The current Victoria Corridor plan would not allow Wal-mart to build anything bigger than the existing K-mart building is now. (100,000 square feet.) I have been told the new code for the Victoria Corridor is being written right now and will come for council's approval soon.

While Wal-mart can certainly submit the plans shown here, something that big would likely not get approval under the new rules. The new code is being written to conform to the city's General Plan, mapped out in 2005 by our citizens and city staff, which specifically discourages big-box development for Victoria (over 90,000 square feet).

But, as I have said on numerous posts elsewhere, if Wal-mart wanted to move into the existing K-mart space, there is not much the city can legally do to prevent them from doing so.

For a really excellent discussion on this issue, I encourage everyone to visit Bill Fulton's blog: http://fulton4ventura.blogspot.com/search/label/Victoria%20Corridor

City Manager Rick Cole also has an excellent discussion on this very topic on his blog:
http://www.cityofventura.net/cmblog/2007/09/walmart-again.html

The city council wants to keep WalMart out to keep Ventura consumers paying more to their political interests.

WalMart saves $2,500 a year for families. The Ventura city council wants to make their local command economy something only people with political connections can participate in.

It's time for a change.

Save Money,

Did you read anything I posted above you? If Wal-mart wants to move into the existing space -- and they very well might -- there is very little the city can do legally to stop that.

The city is merely working to make sure the Victoria Corridor conforms to our General Plan. If you would like to read the plan for Victoria, go here:
http://www.cityofventura.net/victoria

Your "command economy" rhetoric does nothing to add rational discussion to this topic. We all have our own opinions on whether or not Wal-mart would be good for Ventura. In the end, though, we need to consider the facts.

Despite the cloak and dagger dramatics, these "plans" have been posted on the City's website and reported in the newspapers.

The "secret plans" are a concept that Walmart showed the City back in June. They reflect an attempt to meet the new proposed Victoria code. In some ways (reducing surface parking, introducing a green space into a bleak shopping center, and reducing the impact of a long blank wall by putting other stores on the front) it is encouraging. But the informal feedback from City staff was that the concept was a non-starter because of the size of the footprint. As anyone reading the newspapers knows, Walmart is in the midst of a major corporate rethinking about its expansion plans, store sizes and sustainability practices. They have never submitted a formal application to the City.

The City has been consistent now for two years:

Walmart (or any other tenant) is free to move into the current K-Mart when the lease expires.

If Walmart (or any other tenant) wants to replace the existing building, it must respect the clear language in the General Plan regarding the Victoria Corridor which is to discourage single-use big box retail stores because of the traffic patterns they generate.

We now have a draft plan which is under legally required environmental review. As drafted, the concept plan would conform because of its size.

Both sides in this debate continue to mischaracterize the stance of the staff and City Council. The City is neither for or against Walmart as a company. We have consistently sought to apply the language of the 2005 General Plan to ensure that Victoria is enhanced as an important jobs and retail corridor, not a strip of big box stores choked with traffic.

That's what the General Plan calls for and that is what we continue to work toward.

Rick Cole
City Manager

Thank you for your thoughtful comments, Rick. It's nice to see you in here.

K Mart failed in that spot and the city position to WalMart is go into the unmarketable spot, but if you want to improve, you must abide by our 4,000 page general plan that outlaws single use "big box" stores.

City position: "We aren't against WalMart, just all stores that have their same characteristics." Wouldn't that mean you're against WalMart too?

So long as WalMart behaves like open space, the city is willing to allow WalMart to come in.

Save us the propaganda...

I'm glad to hear that the City is responding favorably to WalMart's development plan for the K-Mart center, as per Rick Cole's comments. Rick's correct, all this hullabaloo about WalMart being the devil incarnate by the Livable Ventura and the union extremists, ignores the fact that they have a legal right to bring a store into this space.

I think the current City Council has done a pretty good job of not letting these groups lure them into the anti-WalMart rhetoric. I think only one of the challengers has spoken rationally about WalMart's legal rights to this location, despite the hype.

It is time for the City, and Wal-Mart's lone supporter to WAKE UP.

Wal-Mart does NOT save $2500.00 a year, it simply shifts those costs to the Cities, Counties and States General Fund. This mentality of "save a buck today to heck with tomorrow" is what has us in this mess we are in now.

Also, K-Mart didn't fail locally. The entire chain is in bankruptcy.

And due respect for Mr. Fulton, but if Wal-Mart submits plans while no ordinance is in place, and you later place an ordnance you can, and will be sued clear back to the dark ages.

WAKE UP!

If it takes teams of lawyers from a multinational corporation to figure out the City of Ventura's rules and regulations, wonder what it's like for the average business owner?

As the packed town hall meeting the other day demonstrated, we DONT WANT THIS WAL MART. If Mr. Fulton, Mr. Cole or anyone else for that matter were serious about opposing Wal-Mart, they would pass laws that would stop them.

Just more talk from an arrogant politician who is trying to please both sides of the fence. Some of these folks need to be removed from office.

Yes it does save families $2,500 dollars a year. Maybe, you should read a little more.

East German: I believe the idea of coming up with a General Plan for the city and then writing the code to conform to it will make it easier for developers to go into a site and see right away what they can and can't do there.

Rick,

Thanks for shedding more light on the issue. I didn't say these plans were top secret nor did I say anything about my opinion on the subject. To be clear the words in italics are from the person that e-mailed them in.

I agree that some of these folks need to go - Bill Fulton and Carl Morehouse, particularly. They have done nothing but destroy our City's future by alienating any retailer that wants to do something worthwhile in the City. Retailers are an important component of any economic development strategy. I say throw the bums out!!!

What do you think will happen to Trader Joe's, Ralph's and Long's if WalMart does in fact go in @ the KMart site?

It might take a few years - but eventually they will ALL be gone from the area with these jobs having been replaced with low paying jobs that will inevitably end up costing the taxpayers more money in areas of social services.

Hi, "it is obvious,"

I am wondering what laws you would suggest passing that would stop Wal-mart from moving into the existing K-mart space?

We already effectively have a "big box law" in place for that section of Ventura with the new code.

Here is an interesting article on the Huffington Post, which talks about what other cities have done and the legal rulings surrounding these actions:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/al-norman/california-supreme-court-_b_51430.html

Hi Marie - I think that an actual ordinance could/should/is (?) be formulated and passed by City Council to prevent big boxes from coming in and destroying the area (whether it be just along the Victoria Cooridor or include all of Ventura).

Do we know if any of the candidates for City Council would support something like that??

What will happen to Ralphs, Trader Joes, and Longs if WalMart comes in?

Well, prices will go down for the consumer. Heaven forbid your sacred cows would actually have to compete and reduce prices.

Of course, if consumers did not like WalMart they wouldn't go there and you would not need any laws.

What next? Is the city of Ventura going to regulate who and what day consumers can go to see a blockbuster movie for fear of the traffic and impacts on loss of money to other entertainment venues?

You people are absurd.

Nice Ventura,

The problem with passing a city-wide big box ordinance is that if some day a store like IKEA were to come to town -- and that is something we are hoping to get behind the Auto Mall -- that ordinance would prohibit that, too.

Don't get me wrong, I'm not a big Wal-mart fan. In my personal opinion only, I would prefer a more upscale retailer for that site. We already have two Targets within close proximity. I would like to see Ventura get something new rather than more of the same.

But I'd LOVE to see an IKEA come to town. So I personally would not be in favor of a city-wide big box ordinance.

I am sure your question will be dealt with at the upcoming CAPC/Star City Council forum Wednesday night. I encourage you to come and listen.

What about all the poor furniture dealers that would go out of business as a result you liking IKEA?

How dare you like a big box store like IKEA. You need to go to a more expensive, less choice furniture shops in town. We need to talk to government officials to ensure we keep it the way it is.

