Winco   is   DEAD

 5/30/13

In a sudden and surprising move, Winco Foods has decided to abandon plans to open a supermarket in the former Elks Lodge near redwood Parkway. While there was some concern among some members of the community over possible traffic congestion surrounding the project, it enjoyed unanimous support in the City Council vote moving it forward.

Some speculate that the approval of a Wal-Mart store in the old Mervyn's location on Sonoma Blvd. played a role in Winco abandoning their plans.

Read the letter from Winco to Vallejo City Manager Dan Keen HERE

Comments

Add New Search RSS

click this link  - Vallejo Independent Bulletin - Winco is DEAD -- 5/     |September.14.2013 Very interesting information!Perfect just what I was searching for!

wharf rat   |June.04.2013 yes anon you are right that entire area of waterfront is flood prone in 1987 the north Marina parking lot was flooded by a high tide and A dock floated off it's pilings . Yes they fudge when they can and it often costs us big money to mitigate this fudging . Keep in mind the Lofas Lakeside area flooded in the 80's with over 6' of water in some areas this whole area is a flood plain based on recent history and well doccumented ..

Anonymous   |June.04.2013 The FEMA maps for Vallejo have been fudged. FEMA gets their data from the jurisdiction and the City of Vallejo staff has an agenda that wants development no matter what they have to do. Flood plain? What flood plain. Look at the 100 year flood plain along the Mariner's cove section of the northern waterfront plan. It shows all of the marshland illegally filled by the City in the 1980's as outside the FEMA line even though the functional tidal wetland in the middle says otherwise. Since the property is outside the 100 year flood line as shown on the FEMA maps, the developer is allowed to build slab-on-grade rather than 1" above the FEMA line as required by Code and no future owners will be required to have flood insurance for the inevitable flooding. No levees protect that site. The City is also pretending that climate change is a myth and there is no such thing as sea level rise. Vallejo has a long history of faking data which explains why citizens are hypervigilant. If you want some decent data, don't look at FEMA, look at the BCDC hazard maps. They show the entire area from White Slough along Sonoma Boulevard as vulnerable to flooding.

Anonymous   |June.04.2013 Never mind Doug, I found it. It was built in the 1860's as a pvt water source that failed. Sulphur content was so high the original pipes for the water delivery corroded and leaked. An excerpt from a FEMA report: individuals and businesses near Rindler Creek and tributaries are urged to look at the preliminary flood maps to become familiar with flood risks. These flood maps can help make informed decisions about flood insurance options and flood protection measures.

Anonymous   |June.03.2013 Drinking water? Never knew that. Is that what your crusade is about to preserve it for future possible potable water source? What year was it last used for drinking water supply?

Doug   |June.03.2013 In layman's terms, you seem to have picked up on the fact that i called it "my" watershed, good job Yes, i call it taking ownership, i do so in MANY ways, seems to ruffle some feathers here and there. Vallejo taught me that if you want something done you have to get in there and make it happen. Taking ownership is not for everyone, its extremely time consuming and the pay sucks. As for the rest of your questions, your just fishing and i doubt you have a license. Last but not least, the dam wasn't built for flood control, it was built to create a drinking supply. Good day.

Anonymous   |June.03.2013 "The Winco and 360 EIRs only confirm just how vulnerable our watershed is." In layman terms, what exactly are your fears for "your" watershed? Are these dangers greater than when the LCGC was expanded from 9-18 holes? Greater than the housing development above it? Greater than the demolished Lake Chabot Golf Course and the building of Marine World + parking lots? Greater than the continuous operation of the Solano County Fair for the past 70+ years? What perils can Solano 360 or WINCO bring that will damage "your" watershed (which is not natural (there is a dam) and was created for flood control and not fish or mud hens).

Doug   |June.03.2013 @ Anon/red hearing, perception is a funny thing, doesn't matter what we say or do, people will believe what they want I don't care about union vs non union, if you knew my history as you allude to, you would know i have taken the same stance against 360, has nothing to do with unions. Has everything to do with my watershed. GC'er mentioned his/her surprise in my association in said suit, as i mentioned before, i must at times find leverage wherever possible, if that means saddling up with others in opposition, so be it, i got no problem with that! As for perception, i wont lose a wink over what others might think. As some one mentioned, FOLCs part in this is minimal, my stake in this never got driven. I was working on this before Winco came, i will be working on it after they leave. The Winco and 360 EIRs only confirm just how vulnerable our watershed is.

