Yes Virginia, There is a Small Business Community

As all of the recent polls indicate, a great deal of growing support for Virginia Fields’s candidacy for mayor in the Democratic primary, it is a good time to analyze what her candidacy could mean for small business in general and neighborhood retailers in particular.

In the 1995 battle over Pathmark in East Harlem, Fields, even though she was an active member of Abyssinian Church, supported the use of public money for Abyssinian Development Corps’s proposal to bring the regional chain into Harlem. When we met her for the first time she remarked to us, “Oh, you’re the one who represents the ‘bodegos’”

It was pointed out to her that these so-called “bodegos” had collectively invested over 45 million dollars in the East Harlem community and any reference to them that implied they were bodegueros was demeaning. Her hostility, however, continued unabated even while council members who eventually supported the project made special efforts to visit the local supermarkets and comment on how well they were run.

Virginia’s work for the big guys continued as she helped broker another council deal that brought a shopping center to Laurelton, Queens, over the objections of the African American council member in the district and the Laurelton Federation of Block Associations. In fact, Virginia’s main role on the Council’s Land Use Committee was to be the primary midwife for all large real estate development.

Unfortunately, Virginia brought this mindset with her when she was elected Manhattan Borough President. When Steve Ross and Related were looking to build two huge Costco stores – without any parking – on the West Side of Manhattan, the labor-business-community coalition met with her to hopefully enlist her support. She told our group that she would be with us but subsequently failed to lift a finger in the effort that eventually led Related to withdraw its silly proposal. In fact, while Virginia did nothing, State Senator Tom Duane and council member Chris Quinn demonstrated what strong leadership was all about by rallying their communities to the cause.

With all this being said, it is important to point out that the purpose of campaigns is to give candidates the opportunity to expand their constituencies. In this vein, we welcome Virginia’s proposals on how she will treat the small business community. Given the mayor’s weak record, there is clearly room for all the candidates, although only Anthony Weiner has articulated a full set of proposals.

p.s. Given Virginia’s history, her rather weak initial comments on Wal-Mart (ones she later clarified), should make the entire anti-Wal-Mart coalition nervous.

ULURP Needs Major Overhaul

The city’s Uniform Land Use Review process, known affectionately as ULURP, is badly flawed and needs fixing if adequate planning and the protection of the public interest is the objective. Under the current system, a developer who seeks to build a project that doesn’t conform with the land use rules for an area must submit a plan to the Department of City Planning for a preliminary review. Quite often, very few people outside of a small circle are aware of the size and scope of the planned project.

This internal review and dialogue allow for no public discussion of the project and potential stakeholders – community residents, small business owners and companies with similar interests to the proposed tenants in the new development – are consciously kept out of the process. Exacerbating this situation is the fact that all of the technical questions asked of the developer, issues involving traffic and economic impact, are in turn answered by a so-called expert hired by that same developer.

Here’s the problem in a nutshell: for the past thirty years a coterie of environmental consultants has emerged whose only interest is serving the narrow needs of developers seeking to garner public approval. These experts, all seemingly from the same firm of Dewey, Cheatem & Howe, are paid by the developers and invariably minimize potential impacts of the projects they are paid to analyze.

This is the system that needs to be changed. Consultants should be hired for their unbiased expertise and should be chosen at random from a list of approved vendors. Once hired, it should be made clear that they work for both the city as a whole and the community that will host the new development. As in other jurisdictions, the developer would still be made responsible for picking up the tab.

That is, however, not the only change that should be made in ULURP. What should also be changed is the certification process. Under the current system, the full scope of the new project and all of the technical analysis is unveiled to the public after a project is certified by City Planning. Once that happens the so-called ULURP clock starts and all hell breaks loose as stakeholders pro and con fight to quickly assert their positions.

This doesn’t make sense. ULURP should require, minimally, a three month pre-certification period where the details of a project would be fully vetted. If opponents have the wherewithal to do independent critiques and analysis this pre-certification period would give them the time to do so. More importantly, it would create a timeframe for the beginning of a legitimate and proper public debate. Too often a developer, knowing full well in advance all of the important details of a project, spends a great deal of lead time quietly lining up support for a development. Once the ULURP clock starts opponents are already laps behind.