I'm offended you like IKEA and I'm going to use the government to stop your choice to protect our poor furniture dealers to keep their prices high and their selection scarce.

Hi Marie - I'm not a big walmart fan either. Victoria is so crowded with traffic congestion already and personally I'm more for restrictions along Victoria. I serious doubt ANY retailer is going to want to go into the EXISTING Kmart site without some serious renovations or new construction of a new building which in effect will probably displace the other smaller retailers and small business owners on that site. Consumers like fresh and new - and let's be honest - the existing site is old and very dated and if WalMart does try to come in they will presumably want the entire site (for their parking structure and all).

As for IKEA - I've been hearing rumors floating around for years that IKEA is coming to Ventura and it still hasn't happened. Do we know if they have even demonstrated an interest to the city for that? Would a spot on the existing parcel that Pacific View Mall is at maybe more appropriate? There are several vacant buildings between the mall and the Sears auto service center that have been sitting that way for years (with of course the exception of the seasonal halloween store). Wouldn't that be a more approriate location for maybe another large scale retailer rather than the auto center location (although there are plenty of large warehouse size buildings @ the auto center that could accomodate them maybe under a conditional use permit or something)?

I just don't feel like we need more of the same (I mean really - come 08 we will have 2 Targets in Ventura alone).

Way to go, East German. I like most of what you say, even though your impartiality in judging competition at the Olympic Games is questionable.

I agree with your point on stores having to become more competitive if WalMart comes in on Victoria. A boon to consumers, for sure. Stores like Trader Joe's, Ralph's, & Long's aren't just going to fold up their tents and move out of town, c'mon. I noticed that really happened when the WalMart stores opened in Oxnard and Simi Valley, right? No, I think the opposite actually occurred. Other stores benefited from the additional shoppers that WalMart drew to the area (the spillover effect).

I don't want to see Wal-Mart in Ventura for numerous reasons. Their track record as a corporation is abominable, with regards to employee rights (abuses), manufacturing issues in China, destroying U.S. small retail businesses, and so on. Many Wal-Marts also allow overnight camping in their parking lots. You can find statistics on crime rates related to Wal-Mart parking lots. Is that what we want in Ventura? How much money do people really save at Wal-Mart? At what price are those "savings"? Do we save if we have to pay for increased police patrolling of their parking lot, or for increased arrests, jailing, and the resulting legal/court cases? This is a high-priced area to live. Will Wal-Mart employees make a livable wage? Wal-Mart has a history of anti-union organizing, paying sustainable wages, and of providing affordable health care benefits. Their employees historically have taken advantage of county welfare programs, such as food stamps and health care. This will save the community money? Anyone who investigates Wal-Mart's history will find this information easily. Anyone who wishes to shop at Wal-Mart can get on the 101 Freeway and exit at Rose Ave. in Oxnard. It's not that far from Victoria Ave. in Ventura. Keep Wal-Mart out of Ventura! The tax revenue isn't worth it.

Barbara:

I think it's sad you decided to bash WalMart employees as on "welfare" when majority are not. They've freely accepted employment, wages, and work very hard for their money. While they are out their working/earning a living you're sitting here blogging about how terrible they are and the company they work for.

Shame on you.

Nice Ventura,

If you look up at Rick Cole's post above, it would appear that Wal-mart has come back with a plan that conforms to the existing footprint for that K-mart site. Maybe I am reading his comments wrong, but I don't think so. If that is the case, all this hand-wringing on both sides is moot. Again, the city cannot legally prevent Wal-mart from stepping into that same-size space.

If I am wrong, maybe Rick will come back on here and clarify.

On the IKEA: The Auto Mall site would be a better place. It is my understanding that they will be doing road improvements to that area to better handle a larger retailer. I don't think IKEA has expressed interest in the Pacific View Mall site. I also think they were looking at outdoor adventure store Bass Pro for that area as well.

Sustain -
If you wish to Sustain Ventura, you should take a much more objective look at what happened in Simi Valley. No Trader Joe's, Ralph's and Longs did not "fold up their tents." They don't have to. They are chain stores that rely on overall success of their chain to remain open. Wal-Mart Simi Valley also agreed to a compromise (a word not seen in most Wal-Mart dictionaries) not to have a Superstore, thereby securing the lifeblood of Ralph's and Trader Joe's. Longs/Simi Valley, on the other hand, is a ghost town these days.

The real victims are the small shops owned and often operated by local business people. The Mountaingate Plaza in Simi Valley has been a nightmare of transient business populations. I cannot even count the openings and closings that have taken place there since Wal-Mart came to town. Nor can most people remember the names of most of these shops. Aside from two competing health clubs (chains of course) in the largest commercial spaces - and literally located next door to each other - the huge plaza has been home to a mix of short-lived "discount" merchandise centers; that is when the shops themselves are not vacant. Sales tax income does not rise becuase of Wal-Mart. It's source is simply repositioned.

That is the real story behind Wal-Marts all over America. Small business extracted from a community to serve the greater needs of "saving" at Wal-Mart. Ventura's upscale beach community charm lies in the shops that decorate its walk friendly streets. While some of those streets admittedly need a face lift - they do not need to have their soul and spirit exorcised at the expense of Wal-Mart.

If Oxnard wishes to continue down that road, it is only in keeping with their years of planless planning and over-commercialization piled on top of farms and fast-tracked housing projects.

Sustain Ventura by maintaining its character and spirit. Do not sacrifice Ventura for short-term savings.

Sustain - do not sacrifice - Ventura!

That guy who thinks that Walmart employees are being attacked is avoiding "facts" because they don't fir his agenda.

WalMart's business plan includes helping employees apply for welfare.

http://www.commonplacebook.com/current_events/walmart_vs_targ.shtm

It is obvious that the government is subsidizing Walmart by paying their employees what they cannot or will not.

Maybe their prices wouldn't be cheaper if they didn't help their employees to government money.

It is already hard enough on other stores to compete without Walmart the biggest welfare queen of all.

Shop Target.

Wherever WalMart goes it leaves devistation in it's wake. And the wake it creates is huge. Just go to the counties and communities in our country where they have set up business and look at the businesses and the neighborhoods. They maybe CHEAP, CHEAP, CHEAP, and they are not committed to the quality of life of their employees or the people who buy their "slave labor products." When they have driven businesses out they raise their prices. you can count on it.

Marie - I quickly read Mr. Cole's comments and it seems that they want to build an entirely new store and not use the existing building. The city cannot legally prevent them from moving into the existing bldg however they can make them more accountable to the community if they allow them tear down and build a "3 story 151,000 Square Foot project, including a 714 space parking structure". Do we really want that much traffic in that area? From what I've been reading it seems (and forgive me if I'm wrong here) that they want any new big box type stores to move out to the auto center. I don't know about you but I wouldn't want for a 3 story walmart in any part of Ventura.

In relation to IKEA - I've never been into or shopped @ an IKEA (although I've driven by very large box type warehouse stores) down south. Interesting that Bass Pro would want to go to Pac View . . . the traffic in that area is horrible and the parking is even worse.

Let's be clear about a Big-Box ordinance... It WOULD NOT limit an IKEA or something similar. It would limit stores "Over 99,000 square feet to restrict no more than 5% of their floor space to groceries". It would also compel a living wage and mandatory percentage of full-time employees.

If Wal-Mar can change their ways, they are welcome. But eliminating living wage, full time jobs and replacing them with a bunch of low paying part-time jobs is not something we should tolerate.

RICK COLE SAID "If Walmart (or any other tenant) wants to replace the existing building, it must respect the clear language in the General Plan regarding the Victoria Corridor which is to discourage single-use big box retail stores because of the traffic patterns they generate."

