Buy Local Chapter or Chamber? Who represents Windsor Business?
Well, after this confusion with the Chamber of Commerce, I do not believe they are representing my businesses as members. What do I do? No offense to Dr. Morgan but I didn’t see many independent business owners on the Small Business Advisory Panel.
Last night I went to a meeting of a Group called Open City. Apparently there are many in that city who get it. They had a speaker last night, Ingrid Ault, the president of Ann Arbor’s buy local chapter.
When asked what challenges she faced, to the best of my hearing and my suprise, she said that Buy local chapters were fighting with local chambers of commerce across North America over the same issues I am bringing up in Windsor. That the good news is that the Buy Local Independent Business movement was the clear winner. Members of the Chamber of Commerce were changing over their representation to chapters of either BALLE or AMIBA. Both organizations boast between 70-80 chapters each with Balle membership numbering 21,000 small businesses. WOW!
She stated that is was not in anyone’s interest to have the Local Chamber of Commerce as an adversary, that the best results came from BALLE and AMIBA chapters working with their local Chambers but that wasn’t always possible. That most local independent businesses felt that their local Chamber of Commerce did not represent them.
THANK YOU! I thought, I am not alone in my issues with Windsor’s Chamber of Commerce and their representation of my businesses.
Both AMIBA and BALLE have a few chapters in Canada. Both are going to send me information about what it would take Windsor to start up a chapter. If there is interest from other local independent businesses like there is in Detroit and Ann Arbor, I may redirect my efforts on scaledown and the BIA to this cause.
I’m probably too controversial to organize something like this myself, but I’d like to throw my support behind someone who could attract wide ranging support.
Post Feedback
More ammo for the fight against useless development
End of the Big Box Era
http://www.planetizen.com/node/42590
In Birmingham, Alabama, developers are seeing a lot of empty big box and anchor retail spaces, while smaller, neighborhood centers are actually seeing an increase in occupancy.
Michael Tomberlin writes, “Bankruptcies and closings by retailers such as Bruno’s, Circuit City, Goody’s and Linens ‘N’ Things have left hard-to-fill holes in many centers.
Graham said smaller retailers have been able to weather the storm, but a prolonged recession and slow business at neighboring anchors could start taking a toll.”
Full Story: EGS report: Retail real estate stung by loss of ‘big boxes’
Source: The Birmingham News, January 20, 2010
So the ‘market’ is responding to needs and wants. Who knew?
The market was being tampered with for over 40 years with artificially low energy prices, cheap land. Had the market been allowed to be free, we wouldn’t be in this mess. Wish the market worked in the U.S. for the banks.
We just committed to buying energy from Samsung for 50% above Market.
Peak oil is real (two good examples are
1. Cantarell oil fields in Mexico causing Mexico’s exports to drop from something like 5 million barrels per day to 3 million barrels per day
2. Saudi Arabia is building some of the worlds largest aluminum smelters use more of their own oil instead of exporting it.)
Leasing Cars is far more difficult than years before and soon there will be a used car shortage due to the overly low car sales last year. Car insurance prices are going up significantly. You’re going to soon see many families having to do with one car less in their household
Wouldn’t it be nice if our leaders could show some leadership and guide us through this transsition insstead of Ramming face first into it at 100miles per hour.
We need a sustainable economy
I care enough to buy from local independent retailers, do you?
I find it a little unnerving to see expressed joy at the downfall of big-box. Each store and chain that fails represents actual people and families. They may be customers at restaurants, hardware stores, or movie theatres. They are tax payers, students, and parents, who then become dependent upon the over-taxed social system. We all lose.
LOS, you know there was a time, not so long ago, before Big Boxes and Power Centres full of chain stores that take most of their profits out of communities.
What happened to all the merchants who’s businesses were ruined by the Big Boxes and chain stores that used low margins and bulk pricing (or in Wal-Marts case building their own low-wage factories in China) to steal the lively-hoods of so many people and their families?
