Update: Check out coverage from Fox 6, WISN 12 and CBS 58. There is also coverage in the Journal Sentinel and New Kid’s View blog.
Walmart got final South Milwaukee City Council approval Tuesday night.
Specifically, the council gave its final backing to rezoning the land at 222 N. Chicago Avenue, the drawing of a new certified survey map for the area and the vacation and discontinuance of 11th Avenue between Carroll and Davis Avenues.
The vote was 6-2 on all issues, with 1st District Aldermen Frank Van Dusen III and Craig Maass voting no. Here is why I voted yes …
First, I think the majority of residents in the 4th District support the project. It’s not a big majority, but I feel confident it’s a majority. I believed this to be the case in the weeks leading up to the vote through various and countless conversations around the district, emails and phone messages received, feedback on this blog and other sources. And I confirmed this with some leg work over the weekend, when I spent a number of hours taking an informal survey of all homeowners in the three-block radius bounded by 17th and 18th Avenues and Maple and Chestnut Streets.
I simply asked people at each home where they stood on Walmart – without giving them any inkling where I stood, unless asked. In other words, no “push polling.” The results? Support, by a more than 2-to-1 margin. Now, this poll was not even close to scientific, and I do think the gap between supporters and opponents in my district is closer than 2-to-1. But I do believe more than ever there are more supporters than opponents in my district.
Secondly, I personally think the project will be good for the city – specifically when it comes to the tax increment Walmart will provide. Simply put, I couldn’t get past the fact that this is a minimum $12 million development going on a contaminated piece of land that I suspect would otherwise stay vacant for a decade or more without this project moving ahead. For a city in need of revenue to maintain valuable services – and for a city and its taxpayers in need of a more diversified tax base – this is easily the most compelling argument on this issue.
That said, there were a number of valid concerns raised against the project, including many that I agreed with, including issues like traffic, impact on local businesses and a lack of formal public comment until recent weeks.
However, I also supported the project because none of these concerns, nor others I heard, was a dealbreaker on its face.
You can learn more about my position in my previous post on this.
I should also say that, in the end, I did not consider the “how Walmart does business” arguments in this case – concerns raised about how much Walmart pays its employees, or what type of benefits they provide, or from where they source their products. I don’t think these should be part of the debate for this project. Am I concerned about all of these issues? Absolutely. But these are debates that should be happening at the macroeconomic level – not among aldermen as they ponder whether or not to allow construction of a single new store.
On that point, this is a slippery slope argument for me. For if we must consider these factors with Walmart, must the City Council ask the same questions of every employer in town? And what if we don’t like how much Pick n’ Save or Walgreens or Milwaukee Avenue Mom and Pop Shop X pays its employees? What if we’re not happy with the benefits workers at Ace Hardware or Advance Auto Parts employees get?
You can see how troubling that gets … and why I put those concerns out of my mind.
Indeed, these are all points I tried to make at Tuesday’s council meeting, but was shouted down too often to make many of them. I was frankly disappointed, and saddened, with the tone of the meeting. Simply, it got ugly, much uglier than I thought it would.
I hoped for a reasonable, rational debate about the development and its impacts. Instead, we got an angry shouting match, and I left the meeting scared for my safety.
I hope readers of this blog come to realize how difficult a decision this was for me, and recognize how much time, energy, effort and thought went into this process over the last several months. I suspect I will never take a harder, more gut-wrenching vote.
In the end, however, my vote all came back to constituent support, economic development and taxes. Those were my tipping point considerations, and I acted accordingly. I am willing to live with the consequences.
Of course, you are welcome to post your comments below. Please keep them constructive.
South Milwaukee Blog 
I think it is a real shame the aldermen/alderwoman did not listen to the what the people of South Milwaukee Wanted. I hope you don’t have to face a recall! I hope no one gets killed in a traffic accident because of all the extra traffic on Rawson,College and Chicago Ave. What is a life worth? I hope we don’t find out too soon. I don’t think the aldermen/alderwoman would like it very much if a family member got involved in an accident in this area. A stop and go light on Badger Ave. is not going to help all the accidents on Chicago and College Ave. The stop lights already there don’t help and the accidents increase yearly. I live in the cul du sac on Saint Sylvester Drive behind Kentucky Fried Chicken and Griddlers Resturant. I hear all the accidents. I think we need turn arrows for South Bound and North Bound and East and West bound traffic after this Walmart is built. What a sad night for South Milwaukee Residents. If someone is looking to buy a home near Walmart mine will be for sale. I did not buy in South MIlwaukee to be in a city with big box stores. I brought my home over 20 years ago because it was a quiet nice neighborhood close to the lake.
