I wasn't very clear in my original post. I did not intend that 'all' (and I didn't write 'all') buildings left empty for x number of months be torn down; the intention in my proposal was for newly constructed, large, commercial 'big boxes' that were deliberately left empty by owners to prevent competition from buying the empty buildings. My understanding is that other communities have enacted such ordinances that require developers putting up buildings of a certain number of square feet or above to post some sort of bond or sign some sort of agreement that would provide for the disposal of the building if it were to be left empty for X (and X need not be a very small number) of months. The intention is to prevent blight and such an ordinance or set of ordinances would require careful wording, as has been pointed out before, by someone who is much more clever than I and who has good legal training.
Terri Hyle
From: Jerome Christenson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Re: [Winona] Wal-Mart Date: Sun, 17 Aug 2003 21:37:44 -0500
[Winona Online Democracy]
rip down all building that are vacant for "X number of months?" If such an ordinance had been enacted fifty years ago there would be a lot more vacant land in the city... We wouldn't have to put up with the empty Choate Building, the Winona Hotel, W.T. Grant, the Armory, the CST campus, well, most of downtown Winona for that matter.
Be careful what you wish for.
Jerome
> From: "terri hyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 19:35:07 -0500
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: FW: [Winona] Wal-Mart
>
> [Winona Online Democracy]
>
> What I have read is that WalMart has a long history and perhaps policy of
> not selling its empty buildings to competitors, thus leaving a lot of
> derelict buildings (numbering in the hundreds, nation-wide. See the PBS
> website: http://www.pbs.org/itvs/storewars/stores3_2.html#empty for more
> info.
>
> I am concerned about this possibility in Winona. I am also concerned about
> any of the 'big boxes' going out of business, leaving a large building
> standing empty. It is certainly possible for the city to require any new
> big boxes to submit plans for the disposal or removal of any buildings left
> empty for X number of months. In the case of Winona, I don't see our city
> council requiring this unless they hear from a lot of citizens who concerned
> about this possibility. Yet, such a requirement would help protect Winona
> in at least two ways: it would make it more difficult for a large building
> to be left empty, attracting the sorts of problems such properties attract
> because the corporation would be required to take responsibility for its
> empty sites; secondly, it would ensure that Wal Mart were truly invested in
> the supercenter WalMart wants to build in Winona. Remember, that for
> WalMart, the cost of a single supercenter is negligible, even though it is
> millions of dollars, a very large sum for Winona.
>
> Even if a current city ordinance would allow the city to remove such an
> empty property, shouldn't it be WalMart's responsibility to remove a
> building it chooses to allow to remain empty? Again, remember we are
> talking about a corporation that can well afford the cost.
>
> Terri Hyle
>
>
>
>
>> From: "Bob Sebo" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Subject: Re: FW: [Winona] Wal-Mart
>> Date: Sat, 16 Aug 2003 18:48:19 -0500
>>
>> [Winona Online Democracy]
>>
>> I am curious about this that I've been hearing about Walmart not selling
>> its
>> closed stores. My brother pointed one out to me in Antigo WI last
>> week...there is a new one across the street. Was there just no buyer in
>> Antigo (I did not see a for sale or lease sign)?
>>
>> I can't imagine that city ordinance would permit such folly. Couldn't such
>> a structure be identified as blighted and removed?
>>
>> Bob Sebo
>> Winona
>>
>>
>> ----- Original Message -----
>> From: "terri hyle" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> Sent: Tuesday, August 12, 2003 3:49 PM
>> Subject: Re: FW: [Winona] Wal-Mart
>>
>>
>>> [Winona Online Democracy]
>>>
>>> Looking at the 1995 City of Winona Comprehensive plan, under the section
>>> titled Manufacturing, it lists the Riverbend project. I haven't been
>> able
>>> to find the original newspaper articles outlining the proposals for the
>>> sales tax to pay for dredging the lake and filling in the land, so I
>> can't
>>> verify what was originally and officially stated as the purpose of the
>>> project. My recollection is that the dual purpose was to improve Lake
>>> Winona and to provide land for light manufacturing, thus improving both
>>> Winona's aesthetics and recreational possibilities as well as attracting
>>> good paying jobs to Winona.