James, I would assume that those merchants made decisions based on economic cost. Could they find other investments that would afford them more profit than competing with big box? If so, then I guess they took advantage of those opportunities, or left the city for other locales. The workers probably were hired at the big boxes along with a bunch of other people.
I think you think I support big box and do not support independant business. This is not the case. I support free and private enterprise. I do not support waging battle against one system of retail when resources could be better allocated in providing a better alternative to big box.
Big box is not the enemy.
But LOS, you’ve read a few statistics about how many jobs a shift from Big Box to independent retailers could create. Do you dispute those numbers are true?
We’re not talking about imposing restrictions on freedom of choice here. We’re talking about proper land use planning. I’m talking about the wildly wreckless and irresponsible policies that see agricultural and residential land rezoned for commercial when our city sits at a 24-27% commercial vacancy rate.
If target wants to build, they can build in the former Home Depot site by the mall, not on farmland. If Chapters wants a new store, put it by the new downtown college and university campuses.
Other than that, I’d like individuals who choose to shop at Big Box consider what they are costing our local economy. Do I still shop at big box, yes I do, however, I’ll choose a local independent restaurant over a chain every day (although sometimes I will eat at a chain for research). I’ll choose to get my espresso at Milk, Taloolah, social bean or the Coffee exchange before Starbucks any day. Those businesses make Windsor unique and give us a sense of place.
Mark, If the time, energy, and resources spent railing against big box was directed toward bettering and promoting, let’s say, the downtown, then that 10% would find you. It’s always better to build alliances than enemies.
I think I’m fully qualified to do both.
If educating the public about the consequences in Windsor of shifting 10% of their consumer dollars from big box to local independent businesses why would I remain silent about it.
THATS RIGHT For absolutely no cost we could create over 600 jobs in our local economy!!!
600 NEW JOBS AT NO COST! I NEED TO SHOUT THAT OUT!!!
WHile at the same time, I can mind my own business. I think most of us have time to do their job, raise their family and give back to the community
Thats what makes my life fulfilling. The secret to life baby! balancing all three.
I am a businessman, a family man and a communitarian.
Woohoo! I wish everyone understood how fulfilling that makes life
LOS said:
“James, I would assume that those merchants made decisions based on economic cost. Could they find other investments that would afford them more profit than competing with big box? If so, then I guess they took advantage of those opportunities, or left the city for other locales. The workers probably were hired at the big boxes along with a bunch of other people.”
Wow. “Decisions based on economic cost”? A mom and pop business is not run like a board controlled Fortune 500 company. It is run with passion and soul. A small business is like a child, born, nurtured, grown, coaxed along through good and bad. The decision made to close down one’s own business is often crushing. Having to shut down a family business that has passed down from a parent or grandparent can be even more emotional because of feeling of letting down the family.
and then LOS said:
“I think you think I support big box and do not support independant business. This is not the case. I support free and private enterprise. I do not support waging battle against one system of retail when resources could be better allocated in providing a better alternative to big box.”
“Free and private enterprise” the libertarian catch-all that cannot be argued with because anyone that does is some kind of “socialist bastard”. Do you really think Wal-Mart and a local merchant can be compared equally as free and private enterprises. Wal-Mart has annual revenues that rival nations’ GDP. Wal-Mart’s buying power is economic blackmail and other chains aren’t much better. Local small-business IS the better alternative. Every effort should be made to replace big-box with local.
And finally:
“Big box is not the enemy.”
Really? If they aren’t the enemy they sure aren’t friendly to local businesses or local government’s for that matter. Using their corporate power to muscle in to town’s that don’t want them, decimating local business districts with their “lowest price is the law” b.s.?
Big box has taken competitive business and bullied it into obscurity. If that’s not worth fighting against - what is?