Thanks for all of your service Erik! It sounds like you put great, painstaking thought to your decision and it was not taken lightly. I was part of the difficult decision to merge the parishes in town here. It can be a lonely time when unpopular decisions are made. Hang in there and know that many people support you.
Now that this vote is taken and over, let’s work on the budget so as to give the residents an NO TAX increase!!!
Ya right.
Erik,
Thank you and your colleagues for the courage to vote on your principles and not be bullied by the shrill, unreasoned, vocal MINORITY. This is a good thing for SM. I don’t want my taxes going up any more (I’d prefer reductiuons) than they are and this addition to the city’s tax base will help with that.
On the surface, I agree with your reasoning, but I don’t completely agree with your position on how to go about doing your job. Here’s my view on how elected officials should go about their business:
An elected official is put into office as chosen by the citizens. Thus, the official should do what is in the best long term interest of their jurisdiction. That said, it is the official’s job to look at the broad picture. If the citizens agree or disagree with something, if it is in their best interest, the official should vote accordingly. The officials are supposed to be the “best and brightest” of our citizens. They must make hard decisions even though they may be unpopular.
Here is where I have issue with how you made your decision; you didn’t look at the broader picture.
Yes, I understand that how Walmart does business may be a slippery slope, but it isn’t every day that something like this comes up. The problem with this is that most, if not all, of the other businesses that you mention have much to outweigh the negative aspects of how they may do business. Most other businesses have at least a bit of competition as well. Walmart can “put out” the competition relatively easily. No other businesses are the world’s largest retailer, the world’s 16th most profitable business, and have four of the top 10 richest people in the United States as owners/profiteers. Walmart is the epitome of how to do business in the name of greed and taking advantage of fellow human beings.
As Sam Walton said, “I pay low wages. I can take advantage of that. We’re going to be successful, but the basis is a very low-wage, low-benefit model of employment.” The model is successful, but at a cost greater than face value.
Geoff Pearson
nowalmartinsm (dot) com
I run a small business liquor store in the downtown district.. I recently went to the Walmart located on 27th Street..on a “Friday night” around “11:30pm”..and their beer and liquor selection was open to the public after 9:00pm, which is against “Class A Malt Beverage & Liquor Licenses” for the state of Wisconsin with this upcoming Walmart in effect for the city of South Milwaukee and if i have a receipt of them selling after 9:00pm..Am I able to contact you to switch my business hours to sell beer / wine / alcohol after 9:00pm..?
I also implore you to check the 27th location’s alcohol department after 9:00pm
I’ll do my best in contacting city hall, so I’m able to speak with you over the phone, if I have more time available.
Thank-You Mr Brooks
Where else can you buy a loaf of bread and a new pair of underwear? When does construction start?
KMart
I was at the meeting last night and felt if I said anything in favor of the development, I would have had rotten tomatoes thrown at me, or worse. Unfortunately, the aldermen took the brunt of rude, out-of-order comments. Of the 10,000 people that live in SM, only 1350 said no to having a Walmart? I don’t see that as the majority. Walmart would not have been my first choice, but I sure would like to see development in SM. If you want small business then you have to patronage thoses businesses in your community. Ever wonder why Wildflower Bakery left SM?
I have a hard time figuring out if the name “Walmart” is the problem here or actually developing that piece of contaminated property. Target, for example, would have lights, increased traffic, decreased property values, their “stuff” is also made in China. Would Target smother out SM Pick and Save/Cudahy P&S, Kmart, or small businesses? BTW, you can also buy a loaf of bread and underwear in a Target these days.
If you don’t support Walmart, then don’t support Sam’s Club.
Erik,
I think you knew from the get go that you were going to vote against the citizens of your district. You and your fellow council man have a great deal of political capital at stake, since you invested so much time and effort in attracting Wal-Mart to come and build in South Milwaukee. In my opinion, I felt like you really did not want this deal, because of the hardships it would cost the citizens of the development site area. You spoke a good talk and appeared like you might switch your vote, but in reality you just could not take a difficult or different stand. In the end, your actions spoke louder than your words.
It appeared like you were asking for pity last night, since you made such a tough decision. You came across as insincere. You made a tough decision man up to it, but for god’s sake do not ask us to take pity and support you in your decision. This behavior was uncalled for. This was your stance own up to it!! Please do not share with us your shame and guilt. I think and believe you are a person with good values and that is why you struggled with this decision.
