|
Comment on this article |
View comments |
Email this Article
|
|
News :: Miscellaneous |
|
Wal-Mart: Local opposition and opportunities for intervention |
Current rating: 0 |
by Pauline Bartolone, in collaboration with Paul
Email: alice_redqueen (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified!)
Phone: 384-0830
Address: Urbana, IL |
05 Apr 2001
|
|
In the context of local sustainability being increasingly sacrificed by teh national trend in Wal-martism, U-C reporters deeply investigate local opposition to the second Wal-Mart development in the U-C region. Inspired by the question: How can the public be empowered to have a stake in the development decisions that affect their lives? |
The Savoy Super Wal-Mart vandalism in late February had at least two consequences: $100,000 in structural damage, and the induction of the following questions. Why in the world do we need another Wal-Mart in the Champaign –Urbana region? How does the public feel about a new Wal-Mart developing in Savoy? What consequences will another Wal-Mart have on our community? Who is responsible for bringing a Super Wal-mart into the region?
There were no answers to my questions in the dominant media’s news coverage. In fact, all I received was reassurance that the Wal- mart project would be completed on time, by mid- July. There has been little follow –up on the story since the vandalism, and almost a total absence of in-depth reporting. Furthermore, there were no allusions made as to why the vandals would be motivated to perform the damage.
It seemed obvious to me and others at the Indymedia Center that the “vandals” were making a statement about their opposition of the Wal-Mart. Apparently the structure had been manually arranged so that when the bulldozer rammed into the support beams, the structure would partially collapse. Sounds like “vandalism” would be more appropriately described as an intentional obstruction to the Wal-Mart construction. A couple IMC reporters took it onto ourselves to do more investigating into the pertinent questions that were being so neglected .
Community impacts reflected in Nationwide trends
So what is there to oppose about Wal-Mart anyway? Wal-Marts are convenient, and offer a wide variety of cheap products, right? At first glance, this may be true. But to the ever- growing population opposing Wal-Marts nationally, the negative impacts are more apparent. At the bare minimum, there is the concern that big box developments are just plain ugly. They develop on the outskirts of town, generating vacant downtowns and pushing local business owners out of the market. Now, what’s not so blatant are the nationwide statistics. Wal-Mart is the nation’s largest private employer, providing yearly salary on the border of the poverty line to over 720,000 people. 38% of Wal-Mart employees receive health benefits. The national average is 60%. But labor rights are not just violated on a national level, they also exploit workers across border. 80% of Wal-Mart garments are imported from sweatshops around the globe, comparing to the national average of closer to 50%. What’s more is, in the past 8 years, Wal-Mart superstores have multiplied from 10 to 600, and 1400 are predicted to pop up by 2005. Each Super Wal-Mart swallows 210,000 square feet our natural resources. That’s 210,000 times 1,400 square feet of green space turned to asphalt and concrete by 2005. You do the math.
Let me clear up another rumor: Wal-marts are not needed to increase our tax base nor do they benefit our local economy in a desirable way. Not only is profit not kept locally, but cost of new infrastructure to a Sprawl-mart is often times greater than the amount of revenue that is collected from the business. Even when Sprawl-marts pay for utility connections and service roads, they do not pay for the maintenance of this infrastructure in the long haul. This economic burden falls on us, the taxpayers. Personally, I would rather be alleviated from paying maintenance costs for Wal-Mart’s infrastructure than have the convenience of paying 15cents less for toothpaste at a store I cant even get to.
Worker Opposition in C-U
Did I mention that it is estimated that three existing community jobs are sacrificed by two jobs at Wal-Mart? Wal-Mart does not add jobs to our communities. It replaces jobs. Furthermore, the 720,000 employees of Wal-Mart are not unionized. Wal-Mart will not use union labor. In fact, they will actually hire out of state construction workers instead of providing jobs to locals! If that isn’t a blow to our local economy I don’t know what is. This, Chambana residents, is happening right here in Savoy.