THAT IS ALL WAL-MART IS!!! Also, the City Council has yet to draft any enabling ordinances to turn the General Plan into LAW. (Which is why the current proposal all but IGNORES the general plan. There is also a difference between discourages and forbids.

These bozoz are selling us oout using semantic word games.

Nice Ventura,

Sorry, I wasn't clear. I was mentioning Bass Pro as a possibility for behind the Auto Center as well. If you drive around back there you will see a big, new industrial area suitable to this sort of development.

What I believe Rick meant was that Wal-mart has come back with a scaled-down version of the plan posted here which would fit into the 90,000-sq.-ft. or less mandate of the Victoria Corridor Plan. So they would possibly tear down the building and build one this size, not 151,000 sq. ft. This would mean no supercenter with groceries, I believe.

This is what I am trying to tell you: as long as a store conforms to the new coding for the area, the city cannot discriminate over which retailer it happens to be.

I am not the definitive answer person here, but I do have a good grasp of the situation. I realize the Wal-mart situation, both pro and con, makes many people unhappy. But the city has to uphold the law and its General Plan. People need to understand this.

The city HAS NO LAW TO UPHOLD because they haven't put in any protective ordinances!

The Supreme Court cited in its recent Hanford Decision, the zoning code in Turlock, Calif., which limited big box stores with a grocery component. Wal-Mart sued Turlock, and lost. Turlock passed the ordinance because it said "discount superstores (are) likely to negatively impact the vitality and economic viability of the city's neighborhood commercial centers by drawing sales away from traditional supermarkets located in these centers." In the Turlock case, the court ruled that cities are empowered "to control and organize development within their boundaries as a means of serving the general welfare." Avoiding "urban/suburban decay" is a legitimate public interest.

IN OTHER WORDS, THE CITY NEEDS TO GET OFF OF ITS ASS AND DO SOMETHING!

The coding for the area is being written right now and it will come before council and they will vote on it very soon. They just recently voted to proceed with the process for this. You can bet that any development in the pipeline right now will conform to this code.

We also have other laws in place, as Fulton wrote, "The truth is it’s very difficult to keep any individual company from doing business in our city. Constitutionally, our planning policies cannot distinguish between Wal-Mart and, say, Kmart or Target."

So how can you ask the city to legally keep out a business which is the same size as the existing K-mart?

It is being done all across the country. Fulton is simply WRONG. First of all, when it comes to Wal-Mart, I wouldn't trust them with my car keys. Secondly, there are "intensification of use" codes that could be enacted. Simply put, a business which generates considerably more traffic, can be corralled out of an area.

The problem here is that Mr. Fulton nor the rest of the City Council don't see anything beyond tax dollars... screw the community.

That is not god.

It gets done,

You do realize that there are an equal number of folks out there who are bugged at the city for not making it really easy for Wal-mart to waltz in there, right?

All I have to say is that if people on both extreme ends of this issue are perturbed with the city, then they must be doing something right.

I think it's just another clear example of how the current City Council has screwed this community. They do it every Monday night, don't they? They keep business guessing while they continue to work on their legacies and resumes (Fulton, Morehouse, Cole, et al). What a joke! This Council wouldn't last 5 minutes in any other community, but here, we seem to tolerate their malfeasance and shortsightedness. Someone change the channel, please. We need a shake-up. Can't wait for November 6th!

Ahh, the other extreme heard from....

Oh well, I am glad we have plenty of opinionated, passionate people here. Makes it all very interesting. Another reason I love this town!

I find it interesting that if you oppose Wal-Mart because of the unmitigated traffic they will cause, you are "extreme"

I find it interesting that if you oppose the sweatshop conditions of Wal-Marts factories in China, you are extreme.

I find it interesting, that if you oppose the sub poverty level wages of Wal-Mart, and oppose bringing that into our community, you are extreme.

What I really find interesting, is that any of our City Council would even hesitate to flat out oppose this boondoggle.

We really don't need this crap in our neighborhood. You want to destroy a City Mr. Fulton, go to Oxnard.

Why would you want to destroy Oxnard?

If Wal-mart is willing to comply to traffic, housing, labor, health care, and environmental standards that society and, specifically, the community say are acceptable, what is the problem?

I think the point, here, is that Wal-mart won't do that. They will not comply to paying more for affordable housing and they will not give all of their employees access to health care.

But if they do, what is the justification of keeping them out? I am, of course, a Democrat so anti-Wal-mart because of the way in which they treat their workers, their labor standards, etc, but I also think that we really need to be willing to come to the table if they are as well; however, never waiver on our core values.

So, if Wal-mart then does all those things, are we then okay with Wal-mart coming in, or is it just too icky of a place? It seems like some people don't want "those people" in our town. Because two Targets in town are real eye-catching and attracts a really high-class crowd, as is that huge chunk of a Lowe's...what would be accceptable in place of Wal-mart...another Bed, Bath and Beyond?

Marie -

I totally understand that the city cannot discriminate to who comes into any area as long as the retailer conforms to the existing coding for the specific area. That I do get. I think what the community and the city need to consider is planning for "responsible retailers" who are paying their employees comprable to the living wage standards of our community. They need to provide access to affordable healthcare and housing. They also need to take into consideration the traffic and overall environmental issues and the impact of such on our community.

I guess I'm getting sort of tired of arguing now. As a consumer I would also like a better shopping experience for Ventura than Wal-mart. I also don't think we need another Target at the mall within a mile of the existing one. As a middle-aged lady, I wish there weren't so many stores catering to skinny teenagers at the mall, too. :-)

But that's what the free market is giving us.

Nice Ventura, I think you have it right -- "responsible retailers." Ventura is crammed with irresponsible retailers, but if they all start stepping up to the plate and begin discussing being responsible despite their history, we have to be willing to work with them.

Marie, I feel you because the mall is definitly catering to skinny teenagers; however, that IS bringing in sales tax revenue that Ventura really needs. Do you think that is playing a role in the City Council's lack of back bone as it relates to Wal Mart?

Wow, Heather, you wake up early.

I guess my point -- which was made in a frivolous way -- was that I think at some point we need to respect the free market system.

I would also like to jettison the adult bookstore downtown, but it's following all the city's rules and regulations for that area, so it stays.

Oh well, I'm off to the Hillsides Concert. Jack Johnson's playing. Hope you all can make it, too.

For every one blogger that spews venom at WalMart, I bet they'll be 500- 1,000 shoppers at the WalMart when it opens. In the end that is the real story.

You don't like WalMart, don't shop there. That is the nature of a system where consumers rule the day.

What gives you the right to ruin it for everyone else who will shop there when it opens?

Thanks Heather! I do really appreciate your comments. And I do totally agree with what you have said before about WM. And I do agree that if any retailer wants to come to Ventura that they should be willing to be "responsible" and we as a community should also be willing to sit across the table from them in those discussions. Unfortunately I don't see that ever happening with WM. As with most retailers and business in general - it's all about their bottom line even if it is at the expense of the community or their employees or the taxpayer . . .

Marie, I did not know there was an adult bookstore downtown and could have done without...that's gross, but you are right. They have the right to be there.

EGSDD...so true, for every Wal Mart protester, there are quite a few waiting to burst down the doors for the rolled-back prices. I think one of the first attornies to launch a major class action law suit against Wal Mart many years ago was quoted as saying "you know, I can fight Wal Mart to the end, but the reason why I will never win is because I can't get my mom and my grandma to stop shopping there."

We need a city council that will go with responsible retailers, as was said before...do we have that? And if not, how do we get it? It seems almost everyone is mamby-pamby about it, even the challengers, with the exception of Jerry...but is he strong on other issues and how will he bring in sales tax revenue otherwise?