You voted for this deal because of the upcoming possible revenue stream that this development could bring into the city. But I asked your gang to produce some financial analysis as it relates to the costs of having a “Big Box “store in the city. Question —Do you believe the City of South Milwaukee will not have any additional expenses with having this type of business in our city? Predictions and “what if statements” can be made as to what expenses could occur in the near future, but somehow this question as fallen on deaf ears. Really what is the cost benefit analysis of having this store destroy the natural beauty of our city and homeowners property values?
I know for a fact that several Wal-Mart stores are struggling financially, since I have been told they have laid off hundreds of HR professionals at many of their stores nationwide. Guess what I have interviewed many former Wal-Mart HR Store Managers recently and they tell me that Costco is eating Wal-Mart’s lunch.
I fear most that this store will not be successful, because of the angry environment that was created by your council in not informing the citizens of South Milwaukee in advance to the deal that was sealed behind closed doors. You should have engaged and allowed the citizens to be part of the planning process to bring in a successful business partner. We all get that the land is a mess!! If it was your intent to bring in a big box retail store to this site than why did your team not involve the citizens of the immediate area in the planning of the size of the store, the store hours, which road should be their main entrance, etc? The list of questions is endless, but hell you do not give a dam about your citizen’s opinions that is very clear. Why were you all so afraid allowing a referendum vote on this issue?
You understand that many of citizens will not forget how disrespectful the South Milwaukee Council Persons who voted for this deal were during this three week process. You state that you will bear the consequence that goes along with your yes vote and I am sure you are intimating maybe a RECALL election or just flat campaign against all of the Council persons that supported this project. REST ASSURED we will ensure that many of you will not get voted into office again. We will all work hard not to get you reelected –that is a given. Just think about what we can accomplish in weeks and months, you witnessed what we were able to do in three days!!! I will fight for the family that lives across the street from Wal-Mart and the impact that this development will have on their main financial asset their home. But hell you don’t care you live in another district. You said it yourself it is all about the revenue stream and the almighty dollar. The impact of the homeowners who live near this property was not a big enough of a deal to have you switch your vote. I hope you enjoy and feel great in your nice neighborhood that does not have a Wal-Mart with 6000 more cars a day! Get real. This is a moral issue to me and to the other folks on our team. I talked to many of these people who own homes in this area they have worked very hard to improve their property values and have not moved away even though this city has given up on changing the economic growth of our city.
I just keep thinking that this development is a basically a way for all of you to say look what we did we got Wal-Mart in our city. But look at the entire rest of the town is in need of serious help. How many empty storefronts do we have all over our city? Can you give us that number to share with the tax payers. I am guessing this number will go up when Wal-Mart is built.
You have poked the bear and the bear is willing, smart and able to take on the cause of injustice and remove the city council persons who have no vision. The vision of our city planners is absent take a look at our downtown.
The Friends of South Milwaukee goal is take back this city and make sure that this type of behavior is never witnessed again by our city elected officials.
Thank you to all of you that supported our cause and took the time to walk the streets and get signatures against this project (1300 votes no in three days) you are wonderful caring people. Lynn Arts (lynn@triohrsolutions.com)
Lynn: It was a tough call for me, very tough, and I have clearly stated why I voted the way I did. I stand by my decision and own it. That said, I now wish I hadn’t made the comment I did at the end of the “debate.” My emotions got the best of me, and that’s my fault. I was not seeking any pity. I deserve no pity. I am only asking opponents to respect how much time, energy, effort and heartache went into making the vote I (and others) did. But in these “if you’re not for me, you’re against me” times, I am finding even that is too much to ask. Instead of respectful, reasonable discourse, we get shouting and hatred. And that’s unfortunate.
Erik,
I don’t think the citizens of SM hate you, but I do think many folks believed this was a decision that was made behind closed doors. I spoke to many of the families and they feel like their entire property value is going to decrease 50 to 60% due to this development. I have respect for them and feel for their loss. You guys managed this very poorly. We only learned of this deal Oct 8th, 2011 most of us thought the deal with Wal-Mart was not moving forward. So this new deal came to us very unexpected.
When the President of the Council stated this is not Madison and talked down to everyone like they were kids it was very hateful and disrespectful. You have a right to your opinion and ideas. I believe the shouting came because the council did not want to hear anyone’s ideas or thoughts only take a vote and move on! That is what I call unreassonable and shameful. I am sorry you felt uncomforable, but that is part of making a difficult decision.