I visited the actual Wal-Mart site in Savoy several times, located just North of Willard airport on Highway 45. It was necessary to use a car (a practice I avoid whenever possible) to trek out to the site. There is currently no public transportation that far out and no plans in the near future. I wondered how the elderly, handicapped and non-car users were taken into account when designing and locating the building. Two things struck me immediately when I arrived at the construction site- the first was the 210,000 square feet of machinery and aggressively uprooted earth – a preview of an apocalypse. After the initial disgust of the unnecessary and poorly planned land use died down, I became enthusiastic with my second encounter- labor unions picketing! Politically active individuals voicing their opposition! The three labor unions represented held signs:
“ Tri-State Steel Erectors receive sub-standard wages and benefits. Our dispute concerns only the substandard wages and benefits paid by Tri-State Steel Erectors” –Iron Workers Local #380
“Bland Construction has no contract with Local #143”
“NOTICE: Giberson Electric does not employ members of IBEW (International Brotherhood of Electrical Workers) Local #601”
Unbeknownst to me (and I suspect to the general public as well), the picketers had been picketing since December. I was told that most building trade unions were opposed to the Wal-Mart because of the company’s refusal to employ union labor. At least three unions have been sending out one picketer to the site every workday since construction began. Feeling exploited by the way that the media has represented them in the past, the workers were reluctant to talk to me. They did respond to me however when I asked them how we could tell the public to support them. “We just want to work,” I was told by an ironworker, “ these are our jobs and they won’t let us [work] in our own backyard.” They went on to tell me that the Wal-Mart had hired workers from Tennessee and Kentucky, instead of hiring local union labor. They pointed out a truck driving into the site with a Tennessee license plate; “We don’t go there and take their jobs away.”
C-U public opposition
Curious about what the public thought of Wal-Marts and the vandalism, I went to the Pages For All Ages bookstore, one of the only locally owned businesses in Savoy, to ask people some questions. Many people had not known about the new Wal-Mart at all, and some didn’t hear about it until the vandalism happened. Out of 8 people, only one said that having a second Wal-Mart in the region was a good idea. When notified of the concerns about civil, labor and environmental violations that Wal-Mart is affiliated with, the individual expressed unfamiliarity of the issues. More than half expressed disapproval of the development, but when prodded as to what we can do about preventing it, I only received unhopeful, disempowered responses. Even though most comprehended the negative impacts of the Wal-Mart on the community, I received answers such as “Well, there’s nothing we can do about it now.”
Perhaps the most constructive suggestion I received about demonstrating our opposition was to fail to patronize the business when it opened. Sure, that’s easy enough for me to do since it’s more than inconvenient to ride my bike out to Sprawl Land for my food shopping. But how does this solve the problem of more car usage, more concrete, and the ever growing trend of big-wig business against quality of life?
These public interviews demonstrated the need for the public to be educated about how to intervene in the decisions about development that affect our communities. Out of the interviews spawned new questions. How can citizens be empowered to stop these sorts of developments in the future? Who can prevent poorly and irresponsibly designed development from consuming the natural resources needed to keep our air and water healthy? What tools can I use to protect farmland from being paved by a profit- seeking corporation? Who knows how to address my concerns? Confused, I contacted regional and city government for answers.
Advice from the Board
I had a long chat with Ralph Langenheim, chair of the Environment and Land Use committee of the County Board. I figured he would be able to inform me about how, as a citizen, I could have a stake in regional development in the future.
Langenheim explained to me the practicalities behind planning and zoning in the county. Apparently, there is no public notification of any sort about prospective developments in cities or in the county. There is only notification of the actual board meetings, but the agenda is only released upon request. So if we want to be informed about development in our area, we have to keep in touch with our representatives on a regular basis. As far as the venues available to voice opposition to a development, formally there are almost none. Unless the development is violating zoning ordinances, no public forum takes place to decide on the matter. There is no conventional way or legal measures that a citizen can go through based on principal, political beliefs, or any other personal reason. Basically, a citizen can speak out at a County Board meeting or by contacting your district’s board member, but by no means does this mean that your concern will necessarily be represented in a decision to bring in a business. On a city level, the same red tape applies, according to Dan Davies from the Village of Savoy.