BJ’s in the Bronx as an Example

This is precisely what happened in the Bronx at Community Board #10. Members of the Board, wined and dined by the Related Companies for months, actually expressed resentment that opponents were raising serious objects “at this late date.” At the same time, Related’s consultants presented voluminous material on traffic that no one on the Board had any ability to analyze.

When opponents hired a respected consultant to analyze the data and help provide the community with a contrasting perspective, the ability to present this countervailing view was compromised by the limited time available under ULURP. Thankfully, the City Council provided opponents with the opportunity of presenting data that convincingly demonstrated the shortcomings of the developer’s data. As a result, the project was resoundingly defeated. In the process, however, serious flaws in ULURP were vividly highlighted.

ULURP and the Bronx Terminal Market

Which brings us to the nettlesome Bronx Terminal Market issue. Related has been busy developing data on an Economic Impact Statement for its Gateway project and is pushing for certification in June. One thing we’ve already learned about Related’s consultants is that they’re adept at ignoring any traffic impacts on adjacent highways to their projects. While we don’t think they’ll be able to do this with the Deegan, we know that they will be up to their minimizing tricks. We travel down the Deegan everyday and as it becomes more clogged by the minute we feel like telling Related, as Desi would say to Luci, “You’ve got some ‘splaining to do.”

Traffic, however, isn’t the biggest problem with Related. Even if we ignore the secret nature of the BTM deal and the favoritism that promoted it, we are still left with the outright gall of a company that refuses to fully disclose, before this project is certified, who is tenanting the Gateway development. The refusal of Related to tell even those elected officials who will eventually sit in judgment of the project is telling. Clearly, unwillingness to disclose is an unmistakable sign that Related knows that it has a tenant(s) who will cause a firestorm of reaction.

What the Alliance will be doing, of course, is to press the city, the borough and Related to unveil this development scheme so that all the potential stakeholders can be properly informed. Full transparency is the only correct course.

Suit: Wal-Mart fired woman who reported harassment

Reuters reports that a woman is suing Wal-Mart, saying that she was fired because she complained of sexual harassment by a fellow employee:

April Brown said a co-worker subjected her to "sexually offensive comments on a regular, daily basis" and touched her inappropriately during her overnight shift as a stocker at Wal-Mart Stores Inc. in Tuscaloosa, Alabama, according to papers filed last week in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Alabama and Brown's attorney, David Arendall.

...

The lawsuit filed in Alabama also claims that Brown's co-worker asked "whether she wore granny panties or a thong," and told her "about the size of his penis and how he would make her 'baa like a goat."'

"The Hyprocrisy of Wal-Mart Bashers"

In today's NY Sun, Alicia Colon expresses her opinion that those who oppose Wal-Mart coming into New York City are hypocritical and even racist. There are a number of faults in her argument that we'll be addressing in a letter to the editor. We encourage you to also write a letter or directly contact Ms. Colon.

Neighborhood Retail Alliance Profile

The Neighborhood Retail Alliance is profiled in a great piece by Stacey Mitchell at the Hometown Advantage, a pro-small business organization. The site itself is a great source of detailed information concerning the benefits of retaining and promoting neighborhood-based entrepreneurs. If you can, support their work.

Related on the Move

A little bird informs us that Related met with a certain Bronx council member last week looking for support for their redolent “Gateway” project on the gravesite of the Bronx Terminal Market. When pressed, however, on the details of what will actually tenant the facility the Related folks were unforthcoming leading the council member to politely request that they get lost.

Why won’t Related disclose the information? Are they afraid of its impact? It’s not as if this is so far down the road given that the realtor is actively seeking to certify this project in June so that ULURP can begin. It makes sense to us that City Planning should insist that Related reveal the tenants with whom they have signed leases with before certifying this project.

One other question: Is the Bronx House of Detention part of this proposed land use review. If so, is this legal since no approval has been granted for the disposition of the property in exchange for what all the Bronx has been waiting for: a velodrome. (And if there are no Olympics what about this nefarious land swap?)