Thanks for responding. Unfortunately, there was a lot of hatred in that room on Tuesday, and I sense that still exists and will exist going forward. I guess I must accept that as part of the job, and part of making a difficult decision … especially in these times where hatred is more and more pervading politics and political discourse is more and more becoming “I’m right, you’re wrong, and I must yell at you and threaten you for being wrong.”
That said, my feeling the other night went beyond “uncomfortable.” I truly felt scared for my safety, so much so that aldermen were escorted to their cars by police and extra patrols were ordered for our homes. No matter what the issue or vote, I hope and pray that never happens again. There is no place for that in what we do.
As to concerns about notification, news of Walmart coming to South Milwaukee first broke last November. In fact, I broke it on this blog. Since then, I’ve written dozens of times about the project. And local media has covered the project off and on since then. And the city has done the other “basics” when it comes to keeping residents informed on the issue. Is that enough? That’s a very valid question, and I’ve been critical of our efforts around that part of the project, and will continue to be. For example, I continue to believe the fact that we went nearly a year without having a formal public meeting or hearing about the project was wrong.
But I also say this: In these days without a truly local newspaper — and a local media that barely covers our fair city anymore — it is harder to keep citizens informed on issues. I see that all the time with the farmers’ market and other community events, and on key issues like this. It’s hard to speak to a large audience these days, which is the biggest reason I started this blog.
So, right or wrong, the burden does somewhat fall onto residents to keep themselves informed, to go out and get the information digitally or in person and act accordingly. Of course, the city still plays a role here as well, and we need to continue to find new and better ways to talk to our residents.
What an embarrassment! I was unable to attend the meeting last night, but I turn on the TV and the lead news story is a bunch of loud obnoxious protesters in South Milwaukee. It strikes me that even though the aldermen can see from their emails and phone calls that a majority of SM people want Walmart, the embarrassing actions seem to have been done only by one side. And then, what comes next? “You didn’t vote the way the loud, vocal minority wants you to in this ONE vote, so a recall is coming”. Sounds vaguely like a loud, vocal minority wanting recalls after ONE vote in Madison.
Again, I’ve noticed that there has been no calls for recall for the one elected official and one unelected official who did not support us here in the 1st district. It must be because some of us recognize the fact that the aldermen vote in the way they see best for the city, even if it is not seen as “best” for a particular individual. Most of us believe that in this country, you elect representatives who think most in line with you and then let those representatives do their jobs. If the community that elected them no longer believes that they are in line with their thoughts, that’s where the next election cycle come in – and is driven by their constituents, not out-of-state political parties / unions or out-of-district people that want to go after “all” of you.
It’s amazing that so many of these people are claiming they weren’t involved in the process. Did they not notice that big expanse of land sitting there for 8 (?) years – or that big “CDA” sign sitting on that land? Where were all the ideas then? That was even before the economy turned. No real ideas at all until somebody comes up with one and then the only thing they say is: “NIMBY!!!!”
Finally, I’ve noticed that for the most part, your followers on this blog have kept open a respectful debate – which says something about you as well. Of course I am ignoring the previous poster – maybe you need a “bleeper” there, or, perchance a bar or soap! 🙂
What’s with “NIMBY”? Learn to spell
smdre: I think “NIMBY” stands for “Not In My Backyard.”
I find it interesting to post the decisions made by elected officials on behalf of their constituents in Menomonee Falls whose meeting had a smaller turn out than ours (AND they didn’t have petitions). They’re reasons for denial were hauntingly familiar. And that same size project on a space much larger than ours…. Our turn out was largely, understandably, from those who have no choice but to live with it while those districts on the other side of the tracks sit on their holy hill and enjoy the “convenience.”
“The village [Menomonee Falls] Plan Commission, in January, voted unanimously to deny a request to rezone the proposed development site north of Lisbon Road and west of Pilgrim Road.
Dickson, Tenn.-based Gatlin Development Co. wanted to rezone the 25-acre site to accommodate a 115,000-square-foot Walmart.
The commission voted to recommend denying the zoning request after dozens of opponents, many from a neighboring subdivision, attended the meeting.
Randy Newman, Village Board president, said then that the proposed store would be too large, and generate too much traffic for the area, which is mostly residential. He said the site’s current zoning is intended to provide less-intense uses on the portions adjacent to homes.”