However, this does not mean that we shouldn’t bother to communicate our desires to our City and County representatives. Langenheim points out that the County Board “acts in ignorance of what our constituents feel… the level of apathy is very high [among citizens] “ I personally highly recommend keeping in touch with representatives, we just must not depend on this communication as a tool for implementing the kind of community we want. I must say that this bureaucracy that stifles our voices is less than empowering.
Finally, I asked Langenheim if he thought there was a need for two Wal-Marts in the region. He responded, “ I personally don’t feel the need for two… and I don’t approve of their business practices nor am I happy with the impacts of development. However, I am not opposed to the development of the Wal-Mart.” Sounds something like what those citizens I interviewed…”I don’t want it, but I’ll let it happen”
So I didn’t get to talk to whoever did the vandalism, but I did find out plenty of reasons why somebody would go to radical measures to get their statement across. The existence of another Wal-Mart is not just an issue for environmentalists and union activists. It is a manifestation of uninformed citizens and an anti-participatory government, a marriage of apathy and bureaucracy. Is it time for a regulation on a county-wide level mandating public notification and approval before development? Or do we need to redesign our political system so that we have power to deny prospective Wal-Marts? Well, we can start transforming Wal-Mart patronage by not shopping at there at all and spending in local businesses. While we are preparing for the revolution, let’s at least interact with the system that exists, by communicating with our representatives and tuning into our communities’ needs.
I actively solicit input about this piece. Add comments...
|
Comments
|
fighting Walmart |
by Jacqueline Waters
morte13 (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
21 Apr 2001
|
I was interested and excited to see an article on the building of a second Walmart in the Chambana region but the article left me a little uncomfortable.
The first half of the article lists facts about the effects of Walmart on local economies and workers. So far so good. But I was a bit surprised to see all of these facts unattributed. Obviously the author did not pull all of these facts right out of his own mind from his own personal, hands-on data collecting, so where did he find these facts? Besides it being standard practice to attribute facts in articles, it also would be of a lot of interest to readers to know where these facts came from so they can read the book/artice themselves and get more information firsthand. I admit this may be a bit triffling at this point as, in my understanding, the IMC's first goal is to get people creating and sharing media. It is more important in this goal to get people sharing than following all the rules of reporting, but I think getting facts striaght (which the author did to the best of my knowledge) and attributing those facts (which the author did not) is an important issue to look at as the IMC develops.
The second half of the article left me a little queasy, though. The author brings up that he went to the only locally owned (not used) bookstore, Pages for All Ages, to ask people's opinion about the Walmart. The author reports of what he sees as the interview-ees' ignorance and percieved apathy with a tone that gets more and more judemental as the piece continues. Then, the reporter informs us of some local research he did where he finds out well, shucks, there is little to be done on the local level! You can call your local representatives on a frequent basis, ask lots of questions and complain, but that is about that, so the article implies. Yet, just sentences before, a tone of condemnation is taken about those interviewed for not being riled up and doing something about the situation.
It is not that I disagree with the author's displeasure about the new Walmart nor with his obvious belief that people should be doing what they can to stop it. What I do disagree with is his judgemental tone that is followed up with few to any suggestions about what to do about it.
I work at Pages for All Ages (as a cafe manager) and I went up to a bookseller and asked if we had any books on Walmart. Within seconds they had directed me to a little book called, "How Walmart is Destroying America." The book was filled with the facts in this article plus many, many more and with chapters of suggestions about how to begin to fight back on local and national levels against the behemoth. Within minutes I had a wealth of research and ideas at my hands. (By the way, according to this book's extensive research, no city has ever successfully fought off a Walmart at this advanced stage in the development game and so, truly, fighting local in any other way than not patronizing and encouraging others to follow might just be a waste of valuable resources at this time.) My internet search about how to fight Walmart took only a few minutes longer than my book search and reaped results just as rich. I didn't even get to the library yet.
I think this article is very well intended and a good start to getting the Walmart issue into the local, public eye. I also believe that the author in no way intended to insult those he interviewed and those of us reading the article for feeling overwhelm at the dizzying thought of trying to change something so very powerful and that we have been conditioned to believe we cannot change. Yet, I think the author did inadvertently insult some of the audience and people who lended him their time to answer their questions.