Anonymous   |June.03.2013 The point is that these "problems" exist now. The Elks occupy the property. The Elks are not going to be asked to mitigate the problem, therefore, it is not a real problem. WINCO is history so whose feet will be held to the fire to fix the concerns of the FOLC?

Anonymous   |June.03.2013 Let's go back to CEQA. The law, intended to be inforced with citizen litigation, requires that any environmental issue be brought up either in scoping at the beginning of the project, during public comment or at the draft EIR stage. If not, an opponent has no "standing" and cannot bring a lawsuit after the Record of Decision is made. You have to step on all the squares as a citizen. The City has to answer all of those questions and, if not, one sues. So CEQA allows for lots of points along the way for the City and a developer to work with concerned citizens to avoid, mitigate or minimize negative effects. If they do, that demonstates a willingness to work with citizens. CEQA only applies to "projects". That means that all the long standing issues can't be addressed except as the "project" issues add to the cumulative negative impacts. I have no dog in this fight. But I know Doug and his concern is the watershed, not the Unions. Vallejo has long been run by Unions and that is not a good thing. Unions protect Unions, not the workers. One of my contractor friends has been picketed frequently when his crew is paid better than Union scale and has no interest in paying Union dues because it would be a step down for them. Just because an operation is non-union does not make it rapacious like Walmart. If you have a beef with CEQA (and many do) take it to your State representative. Until then, CEQA is the only tool citizens have at their disposal to fight really bad and stupid projects.

Anonymous   |June.03.2013 @Doug Knowing your background and previous battles there is the perception that the FOLC issues with Rindler Creek is a red herring to stop a non Union business from building in Vallejo

GC'er   |June.03.2013 Nuggett did not pull out because of WalMart, but it was one hell of an excuse that worked! It would be more logical if they would have named Costco, right below their location, as the major competition source. To compare Nuggett with WalMart is comparing doughnuts to fruit! Why did Nuggett not return and locate into the space still vacant to this day as soon as it became apparent that Vallejo would not have a Super WalMart? Well anyhow this issue is a dead one.... Granted, I never bought into the story that no upscale grocer or any other business above the dollar store principle will settle in Vallejo because of low income individuals or their educational background. Money talks even in the form of an EBT card! Having major security issues with those they may have to employ may be a contributing factor, but that is another story. There are plenty of people locally that are label and brand concious that would be able to support any business, if they were giving a chance. Businesses have to be able to depend on the support of the community once they settle in. Frequenting them every once in a while can not be considered supporting them. As long as the majority of those employed can not work locally and will conduct their shopping/business where they work or literally anywhere else but at home because we lack what they are looking for, no upscale business nor any other one of value will come.

GC'er   |June.03.2013 I believe that I am as concerned about our waterways as the next person and take measures that will protect my source of water from further damage. I am not making accusations towards you Doug and your worthwhile engagement to protect our water sources. I am simply surprised with whom you have aligned yourself with to have "your" issues addressed that are not their concerns in the least! It appears that instead of working with a business and correct any omissions the consultants may have made, a court battle has ensued that now legally has justified the opposition to the business locating here. A very small percentage of that law suit outcome can be attributed to FOLC, claiming that WinCo will contribute to the further pollutions to our creek system should they be allowed to settle over the water source. How much damage has already been done to the creek system without WinCo even setting foot on the property and conducting any type of business? Has the existence of a 30 year old shopping center along with the use of the property by the Elk's not impacted the creek at all and will any further contamination solely be caused by WinCo? Does anyone believe that another buyer for the property will come forward knowing what has just happened to a major retailer and the demands that could be made on them no matter what business they would engage in? To liken and cite a source downstream for all the problems that come from upstream/hill is disturbing. I liken that to what happened in Austria in the early 1970's when their conservation measures kicked into high gear before anyone elses, but their neighbor, the then State of Czechoslovakia continued to dump toxins and chemicals into their rivers from unchecked industrial sites that ended up in Austria's highly protected water sources. It obviously is very difficult to be compliant when your neighbor continues to be not, kind of working against the flow in a futile attempt to reach a goal, isn't it? I wish you much success in any future endeavors you undoubtedly will have with the arrival of the 360 project, an opponent much more determined to get their way than WinCo ever was.

