:56:00.000-08:00

Wal-Mart is beatable. Nothing is a done deal. Here's a list of some cities (more than 100) that have kept Wal-Mart out of their community:

Chandler, AZ
Inglewood, CA
Monroeville, PA
Cobb County, GA
Hickory, NC
Helotes, TX
Biloxi, MS
Thornton, CO
Sanford, ME
Plainfield, IL
Las Vegas, NV
Lakeway, TX
Hayden, ID
Centerville, UT
Colchester, CT
Harrison, NJ
Carlsbad, CA
Hood River, OR
Topsham, ME
Fort Wright, KY
Manhattan, KS
Lacey, WA
Saranac Lake, NY
Charlevoix, MI
Albuquerque, NM
Morgantown, WV
Blue Springs, MO
Stanwood, WA
Rosemead, CA
Nashua, NH
Brighton Bay, FL
Blue Springs, MO
Clemson, SC
Queens, NY
Pueblo West, NM
Terre Haute, IN
Chalmette, LA
Medford, OR
Estero, FL
Chicago, IL
Arlington, TX
Beaver Creek, OH
Ellenwood, GA
Dunkirk, MD
Hagerstown, MD
Gresham, OR
Helotes, TX
Ham Lake, MN
Decatur, IN
Deptford, NJ
Eureka, CA
Fishers, IN
Greenwood, IN
Glendale, AZ
Gainesville, FL
Front Royal, VA
Cleveland, OH
Clermont, FL
Conover, NC
Dallas, TX
Covington, GA
Crystal River, FL
Buckeye, AZ
Boulder, CO
Belmont, NC
Bangor, ME
Avondale Estates, GA
Avondale, AZ
Auburn, CA
Ham Lake, MN
Harrison, NJ
Harrison, OH
Highland Village, TX
Hillsboro, OR
Holiday, FL
Houston, TX
Independence Township, MI
Jackson, MI
Kingman, AZ
Lake in the Hills, IL
Lawrence, KS
Leominster, MA
Lincoln, CA
Longmont, CO
Madison, WI
Manatee County, FL
Manor, PA
Martinez, CA
Milford, OH
Mokena, IL
Monument, CO
Mount Pleasant, SC
Murphy, TX
New Albany, IN
Newport News, VA
North Greenbush, NY
Oakland, CA
Olivette, MO
Phoenix, AZ
Placer County, CA
Reno, NV
Reedley, CA
Richardston, TX
Rockland, MA

CANADA:
Guelph, Ontario
Burlington, Ontario
Brampton, Ontario
Campbell River, BC

Source: “Wal-Mart: The High Cost of Low Price” documentary movie, 2005

Letter to the Editors of Local Papers

2006-03-12T19:50:00.000-08:00

Wal-Mart is not welcome in Marina. Tallen & Keshen Holdings misrepresented their intended tenants to the Planning Commission and City staff let us all down when they failed to fully vet the requested use permit changes, or to offer an alternative that would bar a single-tenant use in the building.

The City is intensely focused on new developments and, right now, has little tolerance for “distractions” that compete for attention and resources. But if an applicant has made false or misleading statements in obtaining a use permit, surely there is some legal recourse to revoke, or reopen, the use permit. Regardless of its’ other priorities, the City should give this a closer look.

What’s wrong with Wal-Mart in our fair town? Forget for the moment that Wal-Mart has a horrible labor record, they account for a disproportionate share of our trade deficit with China, and that they are less than a “Made In America” merchandise purveyor. Just know that their record shows that they devour local businesses before moving onto other sites, leaving vacant buildings behind. There’s no plus side for the businesses, or residents, of Marina. We need a revitalizing addition to our visitor serving businesses, not a parasite.

Paula F. Pelot (permission to print is granted.)
728 Landrum Court
Marina CA 93933
831-582-0522

Letter to the Editors of Local Papers

2006-03-12T19:11:00.000-08:00

I'm infuriated by how Tallen & Keshen snuck Wal-Mart into the old KMart site with a “loophole” in the use permit. While many city officials stated they’re not happy about it, their sound bite has been, “It’s a done deal.”

How can this be a done deal? The impact is too big for just an administrative rubber stamp. There has been no discussion by Marina officials, residents or businesses. There have been no public hearings. When the Planning Commission modified the use permit at the October 13, 2005 meeting, it was done with the understanding there would specifically be no Wal-Mart. Plus, signature of the lease has occurred before completing the California Environmental Quality Act process.

Wal-Mart would be Marina’s biggest business. While some say it’s the same as other big box retailers, I disagree. It’s an anomaly that leaves economic wastelands in its wake.

Our right to due process must be honored. We demand it. We’ve formed a group, Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina!, to ensure this right. We want all Marina citizens’ voices to be heard on this pivotal issue. We will not be ignored for the sake of convenience.

Say no to Wal-Mart in Marina!

Steve Zmak
Citizens Against Wal-Mart in Marina!
3200 Crescent Ave., Marina, CA 93933
831-883-4459
cawim@earthlink.net