Maybe next time the a few minutes could be taken to do the simple research to offer us suggestions and alternatives instead of condemnation. Let's encourage each other to feel we can make a difference in a world that we are often afraid of, not point fingers at one another for giving in to forces we are all guilty of cowaring before from time to time.
Thanks for an opportunity to put in my lengthy two-cents worth,
Jacqueline Waters |
|
A dialog emerges from indymedia! |
by Pauline Bartolone
alice_redqueen (nospam) hotmail.com (unverified) |
Current rating: 0
09 May 2001
|
Thanks for posting a reply. I have been waiting for someone to give me an idea about how this piece is interpreted. I have a lot to say about how you reacted to my piece. I must admit I feel a little defensive at how you depicted it.
I want to use this opportunity to let you know more about the IMC. It is entirely volunteer run, with limited resources. As far as I know, nobody has special training in journalism, including myself. One of the reasons why I am involved in the IMC is because everybody’s voices are embraced, not censored or changed to fit into a certain communication style. People who write are usually passionate about the subject they write because they have a personal interest. If someone wants that a certain topic be represented, the IMC is structured so that you can be empowered to represent it yourself. We want to represent underrepresented news. But we are not a group of full time news reporters taking requests from the public. We provide the resources for others to meet their needs, and represent themselves. It would be nice to have the time and energy to represent everyone the way they want, but for now, we need your help to create what is desirable to you more than we need your criticism.
My best advice about the dissatisfaction you have with my article is to post the information that you want to the site. If it took 5 minutes to research it, it won’t take that much longer to post it up. My personal inclination was to interview local government about how it can (and cannot) be used as a tool for political change. This is what I had to offer at the moment. I mentioned on another link that I plan to pursue the Wal-Mart issue for a long time. So, the piece is not finished.
I don’t believe that there is any such thing as news being un-biased or objective. In fact, maybe my mistake is that I am taking for granted that people know all news is biased. People who use the IMC as a venue for their "news" or "views" are motivated by personal interests. In the dominant media, it is the reporter's job to cover a story. Perhaps this is why it is easier for them to write using the passive voice or third person. However, I was motivated to cover the stories I have done because I feel passionate about these issues. This is why I constantly refer to myself, talk about my experiences interviewing and retrieving information. I am in no way trying to hide my views. I think this is more desirable to readers than having somebody hide their agenda in the selection of facts-among other tactics.
The IMC in and of itself does not have political stances or agendas. Although I am very active in the IMC, what I write does not necessarily reflect what others in the IMC stand for. It is my view.
I didn’t mean to come off as judgmental in the article. I did however, intend to be assertive. I want to point to the attitudes, the statements, and the systems that perpetuate undesirable dynamics-be it Wal-mart developments or the consumption patterns that enable those developments. I don’t want to blame people. I do think that people need to realize the power that they have, and not keep blaming a system for administrating them. You are right though, blame in and of itself doesn’t empower anyone to change.
Towards the end of your comments, you state" Maybe next time a few minutes could be taken to do the simple research to offer us suggestions and alternatives instead of condemnation. " I have to be honest, I really resent this comment. I took quite a few hours to talk to people and ponder over alternatives. I don’t have answers, and I don’t think that it is possible to find solutions to global capitalism in a book about Wal-Mart. I was questioning the entire system that enables Wal-Mart to exist.
It’s easy to overlook key aspects of an issue. For example, I happened to be female, as insinuated with my female name in the byline.
Again, I'm still learning how to find my voice. I’ve never been schooled or trained as to how I can find my voice. This is what is so unique about the IMC, people don’t have to be "journalists" to get their voice out there. Of course our preference is towards "high quality" reporting. I am afraid I will not be able to live up to everybody's standards of how an issue should be represented. Right now I am trying to figure out how to represent what I think is important. It is a learning environment where we help each other find our voices and advocate for the community representing themselves. I advocate for people sharing their own voices, not speaking for others.
|
|