Ventura does not need Wal-Mart. Of course they bully their way into communities by offering lower prices, but that comes at the expense of health benefits and decent working conditions for their employees. We really need to ask ourselves if the predatory practices of Wal-Mart represent the best that we can offer our community?

Heather,

I think some of the other challengers for City Council have advocated a better economic development strategy, like Gibson. I don't think Martin says much about economic development, except trying to bring more tourism to town, but that's not going to help that much. We don't even have the parking downtown to accommodate more tourists. I think Gibson perhaps has a greater understanding & appreciation for the importance of economic vitality to Ventura's future.

I keep seeing "responsible" retailers being floated around.

That's code for local retailers that offer less selection for a higher price.

My favorite are the know-it-alls that seem to know better than the shoppers at WalMart. Demand for a WalMart is here. Deal with it.

Look, you are free to not shop there, but don't go around using your connections in government to ruin it for the rest of us.

Marie, I'm saddened that you are going to Jack Johnson because I think you should support local entertainers. Maybe, I can call my government officials and try to keep Jack Johnson out of town to protect our local entertainers.

Heather, your argument unfortunately misses the point and plays into the spin.

A community DOES have the right to keep Wal-Mart out, based on an "intensification of use". For those "free market" people, if we let the "free market" decide everything prostitution would be legal and there would be a strip club on every corner. (If you don't like it, don't go there)

Our government has a responsibility to look out for our LONG TERM interests. If Wal-Mart is allowed in Ventura, they will just bully in an expansion in a few years. We don't need Wal-Mart and all it brings in Ventura PERIOD!

What would we do without someone bringing up prostitution and strip clubs?

Get a new red herring pal.

Bring me an example of a "stop Wal-mart" mentality that does NOT have the union behind it. Virtually all local stop wal-mart efforts is seeded by C.A.U.S.E. or the SEIU union.

Right now that strip mall is suffering. However, Trader Joe
is going great guns. Obviously, people like cheap prices.

My favorite thing about WalMart right now is they are entering the big screen TV market. This means prices will drop even further and everyone will be able to buy one that wants one.

It used to be only the wealthy elite had projector big screen TV's, but now because of WAlMart and Best Buy these once luxury items are becoming more affordable.

No wonder wealthy know-it all liberals hate WalMart. It makes their once sacred status symbols affordable for everyone who wants one.

Dear "Save Money Live Better": If you aren't a Wal-Mart employee, I would be very surprised. I'm not just "sitting here blogging" (as are you, didn't you notice that?), but I work full-time. And guess who I work for? The Welfare System. So I know a little bit about what I'm talking about. And since you are so up on your Wal-Mart big screen TV information, I'm pretty sure you work for them. Your comments about "wealthy know-it all liberals" and "the wealthy elite" shows what? Envy? Jealousy? Anger at the fact that Wal-Mart doesn't pay you better wages? I hope they are paying you to be their supporter here, but maybe your blinding loyalty has you shilling for them for free.

First of all, for all your grandstanding against unions, they offer PROTECTIONS for everyone. Why do you think we have any minimum wage at all??? Think the Chamber of Commerce lobbied for that?

Why do you think we have 40 hour work weeks? 8 Hour days? Vacation, sick days, health care, dental etc... think corporate America woke up and said "let's give away free stuff!?"

NO! It is because workers organized, formed unions and FORCED change in our work-force. Wal-Mary is a perfect example of the anti-union -- sweatshop conditions in China, $120.00 a month pay and 60 hour weeks -- in the US: They fight any workers right to organize, limit most employees to part-time status, offer crappy health care to their few full-time employees after 1 year -- the list goes on and on.

And by the way, it is UFCW mot SEIU that backs these fights... know why? Because IT IS THEIR JOB!

He doesn't give a crap...screw the working family now he gets his projector TV cheaper.

GOD AM I ashamed to be an American... it's all about the dollar for these people.

Looks like you have all been having lots of fun arguing while I was gone.

In response to East German's post above: Jack Johnson rocked. And he DONATED his time to play for the Hillsides Conservancy here in Ventura. It was a benefit for them.

Most people like bargains. But are all bargains equal? Low wages and few or no benefits contribute to poverty and substandard health not only abroad, but right in our own communities. Does this type of bargain exemplified by Wal-Mart contribute to a healthy community? I question the value of bargains that result from costs kept low on the backs of both the people who manufacture and the people who do the groundwork in selling those products (ie, clerks, salespeople, janitors, stockers, truck drivers, etc.). Wal-Mart is not necessary to a healthy, flourishing community.

I'd rather work at WalMart, than spend my day doling out other people's money to dope dealers, illegals, and felons.

Hell, I'd rather clean Walmart toilets than work in a welfare department.

10 bucks says the snooty "too good to be an American" already has LCD TV with surround sound and picture in picture.

It would be nice to know the positions on Walmart from some of these council candidates. Who knows this info? I know the chamber of commerce people want Walmart.

Has anyone asked all of the council candidates what their positions are yet? Hoping they will give a direct answer and not 'dance' around the issue. It's laughable @ what the chamber people want.

I think Jerry Martin has said he doesn't like Wal-mart. Gibson has said he favors Wal-mart. The chamber candidates Halter and Cunningham are in favor. Not sure about the rest.

To Save Money - Live Better-

The continuation of Wal-Mart practices will only ensure that more people will need the government programs you deride to survive. With your trite marketing tag it is obvious you help make the decisions for Wal-Mart expansion. You'll never struggle like the workers they abuse so why the hell should you care. You've probably never cleaned your own toilet - let alone WalMart's.

Save Money,

I really don't think it matters that much what the candidates "like" WalMart or not. The fact is, there is no legal way they can ban WalMart from coming to Ventura. So, they're just milking all the political rhetoric they can get out of the issue.

Email addresses for the candidates/current city council members and ask them to get answers here (except for Doug Halter because I couldn't find one for him):

cmorehouse@ci.ventura.ca.us, cweir@ci.ventura.ca.us, bfulton@ci.ventura.ca.us, nandrews@ci.ventura.ca.us, bbrennan@ci.ventura.ca.us, jmonahan@ci.ventura.ca.us, council@ci.ventura.ca.us, jerry39@earthlink.net, voterencher2007@yahoo.com, votelou@loucunningham.com, mgibson@co.santa-barbara.ca.us, draw_not2002@yahoo.com

Um, to my knowledge the only council candidate that has taken a strong position "yay" or "nay" to Wal Mart has been Jerry Martin. As I understand, now, Gibson has as well.

It doesn't make a whole lot of sense that the small business owners in the Chamber would WANT a Wal Mart; however, I think they do not want too many limitations placed on their businesses -- there is a difference, but whatever, that is really not the issue.

I'm not entirely sure how intesification of use is related to workers rights and dignity, but okay. Yes, I must be falling prey to the spin that pro-Wal mart people use. I'm so evil...oh wow, maybe I'm even anti-union!!!!

I said I don't like Wal Mart and for legitimate reasons, and that we should elect people into our city government that will take a strong position on ALL of the issues, and stand behind them. Not fall in love with something just because it looks nice or promises to provide ample parking.

The issue of sales tax revenue is a big one because Ventura doesn't have a whole lot of it, though. If we are going to keep out Wal Mart, what will be an acceptable alternative and how will we train the people that would have otherwise worked there for the "higher paying" jobs that will go in? Those are the questions that should be asked of the council candidates.

Continually saying "I really don't think it matters that much what the candidates "like" WalMart or not. The fact is, there is no legal way they can ban WalMart from coming to Ventura" doesn't make it true.

THE FACT IS THERE ARE LEGAL WAYS TO KEEP WAL-MART OUT. The City Council just hasn't shown the courage to do it.