>>>
>>> My scan of the on-line articles available on the Winona Daily News site
>>> reminded me that before Menard's participation, there was a proposed $25
>>> Million mall but the developer pulled out, and Menards stepped in, with
>> a
>>> contingency on the part of the city that other retail establishments
>> would
>>> be located at the site in addition to Menards.
>>>
>>> For me, Wal-Mart operates on a totally different scale than any of the
>> other
>>> big boxes because of its enormity. We would all object if a single
>>> businessman owned every or nearly every business operating in Winona.
>> Yet,
>>> Wal-Mart will essentially be a small town business district, contained
>> in
>> a
>>> big box, and owned by a single business entity which isn't headquartered
>>> here and has no local interests here, aside from taking whatever profit
>> it
>>> can. Wal-Mart will not use our local banks (and will probably try to
>>> compete with them by opening its own branch of its own bank), our local
>>> accountants, our local contractors. Unlike locally owned and operated
>>> establishments, Wal-Mart has no interest in the Winona community of
>> Winona.
>>> If Winona's purchasing power dwindles because of the number of
>> businesses
>>> lost due to WalMart, WalMart will simply abandon its big box and move on
>> to
>>> the next town. It won't sell it's vacant property, but will hold on to
>> it,
>>> leaving us with an eyesore and empty shops.
>>>
>>> Wal-Mart will foist its responsibility towards its employees onto the
>> city,
>>> county and state by not providing affordable insurance coverage and by
>>> paying such low wages that its employees will be forced to turn to
>> community
>>> foodshelves and other publicly funded services. If Wal-Mart were not a
>>> wealthy corporation that could well afford to provide better for its
>>> employees, perhaps this could be less egregious. Wal-Mart has knowingly
>>> engaged in deceptive advertising practices, and has a terrible track
>> record
>>> with regards to labor laws, gender discrimination, and consumer safety.
>>> There are murmers of anti-trust lawsuits being brought against WalMart
>> and
>>> other 'big box' stores that engage in predatory pricing practices.
>> There
>>> are a number of people who are predicting that in a few years, Wal-Mart
>> will
>>> experience an implosion--will collapse. To me, this makes WalMart a bad
>> bet
>>> for Winona.
>>>
>>> Terri Hyle
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>> From: "Kathy Seifert" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> CC: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> Subject: Re: FW: [Winona] Wal-Mart
>>>> Date: Mon, 11 Aug 2003 11:18:33 -0500
>>>>
>>>> [Winona Online Democracy]
>>>>
>>>> Bryon (I'm assuming and adding a friendly reminder to sign all posts!):
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for sharing this to clarify. I had a sense that Bob and David
>> were
>>>> on different wavelengths, but couldn't put my finger on it! Now I see
>> that
>>>> the decision David referred to was the supreme court's--not a local
>>>> decision
>>>> by our county or city officials. This is an excellent example of how
>> what
>>>> happens on the national level is significant to us locally! If I'm
>>>> understanding correctly, this historic decision seems to have been
>> pivotal
>>>> to the development of more corporate power in America? I imagine the
>>>> arguments for and against this decision are as numerous as those for
>> and
>>>> against Wal-Mart coming to Winona. It seems as though Wal-Mart
>> couldn't
>>>> exist and the Enron tragedy couldn't have happened without that pivotal
>>>> decision and others that followed. I can also argue that we wouldn't
>> even
>>>> be able to have an online discussion forum without it--the technology
>> would
>>>> never have been deveoped without the corporate environment. It still
>>>> leaves
>>>> us with the question of what our community wants and what vision guides
>> the
>>>> decisions of elected officials.
>>>>
>>>> In a sense, it comes down to the "reactive vs. proactive dichotomy"--or
>> do
>>>> we as a comminity jump at the chance of a big box coming to town
>> because
>>>> one
>>>> expresses interest or are we consciously courting this kind of commerce
>>>> because it is what we want? Can any one answer the question of whether
>>>> this
>>>> was the intention of the city when levying the tax for the dredging?
>> Was
>>>> it
>>>> a "Field of Dreams" (i.e., If you build it, big boxes will come") kind
>> of
>>>> thing or was more of trying to create the opportunity for options where
>>>> none
>>>> existed previously? I think those intentions make a significant
>> difference
>>>> and I don't really know the answer--plus it's difficult to know what is
>>>> true
>>>> and what is conjecture. Maybe Jerome or some of the other media folks
>> who
>>>> have followed this more closely can enlighten us with facts?