Anonymous   |June.03.2013 The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires Environomental Impact Reports (EIR) for all "Projects". CEQA is specifically designed to be inforced by citizen litigation. So Doug and the rest of us that pour over EIRs to find the fatal flaws buried way deep in the appendices are doing our job. For way too long, the City of Vallejo wasn't which has led to a whole bunch of very stupid projects and several legal battles. (like the stupid garage on the waterfront filling up with contaminated water) Lately, with folks like Doug paying attention, City staff is not getting away with the same behaviors they have for years. If you want to point fingers, take a good look at staff in City Hall that would sell their mother for a permit fee and gladly roll over when developers come knocking. Some developers are scuzzy, some are not. But all developers will do what they need to for a permit. The developer pays for the EIR but City staff oversees its development and ultimately tailors its outcome. If staff does not know the laws around creek protection, they should be replaced by competent staff. If they do know the law and are willing to overlook it, then they should be fired for moral turpitude. The real victims include the good developers who are misled by staff and blindsided. Developers are not supposed to be familiar with the body of environmental laws. So the developers end up spending lots of money on EIRs, hearings, etc. with nothing in the end. That works for City staff. They collect their fees. The purpose of planning is to provide a clear, understandable framework for investment. Vallejo's General Plan has not been updated since 1983 when the Navy was still here. Pieces have but General Plan law says the GP must be comprehensive, comprehendable and internally consistent. Pieces updated a few years ago (like the Housing Element that staff make sure is updated so they can qualify for more subsidize housing) but others are 30 years old. That is not legal. If you are pointing to the fact that Vallejo has a low and extremely low demographic that needs only bargain markets, again look to City staff who works with HUD (Federal Housing and Urban Development) to relocate regional poverty to Vallejo for the fat Administrative fees and poverty entitlement grants. If you believe that Vallejo has no market for better shopping opportunities, get over it. Many of us who live here have plenty of money but have to drive to Berkeley or Napa to shop because there are no stores that provide for our needs. Don't blame Doug for Winco's departure. Staff misled them and they got fed up. I don't blame them. By the way, I support Winco. The Nugget, too, pulled out because of Walmart. Vallejo can support only so many bargain markets. I grieved when Nugget pulled out and have occasionally driven to Davis to shop there when the traffic on Highway 80 makes Berkeley Bowl a hassle. If you want to know why Vallejo does not have a legal General Plan it is because the tangled mess of documents can only be translated by City staff...for a fee and depending on what attorney you have.

Doug   |June.03.2013 @True, i answered anons comments. As for your rants, Google it and find out for yourself. The one rant you make that is worthy of response, in regards to thinking about what i accomplished. It is not what i did, it is what Winco did. Perhaps your willing to believe its raining while they are ****ing on your leg, i am not. Spin it however suits you.

Anonymous   |June.03.2013 If it has "nothing to do with the Elks" which has been there since 1964(?) why does it have something with WINCO? Did the problem appear when WINCO attempted to purchase the property?

TRU VALLEJOAN:   |June.03.2013 DOUG: Anon's question was "...who is responsible for this problem??" The Elks Club? Winnco? or VSFCD ? Why should your FOLC? intervine? Why not RWQCD? Are they not the State Agency that is enpowered to do the enforcement? Now that the Winnco project is gone, what is FOLC going to do to recitfy this "so called MAJOR problem".....is the Lake Chabot runoff now taken care of???....Think about what you have just accomplished.and lastly who came up with the 303d List and what is it's intent? Now that Winnco is gone are the Rindler Creek and Blue Rock Springs tibutaries NOW alright or should we put a tax on every piece of property/home built on top of them??? to protect them?? Good luck with that?? Maybe another Sales Tax measure will handle it?