Charles Hugh Smith - Of Two Minds posted this today. There are links to other posts he’s done on the subject.
http://www.oftwominds.com/blogjan10/self-destruction01-10.html
James, we all make economic decisions. A mom & pop store will do the same but they just don’t realize it. A whether it’s run with “passion and soul” or not, the economic reality of their situation will determine how long they stay in business. As Kevin O’Leary may say, there’s no room for sentiment in business, it’s all about the money.
Libertarian! Yes. You have me. I am a Libertarian and proud of it. Small government, free enterprise. But no, if you argue with that, it does not make you a socialist; It just makes you wrong.
Yes Wal*Mart and small business are both termed free and private enterprises, except Wal*Mart is publically traded and has more restrictions than a privately held company. Wal*Mart does have greater buying power, but a small business has free mobility of resources. Maybe move to those centres that are forced to accept Wal*Marts. But wait, maybe it’s only those on council who don’t want big box, or maybe just small, but vocal, minority of citizens. I sincerely don’t think Wal*Mart would stay in a location if no one shopped there. I would not be viable and they would close. No. Someone must be making the operation profitable.
It is the buyer who must be wooed. Wal*Mart does it their way. Small business has to find a way to do it better, and it is not by wasting time, money, and energy fighting Wal*Mart. If that can’t be found then maybe they don’t deserve to be in business. Innovation, resourcefulness, forward thinking, flexibility and any other catch phrases need to be employed by the small business owner in order to attract and retain customers.
That is the fight that must be fought, not tilting against made-in-China windmills.
Fighting Walmart is quite easy, and I wouldn’t even call it fighting them.
First off we need new site plan guidelines. one of the bad things about big box is it locates in what I call uni purpose areas.
We need mixed use areas that have residential, office and commercial and public spaces programmed with local artists all in one zone.
Sort of like a …….(drumroll please) MAIN STREET (or BIA)
By doing that we create a living economy thats sustainable, walkable. We improve quality of life while lowering its cost. We help the environmrnt and global warming by reducing Vehicle Miles Travelled pollution and global warming.
Thats what Scaledown is all about
LOS, apologize for posts from a previous date, can’t guarantee I’ll be perfect in the future but I will try
You should not be that unnerved as closing big boxes creates far more jobs then are destroyed
Studies show for every $1 spent at a big box vs. 0.44 c stays in a community vs 0.68 c for a local independent business.
Portland found that if their community simply shifted 10% of their spending from Big Box to Local independent retailers, 600 new jobs would be created and $50 million in new economic activity for their city
http://www.newrules.org/retail/key-studies-walmart-and-bigbox-retail
This study concludes that if residents of Grand Rapids and surrounding Kent County, Michigan, were to redirect 10 percent of their total spending from chains to locally owned businesses, the result would be $140 million in new economic activity for the region, including 1,600 new jobs and $53 million in additional payroll
Buy Local or Bye-Bye Local
I’m not disputing the fact that small business retailers are preferable to big box, both in terms of planning and esthetics. But once they are here, as we have them in Windsor, to advocate for their demise will draw those that work and shop there to be opponents against your initiatives for the downtown.
If those against big box got their way and they disappeared tomorrow, it’s the interim that is unnerving. Local independant retailers will not pop up over night. And even then they won’t all go downtown. They’ll locate where the systems are in place to accomodate the modern consumer in motion.
I don’t believe that if a big box closed, people would simply save money and not spend in our consumerist society. I believe that spending in a city is a function of population and employment rates. The amount of stores does not affect what we spend, only where we spend it and on what goods
With no population and employment growth, new big box simply cannibalize other businesses.
I’m not anti big box purist. Sure, I’ll shop at a big box for Toilet paper, cheerios and other staples that I feel are suited to them
I like what the local independent movment calls for, simply a shift of 10% of your spending from big box to independents. No one gets hurt and many benefit.
I would say a shift of %25 for most people might be better for everyone, including the consumer. If I could only convince my wife. Love the blog guys, great conversations.