Michael Gibson said this on his blog here:

In response to the question posed to me on my position on Wal-Mart coming to Ventura, yes I believe it does have the potential to draw people from other communities. I don't see a problem with that at all. I think it will enhance Ventura's image as a community on the move with a pro-active economic development program that relies on a regional draw to support its ever-increasing demand for services (police and fire, particularly). Sales tax is allocated to cities based on the point-of-sale, so we will retain all the sales tax generated regardless of where the shoppers come from. The elected officials in this community simply cannot continue to bury their heads in the sand while other surrounding communities welcome business growth and opportunity and we stay stuck in the past with old attitudes and ideas about growth and business expansion.

Regarding your question on whether I think Wal-Mart will diplace other businesses, I sincerely do not believe it will. Wal-Mart caters to a much broader customer base than our existing small business owners in the City, most of which have a niche product or service that they're offering. Wal-Mart will attract shoppers interested in discounted prices for the same types of products that they purchased from similar retailers, such as Target, K-Mart, Costco, Sam's Club, etc. I know we have a Target store in Ventura with possibly another one coming to town, but I think Wal-Mart will only enhance competition from this retailer, resulting in lower prices for the consumer overall. And what's wrong with that, I ask you? It's another example of the free market system doing what it does best - encouraging competition! As living proof of this, I didn't see Target or K-Mart in Oxnard leaving town when the Wal-Mart opened up there. They simply got more competitive.

Lastly, I think Wal-Mart will undoubtedly increase consumer spending for the reasons stated above. This is a good thing for the City, as it will bring in new sales tax revenue to support services that have been lagging behind our needs (additional police officers and firefighters, park maintenance, streets and roads maintenance, etc.).

I want to know what the city council’s position on is for “big box ordinances� and if they plan to include “intensification of use� language in the general plan.

Something is probably going on with them if the ‘interim ordinance’ for the Victoria Corridor was allowed to expire without something else in place.

Guys,

I don't live in Ventura and I believe you folks are perfectly capable of debating the merits of Walmart in Ventura without a lecture from me.

That being said I appreciate the citizen democracy in action on this thread including the city manager clarifying things, resources to contact candidates, and a debate about free market economics VS the needs of a community.

With all the bad news about voter turnout and public apathy it is cool watching this virtual town hall forum with a cluster of people that know what they are taking about.

Thanks and keep it up.

I hear after the election there will be a Ventura themed blog. if you want help with links to your site and technical support let me know.

"More Googling" has got to be kidding! You put a WalMart SUPER CENTER in and Trader Joe's, Ralph's and Long's WILL be affected and will probably close up shop since they are in such close proximity to the proposed site. It's happened in other areas. The plans above are probably for a supercenter because of the size. We've already got 2 Targets why would we want more of the same old thing???

Oh and by the way KMart in Oxnard is leaving (closing for good) very soon AND just for the record - the Oxnard Target store hasn't been remodelled for as long as I can remember because the others generate more revenue so they get to look new and pretty all the time. Oh and as for the Vons near the WalMart in Oxnard - it's relatively safe since it moved from it's Gonzales location because the WM in Oxnard isn't a super center (and let's hope it never becomes one!). The City of Oxnard sold out in my opinion.

The bottom line is that WalMart destroys communities and hurts local and existing businesses and as an employer they are horrible to work for. They've made employees work off the clock, they encourage their employees to apply for welfare benefits and they don't provide adequate healthcare coverage for their employees or their families. How sick and irresponsible is that?

Oh, you're mixed up. I didn't say that. Look at the top line. I pulled all that from Michael Gibson's blog here. I was looking for web sites for the candidates and found it.

at least we know that MIKE GIBSON appears to be in SUPPORT of walmart. Unbelievable.

and JERRY MARTIN appears to OPPOSE walmart. Jerry is the only candidate so far that has my vote!!!!!!!!!!!! >:-)

if anyone knows what the other candidates including the 3 incumbents think-can you let me know???????

Brian,

You are right, this is exciting! Early in the campaigning, I was volunteering for one of the candidates (no time now) and he told me they expect between 23 and 30% voter turn-out in an off-year like this.

THAT IS PATHETIC.

It is too bad that such a negative and contentious issue is causing more activity and community dialouge, but at least people are getting involved.

Question for the googling people -- has Trader Joe's, the local Ralph's or Longs taken a position on the Wal Mart? Are they active in the chamber? I know they are all chain, but have they?

"More Googling" - my apologies - for being "mixed up"

But the way I personally read what you pulled and posted appears to me or rather implies to me that he supports the Walmart...Using the free market system and competition as an excuse.

If you are refering to the "top line" as the 'first sentence' all that implies is increased traffic to all already overburdened street.

But again - "my apologies"

No problem, fellow Googler. I was sort of chuckling about the line where he says Walmart "will enhance Ventura's image as a community on the move."

By first line I meant what I wrote about finding it on his blog.

Chuckle all you want, Luv2Google, the fact is that it's coming and ain't nothing you unionists can do to prevent it.

JUST WATCH US!

I love that = "you unionists". Just remember that union members include your local fire and police departments, city employees and so on. I never said I was a "union member" BUT I am grateful to the unions for things like the 8 hr work day, holidays, workplace safety, and so forth.

I do believe in Ventura that we have a strong community and it will be the community INCLUDING union members, who will decide!

Interesting reading. I think the city council is giving our community the short end of the stick.

Clearing Up - What more can the city council do or can WE DO AS A COMMUNITY to legally keep walmart & all of the baggage that comes with em out of Ventura?

I'm looking forward to WalMart coming to Ventura. Right now, prescription drug costs are outrageous and the government, democrats and republicans are total failures.

WalMart's $4 dollar prescription drug program has already saved Americans 610 million in it's first year and it announced an even larger plan last week.

In California, WalMart has saved 15 million in prescription drug costs directly to consumers and provides the 6.5 million uninsured that the government has totally failed with prescription drug options.

While the WalMart bashers are whining, WalMart is acting and helping consumers afford prescriptions that used to be out of reach.

To help STOP the Wal-Mart, visit www.StopWalmartVentura.com

Looking forward, I recommend the following website: https://www.pparx.org/

Undoubtedly, Wal-Mart does some good things, but as an overall their cost to communities, the workforce, and our nation is one that is simply to high for us to pay.

We should avoid it at all costs. There will always be the impoverished who for one reason or another can not go anywhere else, especially for prescriptions... but that is not the average person.

The average person is simply unaware. Once they become aware, the question becomes are the few bucks "saved" at Wal-Mart worth the slave labor in China, the driving down of wages in the US, no health-care and on and on and on that Wal-Mart brings to a community? The answer any fair-minded person will arrive at is no.

http://walmartwatch.com/ This site has substantiated and verified information about Wal-Mart's policies, practices, lawsuits, and so forth. The largest class action employment discrimination suit in history was brought against Wal-Mart. They have been busted for the conscious practice of using illegal immigrants as night janitors in stores across the U.S., paying below minimum wage. In Mexico, their grocery baggers work for no pay, only tips. If you check out the annual Forbes list of top richest Americans, the Wal-Mart heirs are always in the top 5-10. Why? Because of corporate greed. Of course, this all falls on deaf ears to those who are drinking the pro-Wal-Mart Kool-Aid. Reality is often painful to deal with, folks! Wal-Mart is not a good neighbor.

I used to work in the field during the Mao's great leap forward. My father and I would work our field only to have it taken by the government each harvest and given to government bureaucrats and their cronies.

Now, I moved to the free enterprise zone and I make 120 a month work for a supplier to the US. I have a savings account and am making decent money. I am thankful for US multi-national corporations for freeing me from government serfdom.

Thank you WalMart.