Firehouses and Neighborhood Safety

Today's hearing on the existing NYPD-FDNY emergency response protocol stimulated some thinking on the relationship between firehouses and neighborhoods. The Alliance is all about the health of local communities and, therefore, we are always quick to point out that there is a natural affinity of interest between neighborhood business and the civic groups that represent homeowners and tenants. Where the Alliance has successfully defeated shopping centers and box stores it has been a result of true alliances with these civic organizations.

That is why we are quick to look for ways to help the civics on issues that may not, at first glance, seem to directly impact businesses. Firehouse closing is one such issue. When the decision is made to close a firehouse the safety of all neighborhood stakeholders is put at risk. Often, fires that start in local stores threaten surrounding residences. In reality, storeowners are as much neighborhood residents as the homeowners and tenants who live in the local area.

Which brings us to the Bloomberg decision in 2003 to close six neighborhood firehouses. The mayor did so arguing that, 1) the current siting pattern is our-of-date and 2) the loss of these fire companies would not compromise public safety.
The fact is that siting patterns were demonstrated out-of-date in a 1975 Rand Study that is itself out-of-date today. The mayor and his minions simply have no ideas, given the demographic shifts over the past 30 years, where houses should be located or indeed, if necessary, closed. We may, in fact, need to build new houses in certain areas where growth has been profound. Without this knowledge, and with the understanding that there is an intricate interdependency between companies in adjacent neighborhoods, closing any firehouse is simply an assault on neighborhood safety.

When are our Democratic candidates going to exploit this issue, crucial to so man communities? The fear should be that if Bloomberg is reelected the old Dinkins doomsday plan that had close to 30 firehouses in the crosshairs for closing will be resurrected.

Sipping the Kool-Aid

Because we believe in the open airing of all viewpoints, we point you this column by Crain's Editor Greg David where he states that the mayoral candidates are "drinking the Kool-Aid" when it comes to opposing Wal-Mart. He also alludes to customers going outside the city to shop which we begin to address here and will continue to discuss this week.

The Return of Urban Renewal

Susan Fainstein, professor of Urban Planning at Columbia, discusses Deputy Mayor Doctoroff's development vision for New York City in this article in Harvard Design Magazine. She uses the Bronx Terminal Market as an example of Doctoroff's top-down, input-free development style and states:

As in the demolition of downtown's Radio Row to allow for construction of the World Trade Center, the razing of the Bronx Terminal Market to accommodate a “higher and better use” would enhance city revenues at the cost of destroying a viable business cluster. The change in use would result in a transformation of the employment structure of the area: whereas almost all the present workers are male and many are unionized, the clerks in the new retail stores would be predominantly low-paid women. If the relocation of the merchants does not cause them to lose their customer base, this would constitute a net gain for Bronx residents. The merchants fear, however, that they will be moved to a less convenient location and, as a result, be forced out of business, as has happened to other New York food wholesalers. Hence evaluation of the likely outcomes of the project depends on the relocation plan. But while the intention of evicting the merchants has been made public, their ultimate location remains unknown.

We would add that the merchant's ultimate location (as an aggregate, economically viable market) was never even considered until the issue was publcized in the media and the secrecy of the Doctoroff-brokered deal was brought up. In fact, EDC Chairmain Andrew Alper said the follwing in a letter obtained by Newsday: "While EDC wishes to assist the tenants in their relocation, we have no legal obligation to do so."

Posts about the Neighborhood Retail Alliance

FYI, Here is a list of other blogs that have mentioned the Neighborhood Retail Alliance's work, usually in reference to Wal-Mart or the Bronx Terminal Market. This a good way to explore some other relevant blogs, even some that disagree with us.

Fighting against big boxes

Richard Lipsky In New York Metro

"Big Boxed Out" in Queens New York

Wyatt-Mart Closes Shop -- The Sequel

NYC vs Walmart: Round 1

Big Labor Kills Another Attempt at Job Creation

REJECTED!!!!!!! Wal-Mart not moving to Queens

A Victory For ALL People Of Good Will..NYC Says NO To WalMart

NYC Council to NYC Consumers: Drop Dead

Rise Up Ye Davids and Slay the Goliath Giant!