Doug   |June.02.2013 Has nothing to do with the Elks. Rindler is an "Impaired" body of water, listed with the EPA/RWQCB. Listed for trash. Most impaired bodies fall under non-point source of pollution (not knowing where it comes from) Rindler is listed with point sources, those being illegal dumping and storm drains. You will find Rindler on the 2010 303d list, for whatever reasons, the EIR says Lake Chabot and its Tributaries, are NOT on the 2006 303 d list, tributaries being Rindler and Blue Rock Springs Creek. It is misleading for the Hydrology and Water Quality portion of the EIR to omit the current and up to date 303d list and instead refer to the 2006 list. This wasn't a mistake on their part, it was an intentional omission on their part. Unacceptable as far as i am concerned. The EIR was completed in 2011. An EIR is intended to disclose facts, not omit them. Any developer building upland from an impaired body of water should willfully recognize the additional impacts their development may add to an already polluted body of water. These are existing problems, currently being addressed to an extent by the VSFCD. No TMDL requirements have been implemented by the RWQCB at this time. The Solano 360 EIR takes the same approach, almost verbatim.

Anonymous   |June.02.2013 Is the Elks Club on the hook for the problems with Rindler creek? What problems did WINCO present for FOLC that the Elks Club did not? Are these existing problems that need to be fixed or projected problems?

Reality Slap   |June.02.2013 Vallejo is a City that has mostly low income to middle class families. While every City wants to have upscale retail, how would this upscale retail help the lower economic end with their consumer needs? There is nothing wrong with WalMart or WinCo, they fill a need for the consumer. If you don't like the merchandise they carry, don't shop there, it's that simple. Why not look at these businesses as the start for many people to get into the job market? It's chance for many to gain work experience so they can move on to other jobs. If someone continues to work for these stores, it's their option; they certainly won't be in any worse of a position than if they never got a job. I guess it's just easier to point the finger at the corporation than point to a problem with people that have no ambition to improve their condition in life, and unfortunately Vallejo has a ton of those.

Doug, aka, Friends of Lake Cha   |June.01.2013 GC, no need to be on the fence when it comes to FOLC, here, let me help you down, i don't care which side of the fence you choose. I created FOLC about 10 years ago, to serve the watershed itself. It took me a few years to figure out how dysfunctional our City is, a few more years to figure out that the Cities mismanagement of Lake Chabot is intentional. They have no interest in maintaining that property. Lake Chabot is an amazing piece of property, the Cities neglect is political, like it or not. Because Vallejo has no interest in Chabot, either do any consultants or developers, sadly, the City itself is the biggest roadblock to Watershed Management. Sadly, the Cities own ignorance of this property sets the tone for others to be ignorant of it as well (Winco, Solano 360, Discovery Kingdom, etc) If Vallejo has taught me anything, it is that things don't get done because it is the responsible thing to do, things get done when people are held accountable. I am of course referring the City. Back to Winco, same goes for developers, accountability. My name (FOLC) is in the suit due to the intentional misleading statement of facts in the EIR, even when pointed out to them they felt no obligation to rectify the matter, their behavior is borderline criminal due to their intentional misleading of facts about Rindler Creek. I should have brought the RWQCB into this sooner, i brought this up with them about 4 weeks ago. Although the discussions were centered around the Solano 360 EIR, the Winco EIR and unethical practices were discussed as well. I tried to play by the rules, kindly and repeatedly pointed out to Winco the error in their ways (303d list) during the scoping and EIR process, my interest and concerns for disclosure and transparency fell on deaf ears. If you attempt to take advantage of my watershed i will search for any available leverage to hold you accountable. If Winco would have simply played fairly and honestly i would not have a beef with them, FOLC would not be associated with the suit. Several years back at a Council Meeting, Tye (Winco) offered $1.000.00 to the environmental group of my choice, after they get up and running, my response was no TY. Most folks know very little about Chabot, less about FOLC. I will in the near future make an effort to bring Chabot into the limelight, so to speak. The Cities recent failure to negotiate a water contract (Lake Chabot) with the County is another notch on their resume of failed watershed management Anyone who knows me, knows i am an extremely patient individual, i would rather achieve progress through collaboration than force. FOLC is not about about making friends, FOLC is about the protection and preservation of Lake Chabot.