Dear "Save Money Live Better" (at least I use my real name): Since you are so opposed to welfare programs or public assistance, I can assume that you will not accept Social Security checks once you are eligible. Social Security is the biggest welfare program in the U.S. You could always, say, clean toilets or maybe even be a Wal-Mart greeter, handing carts to shoppers. Because you know, the government is so bad and all. LOL

Barbara

I don't accept social security. Does that mean I get all my money back that I earned and the government took away? I thought not.

Marie:

What about local entertainers? They lost out because you decided to go see an outsider. Shouldn't, as many are proposing with WalMart, government limit your choices down to the ones the select council members feel are appropriate?

Fantastic news for consumers this holiday season. WalMart is offering large discounts on toys. This will mean other retailers must respond to match prices making the holidays an opportunity for consumers to save more than ever before.

Fantastic news for consumers. Is reducing prices on toys at significant discounts irresponsible? I think not.

How much does Wal-Mart pay those little kids in China to make those toxic lead-painted cheap toys? Fair wages? "I think not". Child labor is okay? "I think not".
You just don't get it. Wal-Mart loyalty has you brainwashed. I'm bored with you, so prattle on.

Hi East German,

You are persistent, aren't you? But you are kind of funny about it, so I will give you points for that. I'm done arguing here. I've said all I had to say in the earlier posts. My kids tell me I repeat myself too much, anyway.

All I will say in closing is that I hope we can eventually find some peace about this. Open discussion and communication is always a good thing, even if we don't all agree.

The entire WalMart issue is a sad one. And I see that many of you have been busy blogging away.

A substantial amount of Walmart workers currently earn less than the poverty line. That means they will be seeking out social services (i.e. welfare, food stamps, child care subsidies, etc) which means it will cost us taxpayers more for this corporation to employ people. ** Walmart workers don’t earn enough to support their own families. But in 2004 alone, the CEO of Walmart Lee Scott made about $22 MILLION (yes, million) in stock awards, stock options and bonuses on top of his salary. By the way, Mr. Scott earns an estimated $1.2 million dollar annual salary. ** Walmart's healthcare programs for their workers are restrictive. If you’re part time – you are pretty much screwed for at least a year because you aren’t getting any coverage whatsoever. And by the way they only cover about 43% of their workers anyway – THAT IS IF THE WORKER CAN AFFORD THE COVERAGE. About only every 1 in 6 of their 1.3 million employees have coverage. ** In 2005 CEO Lee Scott himself said “in some of our states, the public program might actually be a better value – with relatively high income limits to qualify, and low premiums.� ** Some estimates put out that about $2.5 BILLION (yes – billion) dollars are spent annually providing taxpayer subsidies to the Walmart worker. In that includes free school lunch programs; low income housing assistance; tax credits and deductions; SCHIP healthcare costs; and low income energy assistance programs. ** Walmart officials have publicly said that “it is common� for the company to request subsidies “in about 1/3 of all retail projects�. They really must know how to play the system! ** Walmart generally reduces employees earnings overall by about 5% in every county they operate in. ** Paying less wages means workers will in turn spend less in their communities. ** Walmart will hurt existing business when it comes to town. ** Walmart has already been fined about 5 million dollars in environmental fees because they are destroying the environment. They pollute streams and have contaminated water supplies. ** Walmart does bring blight into communities. They have millions of square feet in buildings they own but have left vacated because they certainly wouldn’t want another tenant to move in or buy the property from them for fear of competition. So the community gets stuck looking @ abandoned buildings that aren’t being taken care of. ** Walmart imports at least 60% of its goods. We all know how toxic the items are from China (anything ranging from toys to pet food). And remember, just because they buy goods from American suppliers doesn’t mean they are manufacturing here. Why would they? They can use CHEAP child labor and abuse workers overseas. ** Walmart doesn’t care for its workers. They discriminate against women, violate child labor laws, violate state regulations for meals and breaks.

The issues are about Walmart and what they WILL DO to our community if they aren’t stopped.

Other than the retail clerks union, who doesn't want a Walmart in their community? Prices are good, services is good, returns are easy. Employees get jobs. It isn't slave labor. It is labor for people who want the job. Shocking concept, but true.

Looking Forward...Walmarts prescription drug program only covers about 300 prescription meds...So please don't make it sound as if they are saving us all money because they aren't.

DumpKnowledge is right.

Looks like we got a bunch of government grinches on this site. Angry that WalMart is offering discounts on toys for the holidays? Say it ain't so.

I didn't see any of you condemning Target for selling dangerous toys. They announce a big recall today and mum is the word. Where is the protest of Target in Ventura? If your going to be outraged, at least try and be consistent.

If you really cared about the employees at WalMart, you get off your duff, head to WalMart, buy the products you need and pay the difference to the associate or the WalMart greeter Barbara is so fond of making fun of.

Instead, you sit on your IMAC sipping Starbucks all day complaining about how evil WalMart and how no one should shop there, hurting the employees even more.

I guess your moral outrage only applies to WalMart instead of that person looking back at you in the mirror each morning.

Speak for yourself Save Money. Our community deserves better than to have another corporation take advantage of not only us but our community as well!

Take Advantage? Yeah, the gigantic line of customers that will be out front on opening day ready to be taken advantage of. Give me a break.

I agree wholeheartedly with "Save Money Live Better", Ventura needs this WalMart. People are famous around this town for griping about the City not doing enough to protect their quality of life - not enough cops, not enough parks, poorly maintained streets & beaches, and the list goes on. Finally, when the opportunity lands on its doorstep to do something to generate ongoing revenue to support city services, the City Council makes it as difficult as possible to bring it in. Well, I think we need to bring in a new City Council - let's start by getting someone like Mike Gibson in there. He's the only one who's not afraid to stand up and be counted on the WalMart issue and many other issues that this namby-pamby Council refuses to address.

Right on Tim:

Please don't forget the often ridiculed WalMart employee. He or she get's to have people like on this blog making fun of their employer and their efforts everyday. Demeaning their hard work in the name of a progressive society.

These employees may even feel shame much like a high school kid felt shame for working at Macdonald's, another maligned company by these class warriors.

They get up everyday and do their job and are ignored as they pull themselves up in society or just work part time to put a little away for their kids or for pay for their college dreams or to supplement their retirement.

Some might mock Walmart because it has been so successful and generally people such as we've seen here despise success stories. I think Walmart is giving opportunity where their used to be none.

I have a great idea! A new vote to take place right here. All in favor of kicking "Marie", "Save Money Live Better", and all the other pro-Walmart-ers off this blog, say "I!" Idiots! Get informed on what Walmart brings to a city other than the four cents your cheap *ss saved on tissue!

This is pretty funny. The anti-Wal-mart people on this site think I'm for it. The pro-Wal-mart people think I'm against it. All I said is what I continue to say: legally the city can't do a whole lot to stop it if it follows the new code for Victoria.

But if it comes, I likely won't shop there.

Actually Marie you are unfortunately incorrect. The city council, city and the community CAN do something about it. They (the city) do have options including implementing a super center ordinance (other cities have done this); they could also implement an intensification of use ordinance (again - other cities have done this); and they could also implement a citywide living wage ordinance that applies to large employers.

With our new zonng codes, we will effectively have an ordinance in place which will limit the ability of Wal-mart to place a supercenter in there. They won't be able to go bigger than 90,000 sq. feet. Supercenters are much bigger. As for an intensification of use ordinance and a citywide living wage ordinance, I think we have to be really careful when applying things like this.

There are a lot of things to consider. I understand both sides of this issue.

I have a question to those that continually accuse Walmart of paying "poverty wages". Given that Walmart must comply with any labor laws and pay at least the State mandated minimum wage, doesn't that mean that there must also be an abundance of employers, other than Walmart, that also pay "poverty wages"? Wouldn't Target, Kmart, McDonalds, or even your local theater and donut shop be guilty of the same thing?