Rego Park Fight Underway

Walmart and the "Divine Right of Stagnation"

Come on homies, exercise your exorcism skillz...

Evil Empire

Time for the rat

Wal-Mart watch

BIGGEST BOX BRAWL YET?

Bloomberg the Building Preservationist

dvdandvhs.info Daily Update

Bronx Terminal Market ...terminated

Bronx Terminal Market ...terminated for economic development pipe dream

Vote Not-Bloomberg

Your tax dollars at work

Bloomberg's Mismanagement and its Cost to Small Business

Bob McManus has a column in the Post today that talks about the long-term dangers of Bloomberg's economic policy, specifically his failure to control City costs:

Carey couldn't anticipate Mayor Mike, of course. Early on, Bloomberg resumed the practice of borrowing to finance everyday municipal expenses the tactic that precipitated the fiscal crisis in the first place.

The following year, he refinanced the 1976 bail-out bonds, after 30 years, they were about to mature , effectively obligating the whole state to 30 more years of interest payments to make good on the profligacy of Mayors Wagner, Lindsay and Beame.

But Mike got $2.4 billion in fresh money for the municipal spending machine, which was all that mattered to him.

Now he has a new budget out, larded with election-year goodies but utterly devoid of any sense of the city's continuing - indeed, structural - fiscal peril.


The problem with Bloomberg's failure to control costs is that it inevitably results in increased taxes and fines at the expense of small business. As the 20% property tax increase, the 150% cigarette tax increase, the high sales tax, and the increased number of fines demonstrate, Bloomberg is helping to fund his proposals on the back of hard-working entrepreneurs. In the long term this creates two major problems. The first is that because higher business costs are passed on to consumers, these shoppers will increasingly opt to go to out-of-town locations with cheaper taxes and hence cheaper prices. The second issue is that these small business owners, in part due to the city's high taxes and draconian regulatory policies, are declaring bankruptcies at unprecedented rates. Therefore, while padding city coffers in the short term, Bloomberg is destroying his tax base and creating a fiscally unsound future.

Crain's: Wal-Mart vs. Target

Tommy Fernandez writes in Crain's this morning comparing Wal-Mart to Target and describing New York's intense opposition to the former.

"There is something for everyone to hate in a Wal-Mart store," says lobbyist Richard Lipsky, who was a leader of the successful drive against the retailer in Queens.

Wal-Mart's girth makes it a focus of antipathy.

While its size (and hence its ability to trend set) is definitely a factor we'd also guess that New Yorker's are irked by the number of Wal-Mart employees on public assistance, the current gender discrimination lawsuit, the company's agressive anti-union stance, its affect of neighborhood business and quality of life, its red-state origins and policy of censoring certain books and magainzes.

Sales Tax: The Root Cause of "Leakage"

The Mayor’s budget was announced last week and on his weekly radio show he took the time to promote his sales tax exemption for clothing purchases under $110. He pointedly remarked that the sales tax drove New York customers to New Jersey and Connecticut. Of course he is right but his proposal doesn’t go far enough. Under Mayor Giuliani, the Economic Development Corporation did a survey that estimated that over $700 million in retail sales leak to New Jersey because of the sales tax.

Old timer Lew Powsner who owned a men’s clothing store for years on Mermaid Avenue in Coney Island used to say that each time the city raised the sales tax another mall was built in New Jersey. Where does this situation hit hardest? Why Staten Island of course where a short drive over the Outerbridge will enable you to save $25-$30 on gas, buy beer and soda without deposit, get a nice discount on cigarettes by steering clear of Bloomberg’s confiscatory $1.50 a pack cigarette tax, and save on a whole host of other non-taxed or less taxed products.