Anonymous   |June.01.2013 California Healthy Community Network: http://www.calhcn.org/

Anonymous   |June.01.2013 Wow. The ying and yang. Upset with the unions behind the fight against non union WINCO and WALMART because they don't pay their employees as they should. But many don't care about that issue; unions? retail? stores/ who cares? I want low prices. But yet, the same people are more than happy to pay union employees of the city of Vallejo more than the city can afford, to the detriment of residents. Illogical

TRU VALLEJOAN   |June.01.2013 SILAS; I always appreciate your comments and opinions, however, I think you should relook at your last blog. You say "..we want stores that cater to the poor and cheapskates", and I can understand why you feel that way. But like your last line indicated.."you aren't sure if Winnco" meets that threshold: Try looking at the whole market for Winnco's and WalMarts, they are the most successful businesses (retail) in the world today and they cater to the working men and women, who are trying to make ends meet. Luckily, I am not there (YET), but do undestand that need. Like you I am tired of tattoo parlors, cigerette cheaper stores and thrift shops? But Winnco's and WalMart's produce job, taxes, revenues....Now you tell me what does Vallejo need???..You and I both have the same fustrations, but lets pick our fights. I have never been to a WM or a Winnco, but friends that have, always say they are pretty good businesses. As far as being union or not??, that is their right. Me, I have been an active union member all of my life and believe in their need, but I have also been to non union businesses like the old Nut Tree, Don Giaovanni's and other retail stores and they are what make America so great, if you believe in the Union Label, then don't patronize them, but don't stop others from going where they want...Silas, keep offering what you believe and hopefully things will get better........

silasbarnabe   |June.01.2013 This is not shocking considering our spending customers here in Vallejo. We want stores that cater to the poor and cheapskates and I am on the fence right now as to whether that applies to Winco.

GC'er   |June.01.2013 Check it out: http://www.calhcn.org/whatis.htm http://www.transformca.org/ Some are members of our community and their goal is to enlighten..... via some other organizations such as the Sierra Club, Labor Councils and so on. A very specific target is WalMart and or any large business without a union labor force, much effort is expanded in going after them. I can not help you much with Tucker, he appears to be a mouthpiece with HC and a lot of spare time and donated money on his hands. With Friends of Lake Chabot I am still on the fence. Although I appreciate all their efforts with respect to our waterways and springs, I sure wish they stayed far away from the political games being played. It may ultimately hurt their cause and not benefit Lake Chabot as intended.

TRU VALLEJOAN:   |June.01.2013 GC'er/ANON: Finally I find some people that I agree with here. Can anyone tell me who HEALTHY COMMUNITIES are? That is the group that led to opposition to WINNCO & WALMART?..Who funds them?? This Feller and Tucker guy, came out of the blue? I assume they are funded by some unions (not FF or VPD). Is Tucker related to the guy that used to work for GVRD and was in the tennis ball business?? Just curious why this union (I think it is SCIEU/RETAIL Clerks?, not being against unions, but do they realize they are killing opportunities for the working men and woman in Vallejo. Someone should investigate this. The Friends of Lake Chabot mean well, but sell out to whoever asks them to oppose Vallejo's chance to ever survive. Do they realize that the City Revenue's from a Winnco or Walmart could have benefited the improvements for Lake Chabot?? Wake up you so called opponents, you are killing the goose????

GC'er   |June.01.2013 Well lookie here, a citizen who is as angry as I am with the continued meddling of a few that soil and spoil progress for many! I am at a loss of words (a tough one)when a few want to determine where a business can locate despite trying to fleece them with requirements other stores would have declined and moved on immediately. If it is available, zoned for commercial usage and the requirements Vallejo has already on the books are enforced by those who are tasked to oversee it all, why can we not move forward with anything new in this town? Not only will we not receive a grocery store at this location, (I can live with that and will go to an out-of-town WinCo) but we also have a very good chance of losing a valuable service organization that has aided thousands of Vallejo residents in the past. But we will fill the gap in funding lost from this organization with PB monies, correct? This time around the city council actually approved something that not only would have created jobs and revenue, but would be an asset to the area. Lucky's (Save Mart actually) pulled a premature withdrawel by the simple mention of a WinCo opening a mile away and gave us a store instead that carries pre-packaged goods, no butcher, no baker... which tells me that management had plans to shut the Luck'y division way before WinCo came on scene. But I do not hear a beep from Joe Feller who whined that the arrival of WinCo would lay siege to every grocery store in Vallejo, specifically Lucky's! Certainly, without the cooperation of the owner of the Safeway center and a well thought out renovation and improved layout of the parking and access routes that would have been beneficial to both, WinCo undoubtedly would have increased traffic flow. But with the proliferation of available markets how many people would have frequented the WinCo location, all at the same time? How many are shopping Costco and wonder who was in charge of their parking lot layout and access ...and it does not have to be an upcoming holiday to swear off food shopping! I am now looking forward to WalMart's Neighborhood Market. I am not the usual WalMart shopper, but I may frequent them a few times to see what is cooking. ...and if I see someone who in the past was against all those greedy, humanity exploiting corporations and is now frequenting those stores to pinch a few pennies, I may just say, "Hi how's it going,scabby"?