And if Walmart should be required to boost wages and offer healthcare benefits to workers, wouldn't the same then apply to companies like Target and McDonalds? Are the anti-Walmart folks suggesting that we impose drastically higher wage and benefit requirements on all employers, or are we just singling out Walmart?

Bubba Kidd, you state it well. What's good for the goose should be good for the gander.

BTW, it seems Bill Fulton has gotten himself into a bit of a pickle with the union-types by coming out in favor of WalMart. It's exploding on the other thread. Not good timing, William. Isn't there a little election coming up that you were somehow hoping to win? The Chamber says you and Morehouse were already on the ropes. Apparently, the challengers are chewing you to bits at the candidates forums and putting you both on the defensive. Now, this little move may put you down for the count.

Better Ventura,

I was at the forum last night at Ventura College and Bill Fulton, Carl Morehouse, and Christy Weir were falling all over each other trying to show how pro-economic development they've been while they've been in office after one of the challengers called them on the issue. It looked as if they probably planned the whole thing out beforehand because it seemed so obviously orchestrated.

They're taking a lot of heat from Gibson and Halter on their lack of foresight and how they're jeopardizing the future of the City. You could definitely tell they were on the "planned" defensive. It showed big-time.

In Christy Weir's case, she is one of the founders of the Downtown Ventura Organization, and has worked with the business owners there to really help that area blossom. That's been a long-time project for her and wasn't orchestrated just for a forum.

Marie, what was orchestrated was the 3 incumbents having to defend their economic development efforts, or lack thereof, due to the prodding of the aforementioned challengers. If these guys weren't talking about economic development, the incumbents sure wouldn't be, I'll tell you that. Because their record has been abyssmal in this area. Absolutely abyssmal!!

Now they're on the defensive, and rightfully so, because they haven't done squat to ensure the City's economic vitality. Speaking of Christy Weir, I noticed she said we're "raising the bar" on design standards at this forum. In so doing, she and her Council cohorts are slamming the door on new businesses that would otherwise be trying to come to Ventura.

Now Bill Fulton is scrambling to defend his position on WalMart because SEIU is jumping ship on this guy. Good for them. They recognize a fraud when they see one.

Chamber guy,

Are you suggesting that we lower our standards?

I guess you and I won't be agreeing. I see nothing wrong with insisting on excellent design and that greenbelts and parks be included in residential developments. These are things that our residents indicated they wanted when our General Plan was developed.

Christy works hard for our Downtown business folks. She would've mentioned that in the forum no matter what. Our thriving Downtown is the largest business district in the county and a real tourist draw.

I think the idea that the city council is responsible for economic development is laughable. Businesses develop the economy, not the government. Government can only hamstring economic development.

Ventura's "economic development model" is to create layers upon layers to defensive mechanisms to ensure the highest barriers of entry for any potential competitors until the economy goes stagnant.

To the council, growth is a public nuisance and must be suffocated out of existence.

Maybe, if they met less, say once a year, there would be more opportunity for businesses to grow the economy in peace.

Hey, Funny Talk, I happen to agree with you. City government stands in the way of economic development all the time. The current group in the Ivory Tower over on Poli (including Christy Weir) have done their best to stifle the growth and forward progress of this community.

We need a couple of free-marketers in there (like Halter and Gibson) who will join forces with a couple of other frustrated Council members (like Monahan and Andrews) and get our community back on track again. By that, I mean, getting out of the way of business, like you have stated, and allowing for opportunities for growth and development, rather than putting up impediment after impediment every time a company makes a proposal to City Hall to do something that will benefit this community in the long run economically.

We need to wake up and go to the polls and make some changes, or we're going to be sorry in a few years when City revenues tank and they come back to the voters looking for another hand-out, P6-2.

Hey Chamber member - maybe you could explain why your Chamber didn't endorse Mike Gibson then? Here you are talking him up and your group isn't backing him. I think they endorsed Lou Cunningham instead.

Just Wondering, wonder no more. The Chamber Political Action Committee (PAC) was actually divided on whether to endorse Gibson or Cunningham. They went with Cunningham because he had run for Council before and had "slightly" more name recognition than Gibson in the community. So, the electability factor prevailed there.

I actually supported Gibson, as did many of my colleagues in the Chamber. So, it wasn't unanimous by a far cry. Doug Halter was a given from the git-go given his longstanding involvement in the business community and Chamber activities. So, he got the other endorsement.

I think Gibson is making a lot of headway in the race and I'd be surprised if he didn't get as many, or more votes, than Cunningham when all is said and done. Good luck to both of them though. We need change desperately at City Hall.

Chamber member - If the Chamber's PAC was so divided, why didn't they endorse both of them? They could have endorsed three candidates. On other threads of the Dennert blog, people who know him say it was because of his ties to the extreme far right people at the VCRCC. There are apparently some moderates on the PAC.

Still Wondering - The Chamber PAC felt that it would carry more weight if they supported 2, rather than 3, candidates for City Council. I can't say I agree with this strategy, since there are 3 seats open on the Council. I really think they should have endorsed a third candidate, myself. But, mine & others pleas fell on deaf ears, so that's the democratic process, I guess.

As for your comment on Gibson's ties to the extreme right, I believe that was fabricated, based on his association with Mike Osborn on the VCRCC. I think he was looking to Osborn for guidance, not as a mentor or someone he is striving to emulate, which seemed perfectly reasonable to me. After all, he is a Republican.

I think some people on the Chamber feel a lot of animosity towards Osborn, given his history, so it may have been a "guilt by association" thing, which is unfortunate. I think some feel his ties to some organizations that give generously to Republican candidates, like his own family, for instance (I know Michael Gibson, Sr. was near the top on John McCain's donor list).

So, there you have it. I still think he's a great guy and has a lot to offer the City of Ventura. I, personally, wouldn't put too much weight on endorsements, either. They can work for you and against you. I know Mike is not that bummed about not getting the Chamber nod. He tole me later that he didn't think it was that significant in the first place.

Maybe it's time for the VCRCC to find some new leaders if the mere "association" of a Republican candidate to Mike Osborn caused him to lose an important business endorsement.

I think what Chamber Member might be implying here is that the Chamber PAC's endorsement is not as big a deal as one might think. In fact, some in the community refer to it as the "kiss of death", since many of the candidates they endorse ending up losing big time.

So... let me get this straight: Osborn's association to Gibson was the "kiss of death" to a business organization whose endorsement is also the "kiss of death"?

Time To Wake Up, yeah, you finally got it. No PHD's on this blog, apparently. I think Gibson might have a difficult time getting elected in Ventura anyway because he's too controversial. This is a pretty staid community. They don't like it when the feathers get too ruffled.

Gibson is going to have a hard time getting elected because he is a lousy candidate and he's associated himself with slime.

As I stated on the "Bill Fulton Try And Defend Yourself" thread, at least Gibson is trying to point out what's wrong with the current establishment up in the ivory tower at Poli in his campaign. They've had to defend themselves at every turn at the candidates forums, largely because of what he's said about their inattention to the future economic situation of the City.

Speaking of lousy candidates, what about Carl Morehouse? He seems to be resting on his laurels and hoping for the best. I haven't seen one sign for him around town. At the last candidates forum at Ventura College, he simply referred the audience to his campaign literature on the back table if they wanted to know more about why he's running for reelection. Then he went on some rant about greenhouse gas emissions that had everyone in the room scratching their heads. Such arrogance.......

This guy needs to be turned out, along with Fulton & Weir!

It's time for us all to repeat ourselves on multiple posts!

Nobody in Ventura has even heard of Gibson. He's only lived in Ventura two years and has not been involved in any visible activities here at all from what I have seen.

