The Trouble with "Steal"-yard Commons : Cleveland IMC (((i)))

A post by bitter-girl.com on a website called metafilter.com states, "Cleveland bloggers are organizing against a giant suburban-style shopping plaza called Steelyard Commons (to be built on the site of the city's historic steel factories), which will include an immense Wal-Mart at its core. After City Council passed legislation in February to prevent Wal-Mart from adding a grocery store (causing the Bensonville bullies to "pull out" and scuttle the project), the developer was aided and abetted behind closed doors by Cleveland's mayor, Queen Jane. Despite the mayor's proclamation of "no public money" or tax abatements for the project, there's plenty of evidence to the contrary."

The plan to revive the mostly barren rusting and toxic wasteland of what used to be cleveland's steel industry running next to the cuyahoga river has been kicked around for a few years now along with other miracle economic remedies like a new convention center and casino gambling. Concerns from labor unions, local businesses and the public prompted councilman Joe Cimperman to propose legislation to change the zoning of the proposed development to limit any superstore like WalMart from being part of the development if it would compete with area grocery stores. The legislation was squashed by city council president Frank Jackson who wanted the lesislation revised. The zoning changes were never voted on(?!) Jackson and Cleveland Mayor Jane Campbell continued to promote Steelyard Commons and begged Wal-Mart to reconsider when they announced they were pulling out of the development.Deal making continued quietly until last Tuesday, May 17th when Steel Commons developer Mitchell Schneider announced the mayor and walmart had struck a deal. After consulting lawyers, Schneider applied for building permits including a WalMart store in the large development knowing that under Ohio law the city could not change zoning after building plans were submitted.

The secretive meetings prompted outrage from unions who supported Campbell in her mayoral campaign and cries of foulplay by City Council representatives and people interested in a more open dialogue on the development plans. {protests}, Last night residents and council people spoke out at a Cleveland city council meeting. The meeting was disrupted for several minutes when thirty or so people stood chanted, clapped, and held up a banner that read "Campbell is Wrong". Order returned to the council chamber when police confiscated the banner and Council President Jackson threatened to remove anyone who tried to further disrupt the meeting. No arrests were made. Councilman Joe Cimperman later spoke about his displeasure (with the way the deal was made and the need for organic/sustainable" developement), There has also been pro-development biased reporting from the Plain Dealer. As Bill Callahan documents in his blog, Callahan's Cleveland Diary, Brent Larkin, the editorial page editor of the Cleveland Plain Dealer wrote an unsigned editorial in the Thursday, May 19th paper entitled "Supersurprise" wherein he bashes Councilman Joe Cimperman and everyone who opposes the developement in Steelyard Commons. One has to ask why was it unsigned? (the plain dealer advertises for Wal Mart?)

Most everyone is aware that Walmart is not well liked by unions, small businesses, anti-corporate globalization activists and environmentalists but heres some reasons why people have come out to oppose it...

Wal-Mart:
Destroys local business,
Exploits immigrant workers,
Discriminates against women,
Pays everyday low wages,
Pressures employees to work unpaid overtime,
Uses sweatshops around the world,
and Forces U.S. manufacturers out of business.

Even when community groups and/or unions do win campaigns to curb or stop Walmart the mega-chain just leaves communities high and dry or closes down the department of the store that is successful in unionizing. A recent email sent by the social justice group Interreligious Task Force on Central America asks "Is Wal-Mart the Future of America?... the message continues ...In 1970, General Motors was the largest employer in the U.S.; unionized workers earned $17.50 an hour plus benefits. Today, >Wal-Mart< is the largest employer; non-unionized workers earn $8.50/hour with no benefits a third less than unionized grocery workers.

In Cleveland, a Wal-Mart SuperCenter would cost other Cleveland grocery jobs at Heinen's, Dave's, Tops, and Giant Eagle--all union employers that pay living wages and provide health benefits. Wal-Mart Kills Local Businesses: In the first decade after Wal-Mart arrived in Iowa, the state lost 555 grocery stores, 298 hardware stores, 293 building supply stores, 161 variety stores, 158 women's apparel stores, 153 shoe stores, 116 drugstores, and 111 men's and boys' apparel stores. (Source: Iowa State University Study). So its not just about grocery stores.

Two-thirds of Wal-Mart workers can’t afford Wal-Mart health insurance, which costs $125 every 2 weeks. 700,000 Wal-Mart workers don’t have company health insurance---so who pays?

Thanks to those everyday low wages, the average Wal-Mart worker receives $2,000 a year in public subsidies for school lunches, health care, housing, etc. (Congressional report, Feb 2004)

Wal-Mart is the largest employer of sweat shop labor in the world. Abuses in Wal-Mart's sweatshops:Forced overtime, Locked bathrooms, Starvation wages, Forced birth control and pregnancy tests, Denial of access to health care, Workers fired and blacklisted if they try to defend their rights. In Nicaragua, workers at one Wal-Mart supply factory work up to 69 hours per week for as little as 29 cents an hour.