ANONYMOUS:   |June.01.2013 Your headline should have read: VALLEJO DEAD...........Why blame WINNCO, they spent over $2 million trying to get approval; the Joe Fellers and Phil Tuckers (another V-Town crook) and their Union Buddies have worked their magic again? The Mayor and City Council have shown absolutely NO leadership in bringing ANY type of developement to our City. It is sickening and fustrating to even live here. What is/has our Economic Developemtent Dept done to ATTEMPT to bring in any business? We are the laughing stock of the whole Bay Area and we think our savior is PB?? Yeh lets improve our grafitti? lets improve the Boys and Girls Clubs? Lets help our bankrupt school district? Lets try to keep our non-revenue producing college? Lets make sure we keep trying to get a grocery store in So.Vallejo; Downtown or on Mare Island? after 30 years wouldn't you think the City would see they aren't getting one there. It is great to watch bloggers here offer their opinions on where a Winnco; WalMart; Nugget should go? but none of them have ever offered to finance such proposals, Wake up to the fact we are DEAD.....by the way SPARKY, why should Fred retire, what did he do besides spending 4 1/2 years to bring a busines to town and attempt to save the ELKS from elimination.(and never received a dime) What have you done to try to improve the City???

GC'er   |June.01.2013 @ Doug I disagree that WinCo cherry picked. The location has been on the market for years and nobody has picked this cherry location to date but WinCo. Since we are oversaturated with low class shopping opportunities here in V-Town, according to our local and out of town activists, I suggest a nice entertainment venue like a gentleman's club/strip club/bar scene that will keep our police department occupied. The close proximity of I-80 will ensure a well mixed crowd from miles around visiting this cherry and they could beat a fast retreat if things get hot. If that should not be the right fit for this cherry of a location may I suggest finding a developer that can be convinced to bring us market rate housing for the homeless and low to no income individuals. There is shopping right next door and top of the line eating joints that will make your heart sing and your waistline expand. Perfect!

Doug   |June.01.2013 GC'er, In your own words, million dollar + for street modifications. Not only is that short change, that is chump=change! Throwing money at a problem that cant be fixed, cant be mitigated, Winco doesn't have to worry about it, Vallejo does. Winco doesn't have to deal with Caltrans, Vallejo does. Winco did nothing but cherry pick a location, tried to put a square peg through a round hole and cut corners on the EIR.

rocketman   |June.01.2013 Vallejo has a problem with people with money. People with money are apparently the undesirable people in this town, which perhaps makes it unique. The Temple Lofts project on Virginia Street, right next to the Empress Theater, is limited to fairly low income tenants. If you have money, don't bother applying. And so that prime location in downtown is, in effect, another subsidized housing complex that explicitly forbids anything that approaches personal wealth. THIS is the reason why this town is economically on idle. THIS is the reason why we have $200,000-a-year firefighters being paid for by taxes paid by $30,000-a-year taxpayers. Vallejo is a crazy place when it comes to money--if you have it, don't come here, you are decidedly not wanted.

wharf rat   |May.31.2013 same old same old city Staff engages in a development project and milkes it out to the last drop ... do we see a patern or is it just the marching orders for each department .. Could it be revenue Generation ............. Or revenue enhansment as procribed by management , without any real connection to a particular Department ... Possibly a wholesale Raping of the Community with no accountibility and no dissclosure Just the same old Staff diatribe and excuses to ensure their Gravy train Continues with their six figures salary and un--affordable bennies ..Wich eclipse the average Citezen .. The time is now We must hire within Vallejo Residents need a major Hiring prefrence so we can enjoy the commitment of Our dedicated locals , who are very invested in the outcome of this City ...Local hiring should be forefront , in fact we have many Locals that could be high performing City managers and or executives in City government who are shareholders of this dissfunctional City Many who have allready given up major components of their lives to move this City foreward .. Hire Local And Govern Local We have all the tallent within City limits to excell and move foreward Many of Us know this just let it happen NO excuses rather action and support ...