LOS, if you are a libertarian then I suppose gov’t supplied healthcare is not something you subscribe to?
I know a few libertarians and they believe as you do. Which is o.k. but to state that big-box and small business is one and the same….sorry but that dog doesn’t hunt.
Dave, Why bring up healthcare? It’s beyond the scope of this discussion, and this site, as far as I can tell. If you want to have a discussion on healthcare, please feel free to contact me directly.
Care to elaborate on why you feel big-box and small business are not both free and private enterprise?
I brought up healthcare as I do with the other libertarians I know. The reason is that libertarians want as little gov’t as possible but a full “free” market economy. Both of which are not possible in today’s world IE healthcare, current economic mess.
I didn’t say both were not free and private. What I said (or should have elaborated on but James did it above) was that they were not one and the same. Large corporations have rules bent for them on a daily basis whereas each and every small business I know have to jump through constant hoops to keep their heads above water; Tax rules for larger corporations are not the same as those for small business.
As James pointed out above the playing field is slowly being tilted in favour of big box stores.
I agree Mark. Sometimes it makes life frustrating but overall it is well worth it.
by the way, I love “communitarian”!
Let me start by acknowledging that this thread didn’t start out about “small government” but it is not a bad topic for Scaledown.
When people say that they are for “small government” I get a bit suspicious. It takes a fairly large number of employees and lots of money to have functioning water treatment, road construction and maintenance, green infrastructure management, and recreation services like community rinks and parks. Since it takes a lot of money and people to do that, it correspondingly takes people to collect revenue, manage finances and account to the public in a considerably more transparent way than the “free market” about the management of money. So what do you mean by “small government”.
I 100% agree with you Margaret. I hear people all the time say small government, less taxes and less spending.
I find those comments wildly wreckless and irresponsible (and complete Bullsh**)unless you say specifically what services you plan to cut. My business minded friends say that makes me sound socialistic but I think they’re just full of crap. I want to see cuts all the time but they have to make business sense.
Its not enough to say there’s savings to be found. Everyone says that.
Most municipal spending is mandated by the province. Levels of service for fire departments, police have minimums that can’t be tampered with.
Social services and Pay rates are set mostly by arbitration.
The amount of spending that is discretionary is so darn small that to affect tax levels you have to make dramatic cuts to that discretionary spending.
I’d like to see cuts to that discretionary spending but not any cost.
Oh, I also forgot to mention that much spending goes to matching provincial and federal funds so that if you don’t spend a million here or there, you might lose that and more of matching funds.
Hey, again, I repeat I want to see smaller gov’t too, I just wish someone had the gumption to say what that actually means
Small government is a topic much too intense and with too many levels for a simple on line forum. Suffice it to say, small government isn’t necessarily to do with the numbers of people who work for government, but encompasses every aspect stemming from concentration on core responsibilities. Those cores will differ depending on what level of government we’re talking about, but can change over time due to growth or contraction of population and area, and availability of other opportunities. Government can grow in size, but the key is management without straying from the cores.
“It takes a fairly large number of employees and lots of money to have functioning water treatment, road construction and maintenance, green infrastructure management, and recreation services like community rinks and parks.”
No it doesn’t.
Water treatment is not a labour intensive operation. It is mostly automated. Two operators monitor the plant on Wyandotte Street East. The remainder of the small day time group deals primarily with maintenance.
Road construction is tendered. A member of Field Engineering manages the project. I’ve been through a complete reconstruction of a road (including the provision of a storm trunk sewer) and the number of employees on hand was between 5 to 10, depending on the stage of the project.
Road maintenance is minimal. Once a year lines are repainted. Curbs are swept on a 24/7 basis to maximize utilization of equipment - typically you’ll see or hear a sweeper twice a year. In the summer, a few crews fill in cracks. In the winter, the same crews fill potholes.
Vincent, your reply only follows if you don’t think of the contractors as “government”.