>>>>
>>>> Kathy Seifert
>>>> ----- Original Message -----
>>>> From: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>>> Sent: Monday, August 11, 2003 9:11 AM
>>>> Subject: Re: FW: [Winona] Wal-Mart
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>> [Winona Online Democracy]
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wal-Mart is not an individual; therefore, it should not claim the
>>>>>> "right" of equality.
>>>>>> Individuals that interact with the corporation such as officers,
>>>>>> employees, or contractors do and should have rights.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unfortunately, this is not the case and serves to highlight the
>>>>>> irrational status Corporate person-hood has catapulted itself to
>> over
>>>>>> the last hundred years. A court clerk, without prior debate
>> thought
>>>>>> otherwise and essentially gave corporations person-hood. Over
>> time,
>>>> the
>>>>>> precedent has been repeatedly exploited by corporate lawyers, yet
>> the
>>>>>> precedent has never been debated. It is time to end what was
>> started
>>>> by
>>>>>> the actions of a court clerk.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>> Wal-Mart is not an individual; therefore, it should not claim the
>>>>>> "right" of equality. Individuals that interact with the
>> corporation
>>>>> such as officers,
>>>>>> employees, or contractors do and should have rights.
>>>>>
>>>>> I really think this is a fascinating issue. Below is a short
>> excerpt
>>>>> from a good discussion available here:
>>>>>
>>>>> http://www.adbusters.org/magazine/28/usa.html
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Then came a legal event that would not be understood for decades
>> (and
>>>>> remains baffling even today), an event that would change the course
>> of
>>>>> American history. In Santa Clara County vs. Southern Pacific
>> Railroad,
>> a
>>>>> dispute over a railbed route, the US Supreme Court deemed that a
>> private
>>>>> corporation was a "natural person" under the US Constitution and
>>>>> therefore entitled to protection under the Bill of Rights. Suddenly,
>>>>> corporations enjoyed all the rights and sovereignty previously
>> enjoyed
>>>>> only by the people, including the right to free speech.
>>>>>
>>>>> This 1886 decision ostensibly gave corporations the same powers as
>>>>> private citizens. But considering their vast financial resources,
>>>>> corporations thereafter actually had far more power than any private
>>>>> citizen. They could defend and exploit their rights and freedoms
>> more
>>>>> vigorously than any individual and therefore they were more free. In
>> a
>>>>> single legal stroke, the whole intent of the American Constitution
>> --
>>>>> that all citizens have one vote, and exercise an equal voice in
>> public
>>>>> debates -- had been undermined. Sixty years after it was inked,
>> Supreme
>>>>> Court Justice William O. Douglas concluded of Santa Clara that it
>> "could
>>>>> not be supported by history, logic or reason." One of the great
>> legal
>>>>> blunders of the nineteenth century changed the whole idea of
>> democratic
>>>>> government.
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> This message powered by EMUMAIL. -- http://www.EMUMAIL.com
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
>>>>> All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
>>>>> No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
>>>>> To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please
>> visit
>>>>> http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
>>>>> Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
>>>>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>>> If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the
>> Contact
>>>> page at
>>>>> http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
>>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
>>>> All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
>>>> No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
>>>> To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
>>>> http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
>>>> Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
>>>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>>> If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact
>>>> page at
>>>> http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
>>>
>>> _________________________________________________________________
>>> The new MSN 8: smart spam protection and 2 months FREE*
>>> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
>>> All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
>>> No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
>>> To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
>>> http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
>>> Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
>>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>>> If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact
>> page at
>>> http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
>> All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
>> No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
>> To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
>> http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
>> Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
>> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
>> If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact
>> page at
>> http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
>
> _________________________________________________________________
> The new MSN 8: advanced junk mail protection and 2 months FREE*
> http://join.msn.com/?page=features/junkmail
>
> _______________________________________________
> This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
> All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
> No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
> To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
> http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
> Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
> mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page
> at
> http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 helps eliminate e-mail viruses. Get 2 months FREE*. http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus
_______________________________________________
This message was posted to Winona Online Democracy
All messages must be signed by the senders actual name.
No commercial solicitations are allowed on this list.
To manage your subscription or view the message archives, please visit
http://mapnp.mnforum.org/mailman/listinfo/winona
Any problems or suggestions can be directed to mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] If you want help on how to contact elected officials, go to the Contact page at
http://www.winonaonlinedemocracy.org