GC'er   |May.31.2013 Doug, please explain in what way WinCo tried to short change Vallejo? The ball was in our court, not the other way around! Demanding million dollar+ investments for street modifications that will benefit the Fairgrounds and Six Flags, turning lanes that should already be there and any other upgrades to our dismal road system and so on, and all for the privilege of taking a once great but now blighted property off our and the Elk's Organization hands, is considered short changing? What? That the location was inappropriate is further debatable. Was it inappropriate when the Elks had their meetings and get togethers with hundreds of people in attendance? How many business locations in Vallejo are appropriate and thought out with the consumer in mind? Looking at the aging dump of a center next to the Elk's Lodge, including the 30 year old Safeway with a parking lot I will only frequent in the middle of the day for various reasons, makes me wonder why that owner could not have joined with WinCo to revitalize his center to benefit both parties? But no, we can not do that because the under normal circumstances much maligned Safeway Corp. could hightail it out of the location and leave the center blighted even further than it is already. I wonder how many other Vallejo residents will take their business to other communities where shopping is a pleasurable experience. It most certainly is not here in Vallejo where sloppy out of town activists determine where I should shop and leave my tax dollars!

Anon   |May.31.2013 Vallejo is a blue-collar (meaning low-class) town. This is why we don't have a book store. Also books are for f*gs. But seriously, we need more retail like we need more empty commercial space and hardware stores.

Reality Slap   |May.31.2013 First WalMart, now WinCo, what the hell is wrong with Vallejo? Do you truly believe upscale retail is just dying to set up business in the City Limits? Vallejo turns up it's nose at what some refer to as "low stuff", yet Vallejo doesn't even seem to be able to attract the "low stuff". And if you can't attract that, don't hold your breath for the upscale retail to open.....

Doug   |May.31.2013 If this or any other business was such a good fit and or appropriate for location, etc, than "common citizens" and "activists" would not be successful in their stances against irresponsible development! Winco tried to short change Vallejo and caught, simple as that. Go ahead and blame it on common citizens and activists if that makes you feel better. Darn those common citizens anyway!!

AnnoyII   |May.31.2013 Anonymous claims a city city council agreed to the deed restriction of Safeway preventing another store downtown. WRONG! Deed restrictions are placed there by the owner of the property. Government doesn't have anything to do with it unless it is an illegal restriction, such as based on race, color, creed.

Clarke Johnston   |May.31.2013 The location was never really a good fit, and the EIR flagged real problems with traffic every which way. But I think the deleterious effect of challenges based only wobbly greenhouse/carbon claims and spurious talk surrounding noise abatement factored in. Legal battles are pricey. Walmart's entry across town too, perhaps. I miss Lucky's as well.

Anonymous   |May.31.2013 We have too many value discount stores already. Glad to hear WinCo gave up. Most store's here are already catering to low income families. A store that sold non-GMO foods would be a refreshing change. There was a Safeway in the downtown area but left. Allegedly had the city sign a 50 year agreement to have no other grocery stores in the downtown. WTF! And WHY? If one lives in the Heritage area they must drive to the freeway Safeway, or Raley's at the corner of 29 and 37. Someone needs to look into this and change it. What city council that cared for "all" their constituents would agree to such a thoughtless agreement like that? 50 years!!!!

GC'er   |May.31.2013 You are obsolutely correct "Wake Up"! The entire council saw to it that a business, if it is even willing to come to Vallejo, has a place to serve the public. Detractors were mostly out-of-towners who are forcing their mind set onto residents who are poorly educated to the facts. The every day customer will decide if a business is successful or not and as I have said many time, if you hate a business do not patronize them, shop somewhere else that is to your liking! How many Vallejo residents are able to supply their household solely with Whole Foods merchandise down to the organic toilet paper?? I shop Whole Foods in Napa and even in Santa Rosa, but it remains a treat 2-3 times a month and I usually walk away with $100+ in wants and splurges! WinCo will move to another city that already has everything we do not have and become a place to shop for those that are willing to patronize them and appreciate medium priced merchandise without the horrendous overhead of "We Want Chi Chi in V-Town" stores. Although I have only shopped WinCo out of State, I have never been disappointed by their selection. The notion that WinCo customers are solely comprised of low income individuals is an untrue and insulting statement. It is not a loss for WinCo to not settle in this town, the losers are the whole community who was looking forward to an additional CHOICE TO SHOP!

