“Big-Box” Proposal Makes No Sense

By Paul J. Gessing

Having wisely postponed plans to construct a $270 million streetcar, City Council is again on the verge of taking a policy stance that is driven by the philosophy of “new urbanism” rather than the wishes of a vast majority of Albuquerque residents.

How do I know this?

I don’t need polling data to prove that residents of the Duke City love their big box stores; all I need is to head into my local Wal-Mart (or Target, or any other “big box” store) and see the hordes of people of all racial and income groups who are taking advantage of the low costs and vast array of goods available.

The most dangerous part of the proposed “big-box” legislation is that it would slap a six-month moratorium on development of stores sized at more than 50,000 square feet. There is no better way to stifle economic growth than the use of arbitrary prohibitions aimed at specific businesses or industries.

Worse, would this be only a six month moratorium or, as first occurred with the transit tax for the streetcar, will the moratorium, once in place, be extended?

According to the ringleader of the anti-big box coalition, Councilor Debbie O'Malley, the goal of her legislation is to use the moratorium to give Council time to develop a permanent set of guidelines.

This sounds nice, but big box stores are certainly not new to Albuquerque, why is this suddenly such an emergency that a moratorium is required?

Secondly, there already are standards for all development in this City called zoning requirements. If Council wants to alter the way development is done here, they already have the tools to do it.

Instead of being an honest effort to make our fair city a bit fairer, the proposed regulations – 37 pages in length – appear to be little more than a cynical ploy to slow down the process of locating and constructing these stores. At every turn in the process, the regulations make it possible for a small handful of NIMBY activists and radicals to stop the process of locating one of these stores in its tracks.

Traffic issues, for example, are already taken into account in the location of any new business or shopping area, but the regulations add additional steps to the process. The appearance guidelines are particularly absurd.

If window size and pedestrian-friendliness are going to be factors in the development of big-box stores, why shouldn’t all developers face similar issues?

Clearly, what we DON’T need in this city is government bureaucrats determining window size, toilet flow, and every other aspect of our homes and businesses.

One last example of just how out of touch many of our Councilors are with the citizens they represent is the idea contained in the proposed regulations to place residential units in and around big-box stores. It is hard to believe, given the opposition these stores often face, that people would want to live on top of or immediately next door to their local grocery store or Wal-Mart.

The reality is that the very same middle and working class residents on behalf of whom Council purportedly acts, also happen to be the biggest beneficiaries of big box stores. Wal-Mart alone draws 100 million customers a week and is estimated to save the average household $2,300 annually. Now, in response to Wal-Mart’s introduction of $4.00 generic drugs, retailers are battling to offer the cheapest generic drugs.

And, perhaps even more importantly, a rising number of big box retailers are opening in-store health clinics that charge patients a fraction of what doctors do. These tangible benefits offered to low-income customers are an obvious reason why Counselor Sanchez wants to exempt his district from the legislation.

If O’Malley and her allies get their way and pass a moratorium and subsequent regulations that dramatically raise the costs of locating big box stores in Albuquerque, she will be attacking the very residents of this community that can least afford it. Of course, given Council’s track record, they’ll probably respond to the economic harm done to low-income workers with new subsidies or welfare.

Paul Gessing is the president of the Rio Grande Foundation, a non-partisan, tax-exempt research and educational organization dedicated to promoting prosperity for New Mexico based on principles of limited government, economic freedom and individual responsibility.

Comments

[Retro Jordans]

If life is a quilt, then love should be a thread.

[wholesaledunk]

good article.

[wholesaledunk]

good article.

[air jordan 1]

I want someone who actually cares, which I do not.

[provo security systems]

Doesn't work all the time. But it always worth trying.

[Discont Prada]

The second day, Gerry picked me up with his car and a trailer with 5 other boats on it. This was the class day. We went into the beautiful Powers Lake where the water are clear and the “relatively” warm for Gerry to give his Level 2 class. We had there Dave, Susan and Kate which are taking this class for the second time and Steve and Pat that took a paddling class for the first time.

[Discont Prada]

The second day, Gerry picked me up with his car and a trailer with 5 other boats on it. This was the class day. We went into the beautiful Powers Lake where the water are clear and the “relatively” warm for Gerry to give his Level 2 class. We had there Dave, Susan and Kate which are taking this class for the second time and Steve and Pat that took a paddling class for the first time.