Nice to know that some communities care about the little guys. Maybe we should move there when they take our homes to make the road bigger and build maybe a Home Depot?
SMDRE,
I like what you have to say.
Please view our website:
http://www.friendsofsouthmilwaukee.com.
South Milwaukee residents need YOU and others like you to advocate on their behalf.
I urge opponents of the proposed Walmart to join us do something other than just talk (or comment).
Walmart and its land developer been defeated before (in other communities, and in the court of law).
We can do it here, too, with concerned, active citizens.
Thanks for voting for common sense
Pingback: Walmart Seeks Extension On Purchase Agreement | South Milwaukee Blog
Though I do not and will not shop at Walmart and I find their employment practices pretty reprehensible, I’ve remained ambivalent about this project as I understand that there are limited options for the parcel in question…if only bad decisions are possible, sometimes people are forced to make the best bad decision they can. Reality isn’t always as pretty as we’d like.
That being said, I’m not convinced that the best bad decision has been made. In part, this is because, despite speaking with a number of people (including the city engineer) getting adequate information about the project has been difficult to come by. That your blog has been one of the best sources of information, in my estimation, highlights the degree to which the City failed in this respect. That the city has not been sufficiently forthcoming with information or open about its decision-making process was evident during the “public hearing” in early October in which people were clearly operating with limited information necessitating clarification and the presentation of additional information. This is particularly disappointing given that there are several information outlets available to the city, including its own Web site and the SouthMilwaukee.org site and and listserv maintained by the City Clerk.
Though I dislike Walmart’s employment practices (and therefore choose not to give them my patronage), I can follow your rationale for setting this issue aside in the decision making process. I think the more relevant issue is whether Walmart is likely to be a good corporate neighbor…and, in this regard, its track record is not very good. In addition to the concerns you raise about the fate of small businesses in the shadow of the Walmart development, Walmart, in some communities, has gone to great lengths to sidestep its tax obligations. Walmart, in some communities, has maintained a shiny new store for a few years only to cut staff and merchandise supplies and let the building and grounds slide into a level of disrepair. This particular Walmart is being built with little/no buffer from the residential area that borders it. If the store is not well maintained, this will be far more detrimental to residential property values in the area than having a house down the street with chipping paint or an overgrown yard.
I share your concerns about traffic and am wary of the traffic-impact study the developer provided…and disappointed that the City apparently did not consider implications beyond the very limited scope the developer was required to employ. That there was little to no apparent consideration of the traffic impact on North Chicago south of the site…a street already difficult for pedestrians to cross and one traversed by middle and high school students twice a day…is troubling. It would seem a study of traffic on Park might provide some insight for considering potential increase in traffic on Badger, rather than dismissing the concerns of residents out of hand. That alternatives to a light a Badger that might ameliorate some of those concerns were not considered (at least there is no indication/information that there were alternatives considered), such as ending Badger at North Chicago so that it is no longer a through street at that point or making Badger one way to limit traffic flow, is troubling.
I understand that Walmart was the only date to the prom the city could find for the site when the developer was required to carry the full freight of the necessary site clean up…and that even they walked when that was the deal. I’d like to know if other potential suitors were given the same the-city-will-pick-up-half-of-the-clean-up proposal…might the site have been attractive to other developers had they been offered the deal offered the Walmart developer.
Despite my personal dislike of several of Walmart’s busines practices, I’ve been willing to suspend my own agenda to allow for a consideration of the potential benefits for South Milwaukee. Though the broadbrush analysis you provide is compelling, the devil is often in the details, probably more so when dealing with a company that too often has shown itself to be integrity challenged. That details have not been forthcoming from the City has only lead to speculation about the devil. It’s unfortunate that the City has handled this situation…one that from the outset was bound to be controversial…in such a way that has further bred distrust, misinformation, and emotional reactions.
I appreciate your ongoing efforts to keep your constituents informed and to describe your own decision making processes. When others on the Council are on a first name basis with the developers (the familiarity implying a relationship outside the public purview) and appear to be making the process unnecessarily opaque, it works against your individual efforts to inform and represent your constituents.
Though the votes have been cast, issues related to this project will undoubtedly continue to arise. The City still has opportunities to better serve residents.
Pingback: A Banner Year For South Milwaukee Blog: Looking Back To 2011 | South Milwaukee Blog
Pingback: Council Update: Walmart Borrowing Put Off With Procedural Maneuver | South Milwaukee Blog