No. It’s about money. $1.5 million dollars.

For some it is about absolutely nothing else but money.

For others it is about everything else; property rights, quality of life, preserving a city’s personality. It’s about good and bad, right and wrong. And it’s about the river and the park.

There would be no story, no public hearings, no t-shirts, no yard signs and no political posturing if it were not for the $1.5 million being waved at the city.

Wal-Mart knew how to get their attention.

The land being considered for rezoning is completely inappropriate for this development. In terms of negative impact this is the worst possible place for a
24-hour Supercenter.

Nowhere else will you find a Wal-Mart Supercenter, or for that matter any big box retailer, squeezed between residential areas and butted up against a wildlife area and river. This location is 100% completely wrong and inappropriate for this development. Why then is it even being considered?

Money.

The COMPLAN and all of its revisions and updates does not designate that land for big box retail. The current and proposed zoning does not designate that land for big box retail.

The only reason any one is entertaining shoving a Wal-Mart on this land is money.

There are a great many things money can buy and a great many things money can destroy. In this case, the money is far more destructive than it is beneficial.

The residents of Wolhurst Landing and Meadowood did not purchase their property because they expected a Wal-Mart to be planted next door. Were they deceived? Or does the promise of the money take precedence over their property values and quality of life. What about the rights of the property owners? What about their money?

Much has been said of the South Platte Park and Mary Carter Greenway as it relates to this development. It is beyond belief that a city that has gone to historical extremes to protect and preserve this area would even consider allowing a big box retailer come anywhere near it.

If you heartlessly think only in terms of money, I suppose it is easy to ignore the city’s crown jewel in lieu of sales tax revenues.

…this is the worst possible place for a
24-hour Supercenter.

Are the people who count the city’s income the same people that count the city’s spending? Count this; for every one Wal-Mart Supercenter that opens two grocery stores close, for every two poverty-level jobs Wal-Mart creates, three living-wage jobs are lost in the community, over 20.66 million square feet of stores owned by Wal-Mart are vacant.

One of the more ominous issues concerning Wal-Mart is crime. When you build a 177,000 square foot building with 879 parking spaces and you leave it open all day and all night you are going to have crime. You are inviting crime. Wal-Mart’s have crime and a lot of it. A police chief in Virginia was asked about the Wal-Mart Supercenter that opened in his town and he said the Supercenter was responsible for 21% of all criminal offense records over the past 21 months in that community.

He said it had been a drain on their resources. And he would be happy to see the store close and move to some other location. He felt it was a major mistake letting the store stay open all night. His story is not unique. There are hundreds of these stories all across the country.

Can $1.5 million mitigate the crime, the loss in property values, the depletion of the quality of life, the irreparable damage to the South Platte Park and the increased demands on the city’s services?

Littleton does not need the money. Despite what some say the budget is appropriate for the city’s needs. No one is going to suffer if a Wal-Mart isn’t built on South Santa Fe. But…what if it is? What then? The genie won’t go back in the bottle. We are stuck. We have a Wal-Mart and all that comes with it.

We will have lost a parcel of land with potential to be developed into something unique. A development that would serve the community on every level and that would return to the community more than it took from it.

At the end of the day the money isn’t enough. Fiscal responsibility requires us to resist the temptation of easy income in favor of judicious long term planning which will benefit the community beyond the planned obsolescence of a big box retailer.

Debbie Brinkman