Which brings us to the Staten Island Wal-Mart controversy. Before the Mayor, Congressman Fossella, or other elected officials try to convince folks that building box stores will prevent retail leakage to New Jersey they better first level the playing field by dramatically reducing the cost of doing business in NY. If they don’t and a Wal-Mart is built on the South Shore, than we predict you’ll find as many Staten Islanders still shopping in Woodbridge, NJ as you’ll find at the outlet on Richmond Valley Road (in addition, some have commented that due to the traffic it'll be easier to get to Jersey anyway). Islanders will continue to flee and instead of keeping customers in New York, the Staten Island Wal-Mart will draw people in from the other boroughs. Therefore, consumer dollars will simply be transferred from existing NY retailers to Wal-Mart while the fundamental cause of the leakage will remain ignored.

Isn’t it about time that our city’s leaders stopped their anti-small business activities? First they create one of the least hospitable retail environments in the country and then they tell New Yorkers that we need to build box stores to prevent the sales leakage that they themselves have helped to create. This goes beyond even blaming the victim. It’s is blaming the victim and then re-victimizing the victim at the same time. Just ask Staten Island small business people.

We’ll have more on this after talking to tax expert E.J. McMahon later in the week. Hopefully, he’ll post a few observations.

Our first trackback

:_) Our first trackback, from Office Max!.

Assemblyman Bing Comes Out Against Intro 621

It seems that no one is supporting Phil Reed's proposal. Assemblyman Jonathan Bing has just come out with a press release stating his opposition to the Intro based on its lack of enforcibility and potential harm to small business.

Bronx Times Reporter Story on BTM

We missed this story by the Bronx Times Reporter on the how the Bronx Terminal Market merchants are fighting their eviction.

Intro 621, the Terminal Market and the Mayor

Today's Crain's Insider observes that the Street Vendor Bill, Intro 621, has apparently stalled in committee and gives credit to the Neighborhood Retail Alliance for spearheading the opposition. The unanimity of the opposition would seem to indicate that Anne Michaud, the Insider’s political maven, is probably correct. Let's hope so.

Yesterday was the date of the court hearing on the Bronx Terminal Market and it appears that the beleaguered merchants are not going to be evicted any time soon. The judge has appointed a referee to settle outstanding rent disputes and lawyers for the merchant association are confident that this is the first step on the eventual victory that the mostly minority entrepreneurs will win against the city, slumlord Buntzman and the Related Companies.

In related (no pun intended) news the Times is reporting that published letters indicate that Mayor Bloomberg has been spending an inordinate amount of his administration's time on development of the Jets Stadium. The mayor, however, feels the criticism is unfair and blames the press for not focusing on his other brilliant development moves - likes, yes, the Bronx Terminal Market.

Mister Mayor, be careful what you wish for. Bloomberg is probably unaware, his Spanish is not quite fluent, that the Hispanic media is beating up on this foul-smelling project. Props also to Juan Gonzalez, who the other day called this development a prime example of "crony capitalism." Given the fact that Bloomberg, Related's CEO Steve Ross and Dan Doctoroff are all worth billions, it might be fair to call the BTM project an example of "patricianage."

In any case, if the mayor feels that the market redevelopment is not getting enough attention why doesn't he come up to the Bronx site where he will be greeted first by a Bronx cheer and then by the familiar Bronx salute.

Update: As was pointed out to us, Bloomberg is essentially complaining that he is not receiving enough coverage of a Bronx Terminal Market development plan that has been conducted in secret and without any competitive bidding. If the Mayor wants to encourage a sub rosa development process he can't simultaneously expect the media to cover it.

City Limits

Liza Featherstone pens a great piece in City Limits Magazine exploring the opposition to Wal-Mart now that the Rego Park site fight has been won. She interviews a number of key players including Richard Lipsky of our very own Neighborhood Retail Alliance. Featherstone is the author of Selling Woman Short a book about the gender discrimination class action lawsuit brought against Wal-Mart.

Coverage of Intro 621 Vendor Hearing

Peddler bill gets Bloom bum's rush (NY Daily News)

Ambulatens y Comerciantes con una misma causa (Hoy)

Rally Rips Wal-Mart

Coverage of Tuesday's "Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart" rally, which the Neighborhood Retail Alliance attended, from the Staten Island Advance.

More related news:

Activists say not to buy mom's gift at Wal-Mart (Houston Chronicle)

'Love Mom, Not Wal-Mart' Campaign Targets Retailer (NPR)