A commitment to slashing prices means that Wal-Mart is always slashing labor costs (not their profits)--they force US suppliers out of business, force them to "out-source" to sweast shops overseas, and simply tell US suppliers: "we'll go to China." A recent Frontline special showed how Wal-Mart is responsible for most of the growth in sweatshops in China. They still refuse to open these factories to truly independent inspection. As the world's largest retailer, they COULD DO THE RIGHT THING and set a standard for the industry. What are they trying to hide?", IRTF asks.

These are just some of the reasons Clevelanders are concerned about Walmart being the centerpiece to a development here and why many people are baffled as to why the mayor and city council are practically begging the retail behemouth to come to their city.

Its not just about Walmart. Some folks who posted to the webblogs have asked questions like,"What about other big boxes impact?", "Will the area survive like Severance or shutterup like Skaker Square?", "Are jobs just jobs and developement for developements sake really the answers to clevelands woes?" In reference to the jobs, Bill Callahan counters, "Let's assume that the new mall is built as projected, with five big-box stores (including an expandable Wal-Mart) and several dozen smaller spaces in adjacent strips. And let's assume the vacancy rate is low and the stores are very successful (you'll notice we're doing a whole lot of assuming). And finally, let's assume that the resulting work force is, indeed, around 1,800 people.

Does this mean we've "created" 1,800 new jobs? No, and here's why: New retail floor space doesn't create new retail jobs. Higher retail sales, i.e. more consumer spending, is what creates new jobs (sometimes). And since building a mall in the Flats will have no effect on the amount of money Cleveland-area consumers spend -- only on where we spend it -- it will result in little or no new job creation."

Is there a bigger picture here? A post on NoClevelandWalmart.org says,"The Steelyard Commons site is not your average Walmart site. It is a tangled thicket of issues….an environmental, transportation, archeological, urban planning…thicket. The average Walmart site is a cornfield. They turn up, pave it over, build a box, and off they go. The Steelyard Commons site is anything but, with all sorts of angles for concerned citizens to engage in the process." And, how is this weird suburban sprawl blowback going to affect the region as a whole beyond municipal quick fixes and sweetheart deals? i cant help but think there is something missing from the seemingly scripted "debates" and the mega media soundbytes surrounding this issue. Cimperman touched on it in his speech last night (saying something about this not being a black and white issue) Cant we demand a better vision?

Brian Cummins, former Director of the Old Brooklyn CDC and Cleveland City Council Candidate for Ward 15 has even weighed in via the blog brewedfreshdaily.com . Not only does he craft an articulate argument, but he's using the internet to get his message out about Promotion, attraction and retention of sustainable economic development.

He wrote,"...When the ISG property was being parceled out and the 127 acres became available, where was the leadership to take a hard look at what the city, county, & port authority could do to come up with a plan for reviving the area in the valley with a bio-tech, eco-industrial, or newer manufacturing business park? All we have heard is that when the biDs came back for the property that all the city received were bids for retail. Where was the leadership to say, we have a unique opportunity that requires some unique tools (port authority bond, TIF etc..) to devise a plan to gain site control and then take (if need be) several years to develop the area for these higher and better uses. Cleveland must not settle for pure market driven investments, however laudable they may be in Schneider's case. The opportunity to develop the 127-acre Steelyard property is something that comes up only once in some 60 or 80 years. Surely there should have been an ability and willingness for city leaders to do that opportunity justice...." Later in the letter he asks,"What is good for the public? Ahh this is a tough one. If the public is not informed (or even asked their opinions) of what their elected leaders are thinking and doing...well, I’ll let you or someone else finish that point...) he ends his letter on the subject by saying, "...Steelyard Commons may be a done deal and many residents will in fact enjoy the convenience of having this type of shopping so close... but none of that can cover-up the way in which this project has evolved, or is it devolved, from real sustainable progress."

Cummins cites the work of the cuyahoga valley intiative as one of the possible alternatives to the current Steelyard plan. Throughout 2003 and into 2004, the Rocky Mountain Institute (RMI) and Cleveland-based Entrepreneurs for Sustainability, worked with the Cuyahoga County Planning Commission to illustrate how to apply principles of sustainability and natural capitalism to transform a largely industrial part of the Cuyahoga Valley into a regenerated 21st century area where businesses operate more efficiently, land is reclaimed, the River is healthier, and a people-friendly urban environment is created.

The Regenerative Development Zone and the other proposals envisioned through the Innovation Workshops conducted by RMI came into being largely through the collaboration among dozens of participants representing businesses throughout the area, local non-profits, economic development officials, and members of all levels of government.

The wholistic Cuyhoga Valley vision is one that could show promise for the city and the area, if only it was given a chance. Despite the talk of this being a done deal, this is still only the beginning for those committed to opposing the development. The beginning of the end for some businesses and unions, may be the beginning of a new battle to hold onto what little quality of life we still have in this the poorest big cities. Activists and bloggers are already talking strategies on the web about where to go from here.

Cleveland Indy Media Center