Morehouse, on the other hand, has a long-standing involvement in the city. He's the mayor. People know him and respect him. Our last mayor, Brian Brennan, didn't even run a campaign. No signs. No fundraising. No parties. No glossy brochures. And he easily won re-election.

Pay your dues, Gibson. Show us you have more than a few right-wing outsider views. Volunteer on a few committees and boards. But don't expect voters to come running to you because you have trust fund money to throw around.

Grassroots organization wins campaigns in this town. You have to earn the trust of the voters.

Aha, "the rest on your laurels and advocate mediocrity" guy is back (Venturan). You know, I agree with you, if Venturans are so blind to Morehouse, Fulton & Weir's failures to lead our city into the future, they deserve what they get - mediocrity & complacency. I, for one, think we can do better. That's why I'm voting for Gibson, Halter & Cunningham, as are most of my friends & associates in the business community, on November 6th. Truth is, I've already voted by absentee ballot!

The truth is... you haven't received your absentee ballot yet.

Most of here in Ventura are quite pleased with the leadership we have on the City Council. And why not? The city's budget is balanced, the per-capita retail sales level significantly exceeds that of the county, there are new parks, a revitalized Downtown, PLUS a new General Plan which guarantees our Hillsides will be preserved and Victoria won't be a site for big-box developments.

All in all, I see no reason to change to the bunch of rookies you are advocating.

Doug Halter, a rookie? Do you even know your own City? Doug has been enmeshed in every major program and project in this city for going on 30 years. He will be elected on November 6th, I can guarantee you that!

The other 2 - Gibson and Cunningham are change agents who are looking out for the future of the City, something most of the narrow-minded sheep that cuddle up to Morehouse, Fulton & Weir can't possibly see because they're much to busy sniffin' their behinds.

Take a step back, bro, and tell me if you're secure about the economic future of our City when it currently takes an average of 6 years to get anything through the development review process. That's not exactly what I would call leadership.

Let's hope it takes a lot longer than that to get Wal-mart through. We don't need that kind of change! Let's keep these guys out.

Gibson and his pro walmart platform are toast. With days left before vote by mail ballots are sent out he hasn't a single mailer in the hopper. Just call DMH and ask!

We all know Halter's been around the block a few times. Is this his third run at a council seat? He's the only one amongst the three who's got a chance.

It's gotta be frustrating being so pro-development in a town so dead-set against it. Six years? I don't recall the Target at the Mall taking six years to get going.

I almost forgot we're at the bottom of the anti-Wal-mart entry. That says alot.

Hey, Venturan, how can you disparage someone with the kind of longstanding involvement and commitment to this community as Doug Halter? You know nothing about the man, which is quite obvious by your comments. All you know how to do is kiss Morehouse, Fulton & Weir's collective behinds, from what I can tell.

These three have been a disaster to this community. They've got no vision or foresight. They just want more of the same - delays, delays, delays in getting the most minor project through the City's byzantine development review process. As Chamber Member has stated so well, at least the 3 main challengers - Halter, Gibson & Cunningham - have a plan for moving us forward into the future. That's bold leadership, not the same old, same old that we'll get from the 3 foot draggers!!!

Chastity, you big hypocrite. Me pointing out the inexperience of some of your candidates and the multiple candidacies of others is nothing compared to the drubbing you're giving our hard-working incumbents, all of whom have long-standing roots in this community.

Let's face it. The only way you and Ventura Chamber think you can win is to paint this picture that Ventura is going to hell in a hand basket because we don't allow development to go unchecked and without proper planning. I wouldn't want to run that kind of campaign in this town.

And Chamber member, according to the Star today, your "6-year" figure to get development approved is pretty off. The Star says 3-4 years and the council is currently working on a plan to get that time down. So much for that argument!

Keep digging yourselves in a hole. Nobody but you and I and the anti-Walmart people are reading this thread any more. You're giving them a good roadmap on who to campaign against.

Digging myself in a hole, huh? I'm not the one having to defend every accurate statement that is posted about the 3 foot-draggers (Morehouse, Fulton & Weir). Those guys are on the defensive - big-time. You can hear it at the candidates forums (2 of which I have attended, by the way).

This election, as Morehouse stated himself yesterday at the Dudley House/League of Women Voters forum, is a refendum on how the current Council is doing on providing for the long-term sustainability of the City's economy. That being the case, I wouldn't be polishing up that name Mayor's tag for the dais, if I were him just yet.

Odd that you would mention the forum yesterday. Gibson lost about any vote he could possibly get with his rant against efforts to curb greenhouse gases. Wow. People were just shaking their heads in wonder.

Interesting perspective. I thought the Mayor was the one who looked foolish when Gibson coyly pointed out that the League of Calfornia Cities, which the Mayor represents Ventura on, should be more aggressive in standing up to ex-Governor Moonbeam (current Attorney General Brown) on this greenhouse gases farce that he's trying to force down everyone's throat by legal threats, etc.

I guess Morehouse has no problem lying down like the lamb he is when these things get foisted on us by the State. No wonder cities and counties continue to have the budget problems they do.

This is a pretty hopeless exchange. Obviously we have some wide philosophical differences. (That's right, let's stand up to efforts to slow down greenhouse gas emissions! The planet's future be damned..... ) I don't know where to begin there. I suppose you are one of those few people left who don't believe global warming is real.

You do realize that Mayor Morehouse, who you love to malign, just won the Outstanding Distinguished Leadership Award from California Chapter of American Planning Association. That's no small feat.

Among the many supporting recommendations behind his APA win, Cal Poly
SLO professor Zeljka Pavlovich Howard said, "In over 30 years of
professional practice and teaching I have not encountered an elected
official who has more integrity, stronger leadership abilities and
genuine desire to effectively engage the public in the decision making
process."

Venturan,

Why don't you go ahead and kiss his ring while you're at it, since you've already genuflected several times? More evidence of Morehouse standing on his laurels, relying on awards for past performance as a planner (a profession he's retired from, by the way, but still tries to milk for political mileage, apparently).

Granted, Gibson won't receive any votes from the Birkestock Society (I think he's smart enough to realize this), but he's the one candidate with the courage (audacity to you) to challenge the status quo and the "good enough for government" attitude of Morehouse and his fellow foot-draggers.

You're right, Venturan, I'm not a big fan of the global warming "theory". I actually believe in questioning some of the liberal, conventional, media-driven thoughts that are constantly being shoved down our throats by people like Jerry Brown and Al Gore. But, you guys apparently just suck it up like lambs sucking on a teat.

Chastity/Mongo: Hope you enjoyed your little game of "poke the Democrat and make it squeal."

I've lost interest.

You mean, of course, that you've lost your wit and stamina. Good luck in the election though, you're going to need it.

The Walmart in Oxnard has a new Mongo toy. The ugly head is on a spring and bounces around. Bop it with a little soft hammer and it spews one line hate messages.

"I hate you"
"I hate Dems"
"I hate Dantona"
"Hit me again"
"I am lonely"
"I am a weirdo"

The toy is made in China and costs $6.99. I saw the same toy at the mall in Ventura and it cost $14.97. I picked up three of them and will give them to friends for Christmas.

What's all this obsession with Mongo? I actually found him somewhat amusing at times, albeit irreverent. But, he's definitely not the worst I've heard on this blog - anyone remember local Democrat ( name deleted, as if you post about him I need to allow him to respond...)

WasteKnowledge, your stuff is kinda weird & scary too - way too obessive. How's about we get back to discussing local politics?

I'll start it out. So, who are shaping up as the top 3 in the Ventura City Council race? I sense the incumbents are reeling a bit from some pretty good hits recently by the challengers. But, I don't know if any of the challengers are making significant gains at this point.

Nice try at defending yourself. Be very ashamed of your post on the Dantona thread.

Oh where, oh where, has my Mongo gone, oh where, oh where can he be?