|
County urged to discourage Wal-Mart development plans
BY FRANK ZUFALL
Spooner Advocate
Last Updated: Wednesday, June 28th, 2006 09:19:56 AM
The Washburn County Board of Supervisors was asked Tuesday night, June
20, during its monthly meeting to pass a resolution asking Wal-Mart to
“withdraw” from its plans to build a 153,000-square-foot Supercenter in
Spooner.
The request came from Washburn County First, a grassroots citizen
group that has opposed the development since Wal-Mart announced in
February it was the Fortune 100 company planning to build a Supercenter
at the intersection of Cty. Hwy. H and Hwy. 53. A sales agreement for
the land was ratified Nov. 8, 2005, between land developer/broker
Polachek and the county board.
The county board heard the organization’s request before meeting
in closed session to consider a course of action regarding a legal
complaint against the county by members of Washburn County First. The
board did not respond to the request during the open session; however,
supervisors did ask questions of the group.
The complaint states the Washburn County Property and Land Sale
Committee improperly noticed two closed meetings on Oct. 11 and Nov. 3,
2005, by not stating the subject of the meetings, preventing public
input into negotiations on the land sale and the final board vote
ratifying the sales agreement, and by forming a “walking quorum,” a
prearranged agreement amongst some of the supervisors.
On May 24 the Washburn County’s Executive Committee’s directing the
county’s corporate counsel it agreed the county had violated the open
meeting law on Oct. 11, 2005.
Supervisors met in closed session after offering Washburn County First
an opportunity to state its case against the development, but after
being in closed session for 30 minutes the supervisors appeared in open
session and did not offer comment on their disucssions.
Why ask
Washburn County First Chairman Steve Carlson said ((at the board
meeting?)) he believes supervisors were afraid of offering a motion to
void the land sale agreement for fear of legal reprisal from Polachek,
but he said the county could pass a resolution asking Wal-Mart to void
it.
Carlson said supervisors should consider the option because they
had voted on the land sale without knowing who the Fortune 100 Company
was, and he said the public was not offered proper opportunity for
input into the sale agreement.
Addressing his own reasons for opposing the development, Carlson said
his were similar to those offered by the Norwegian government in its
June 6 decision to divest itself of $200 million of Wal-Mart stock
because the government found several practices of the company
objectionable, including , reportedly, employing minors at Wal-Mart
overseas suppliers, forcing employees to work overtime without pay,
alleged discrimination against women (the largest sexual discrimination
case in the United States has been filed against Wal-Mart), and
opposing workers from organizing into unions.
Carlson said the supervisors should consider sending a resolution
to Wal-Mart because they did not realize the traffic concerns that have
would be generated because of the development, nor did they have
information as to the “character” of Wal-Mart , or did not realize how
the development would divide the community.
“At this point you do know, and if there is any inclination to
reconsider, we, Washburn County First, ask to put that in a resolution
and firmly ask Wal-Mart to withdraw from the purchase agreement,” said
Carlson.
Don Posh of the town of Casey, also a member of Washburn County
First, said he feared taxpayers would have to foot the bill for major
highway improvements around the site to make access to the Supercenter
safer, such as converting parts of Hwy. 63 and Hwy. H to four lanes
along with constructing special turning lanes off the intersections
Cty. Hwy. H.
“There is nothing good about this [site] for a retail location,”
he said and suggested Polachek find another occupant that better fit
the county’s proposed comprehensive plan.
“Get rid of Wal-Mart and don’t take this welfare situation to make
this store fit in that location,” said Posh. “Maybe they have another
location they can go to, but this is going to cause safety problems,
and it will cause other problems for our residents and once again, who
is going to pay, taxpayers?”
Regarding paying for infrastructure improvements, city officials
in Hayward and Rice Lake, both with recent Wal-Mart Supercenter
construction, have said Wal-Mart paid the majority share, if not all,
of the highway improvements in both of those cities.
Posh said Wal-Mart would not bring the kinds of jobs that would
elevate Washburn County from being the third poorest county in the
state.
Supervisor Jay Hands challenged Posh’s perception that the proposed comprehensive plan limited retail development at the site.
Larry Colby from the town of Spooner and a member of Washburn
County First also said the Wisconsin Department of Transportation (DOT)
had raised concerns about traffic safety issues at the site’s
intersection.
“That area is zoned industrial, and that is a perfect opportunity to
put industry out there and not a retail development,” he said.
Why the opposition
Supervisor Barry Nielsen asked whether Washburn County First’s
opposition to the Wal-Mart project was based on economics, traffic
concerns or Wal-Mart itself.
“The single best answer to your question is it is all these things together,” said Carlson.
“The economic impact to Washburn County is unknown,” he said. “It is not alarmist to say this could be bad for Washburn County.”
He stated studies in Ohio and Iowa have shown Wal-Marts tend to suppress overall wages in a region.
He alleged Wal-Mart has driven thousands of American jobs oversees
because it forces suppliers to lower prices, making manufacturing
products only feasible in low-paying foreign labor markets such as
China and Indonesia.
Regarding traffic safety, Chairman Micheal Bobin asked whether
there is any location Washburn County First would agree is suitable for
a Wal-Mart.
Carlson said he could not speak for the group on that point, but
he said he himself would never accept a Wal-Mart in the county at any
location, a sentiment also later endorsed by Posh.
“These things to me are a moral issue,” said Carlson. “It is, in
my estimation, the obligation of good people to oppose organizations
like this, and I know everyone here is a good person, and I am
confident there are good people all over Washburn County.”
However, Carlson added, several members of the group would stop
opposing the development if they were convinced the majority of
Washburn County residents were for the Wal-Mart development, but he
said it appears the county is very divided on the issue, approaching
50-50.
At the last Spooner Planning Commission meeting to consider Wal-Mart’s
preliminary plat, almost twice as many citizens, 625 to 349, signed
petitions for the Wal-Mart as those who signed in opposition, while a
recent Spooner Advocate online poll, which was not a scientific poll,
showed 50 percent supported the project as opposed to 48 percent
against.
Washburn County First’s presentation, which had been very cordial,
became confrontational when Superior Broadcasting journalist and
Washburn County First Member Nick Vanderpuy refused to give up his seat
after he was told by Bobin he was not going to allow Vanderpuy to make
an analogy of Wal-Mart and the need for cheap fuel as being one of the
reasons for the war in Iraq.
A county sheriff deputy was called to remove Vanderpuy, but Vanderpuy left after Carlson asked to meet with him.
Tom Spelbring, another Washburn County First member, said the group
does not agree with Vanderpuy’s approach and emphasized the group is
non-adversarial.
Bobin said the group had demonstrated “textbook” political organizing
and he applauded them for being active in the democratic process.
|
|
|
|