Wake Up   |May.31.2013 What drove Winco away was not Walmart but the "activists" with there lawsuit. Winco gave up, knowing it would be to much of a hassle to fight it. As long as you have common citizens fighting every business that comes to town, telling them where they should locate, then you will have businesses ignoring Vallejo. Wake up people, Walmart is not the problem. You are. Vallejo has disgraceful shopping because of you fighting to keep them out.

Poor is as poor does   |May.31.2013 My Mama says" poor is as poor does." Don't you all know that poor attracts poor? Low end shopping creates a mecca for poor folks, they are attracted to what they can afford to buy and to rent. Likewise, high end shopping appeals to more affluent folks who like nice and more expensive things. WE DO NOT NEED TO ATTRACT MORE POOR FOLKS TO OUR CITY, WE HAVE OUR FAIR SHARE. Many of you many not like this, but if we dont start attracting big income earners to Vallejo we are doomed! The middle class is now supporting all the poor folks and trying to support themselves. The poor and uneducated always have social problems, they are in fact ruining our school district, our neighborhhoods and are a major contributor to the crime in our city. We have done more than our fair share to house, school, feed, cloth and provide cheap shopping for the poor folks that are here and continue to come here. Enough is enough, my mama was right "poor is as poor does." Thanks Supervisor Barbara K for only being a champion of the poor, never for supporting the middle class who have to pay for all your social services that you brought to Vallejo, heck you may be the reason the DOC could not believe Vallejo was so ticked off at the DRC being located in Vallejo, they most likely thought Vallejo has every social program known to mankind, has become a sesspool of Solano Co. the liberals love these programs, they will love the DRC too. NO MORE LOW IN STUFF IN VALLEJO!!!!!!!!

wharf rat   |May.30.2013 fact check the drive to Vacaville to shop at Winco is a net gain ! if You have a large Family to feed . many Seniors shop there from Vallejo as the gas cost is well compensated by the good values enjoyed when buying bulk foods .. I know folks that make a monthly trek there to enjoy the good deals ... The Elks site would be better served as Commercial condos , not a big box enterprise , we have better sites for this type of development ... C/M Keen should communicate with Winco and develop an alternative site as their business plan is a fit for so many Vallejo Families , most that are well below the poverty levels of the region . Just review the recent cencus tract data We are not a wealthy City Families need a bang for their buck to feed their Children ................

sparky   |May.30.2013 The real tradgady here is that once again wallmart got there hooks into Vallejo wallmart is a predator , they contribute nothing to local Communities .. Wallmart keeps most Employees below the poverty level and rely on a core of their Employes to recieve Public assistence ... Their Business plan is well known , They are a Corporate parasite at it's worst Winco should be presented with an alternate site as they have greate values for Familys with many mouths to feed and treate their employees with respect .. Just look at the 2012 census and the AMI for Vallejo Families Winco would have been a winner for many Families in Town , good store bad location , fred needs to retire .. How about the old K-mart site or even the old Wall mart location ????

Anonymous   |May.30.2013 Just like the Super-Walmart on the White Slough, WinCo got their approvals (unanimous for WinCo). The Urban Myth spreaders will be out in force saying: look the council drove Winco out. Winco left due to competition from WalMart. WalMart left due to competition from themselves (remember, they abandoned Redwood/Sonoma because of a very weak market -- two Super Walmarts within 2.5 miles of each other just wasn' gong to work.

Vallejo loses   |May.30.2013 I guess I have to keep shopping in Vacaville for WinCo. I don't like WalMart nor shop there. But Vacaville has a WalMart and a WinCo.

Anonymous   |May.30.2013 If the glove don't fit, you must not commit.

Write comment
Name:
Email:
Website:
Title:
	Please input the anti-spam code that you can read in the image.

Powered by !JoomlaComment 3.23

3.23 Copyright (C) 2007 Alain Georgette / Copyright (C) 2006 Frantisek Hliva. All rights reserved."