Monday, May 22, 2006
Wal-Mart and Eminent Domain
Last week, Florida news reports indicated that Wal-Mart was threatening landowners in Florida that if they did not sell their land to the retailer, the company would ask local officials to use eminent domain to take the land away from them.
Turnabout is fair play. Yesterday, San Francisco Bay Area news reports indicated that the town of Hercules, which does not want a Wal-Mart, was threatening to use eminent domain to take Wal-Marts land away and sell it to Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, or another upscale retailer.
"A big-box store is not part of our plan," said one resident. Another was more blunt: "I don't want to have anything ghetto around me." The city's plan calls for, surprise, "a high-density, mixed-use village." But what makes them think that Whole Foods, Trader Joes, or other upscale realtors want to be around them?
Now, Wal-Mart is apologizing for the Florida threat, saying that the threat of eminent domain was actually made by "an overly agressive site selection consultant." Wal-Mart says it should have reviewed the letter (actually an email) before it went out and deleted the eminent domain threat. It hinted that it might cut off its relationship with the consultant.
Can you imagine emailing someone an offer to buy their land with a threat that you will use eminent domain to take it if they don't accept their offer? Can you imagine threatening someone at all when you are trying to get on their good side?
The news reports do not indicate that Wal-Mart said it would never ask a local government to use eminent domain. It just said that threatening to do so "did not reflect the company's position."
On the other hand, identifying Wal-Mart with "ghetto" is reprehensible and borders on racism. Wal-Mart should be allowed to build where it has a market (and where the traffic to its stores do not unduly impact its neighbors). But it should not rely on eminent domain.
Turnabout is fair play. Yesterday, San Francisco Bay Area news reports indicated that the town of Hercules, which does not want a Wal-Mart, was threatening to use eminent domain to take Wal-Marts land away and sell it to Whole Foods, Trader Joe's, or another upscale retailer.
"A big-box store is not part of our plan," said one resident. Another was more blunt: "I don't want to have anything ghetto around me." The city's plan calls for, surprise, "a high-density, mixed-use village." But what makes them think that Whole Foods, Trader Joes, or other upscale realtors want to be around them?
Now, Wal-Mart is apologizing for the Florida threat, saying that the threat of eminent domain was actually made by "an overly agressive site selection consultant." Wal-Mart says it should have reviewed the letter (actually an email) before it went out and deleted the eminent domain threat. It hinted that it might cut off its relationship with the consultant.
Can you imagine emailing someone an offer to buy their land with a threat that you will use eminent domain to take it if they don't accept their offer? Can you imagine threatening someone at all when you are trying to get on their good side?
The news reports do not indicate that Wal-Mart said it would never ask a local government to use eminent domain. It just said that threatening to do so "did not reflect the company's position."
On the other hand, identifying Wal-Mart with "ghetto" is reprehensible and borders on racism. Wal-Mart should be allowed to build where it has a market (and where the traffic to its stores do not unduly impact its neighbors). But it should not rely on eminent domain.
Comments:
Post a Comment