Road and Sewer maintenance require a lot of bodies. Some are employees and some are not. To say that the “contracted out bodies” don’t count is illogical. The multi-millions of dollars managed by the 5 - 10 employees pays for, in part, the contractors staff (probably unionized with benefits).
A city in California claims to have outsourced everything but basic management. They have less than 160 employees. However, their base budget hasn’t gone down and they still have trouble staying within that. Is that small government or is it just government by contractor? And is government by contractor always the best option for managing the public interest?
Which brings us full circle: most libertarians believe that it is out of the governments scope to dabble in land use planning.
Follow this link to the full article on Planetizen.
http://www.planetizen.com/node/42679
Personally, I believe that land use planning is a one of the core responsibilities of local governments.
Mark Boscariol on Wednesday, January 27, 2010 at 1:24 pm
“Hey, again, I repeat I want to see smaller gov’t too, I just wish someone had the gumption to say what that actually means”
Okay Mark, I mean you asked
What does smaller government mean to you and what does it mean?
I think he was asking you, Chris
Yeah, Holt gets me.
I’m wouldn’t argue over what smaller gov’t should look like, only that when someone says those words they should be forced to say upon pain of death, what smaller gov’t means to them.
For me it means not having 11+ agencies giving out grants to local arts and festivals with 11+ different application processes and 11+ different beaurocratic agencies evaluating those grant applications.
Give you a few examples I could apply for celebrate ontario, AGCO has a $10,0000 one, Federal Culture and Heritage, our local tourism board and on and on and on.
You need a full time grant writer and I’m sure there’s full time grant evaluators duplicating the same efforts.
But in Windsor, no one gives examples other than cutting arts and culture. I think much of the arts and cultural spending is important.
Fire and Police are not very discretionary
Social services are set by the province
What else we left with. Lets cut all consultant and legal fees out. How much is that lower our taxes?
Chris S, I think of it as calling myself a fanatical Agnositc.
You know what the difference is between a fanatical agnostic and a regular agnostic is???
An agnostic isn’t sure what he believes or what to believe is true
A fanatical agnostic figures not only is he isn’t sure, He’s DAMN SURE no one else knows either.
I”m not saying I have all the answers or that I’m that sure I’m right, I just have utter contempt for those who are so sure they do. Probably contributes to my aggressive behaviour in my responses to others.
Example, Maybe a canal could work, maybe it won’t. Maybe the probabilities are on the side that it won’t. However, if you implemented Dave’ Cook’s plan the fact is that it could work, I can’t be sure, but you can’t either.
Personally I think that if you follow the feasibility recommendations of what is required to happen in conjunction with a canal. The canal actually doesn’t even matter anymore. Do all the other stuff and placing an old shoe in the centre as a feature would probably also work.
The whole point of an aquarium is the association with the University’s Great Lakes Research group. IF an aquarium is built it would be a sham to include marine life that is not indigenous to the Great Lakes. Colourful fish, no. Dolphins, no. Sharks, there is one that could be argued to be included as part of a larger Great Lakes basin catchment, but not for the lakes themselves.
Based on that criteria then no, there should be no aquarium unless the University wants to foot the bill. Having said that, though, the city can, and should, provide incentives for the University to build it downtown. Through incentives the city can participate but not through direct investment of public monies.
I think a great lakes aquarium would be an awesome research facility that would draw students and researchers. However, I just don’t think they should try to sell it as a family and kids tourist attraction. Not after “Finding Nemo, Flipper and Free Willy”. The proof is in the asking of any 4-10 year old whether they wanna see a sturgeon over a shark.
On this point, you and I agree, Mark.
Actually Chris H., I didn’t raise the issue of smaller government and wanted Mark to give his definition of what he believes it to be, since he demanded the same from others and appreciate his response.
Is there a role for the public sector? Absolutely - in areas where the private sector cannot deliver on levels of performance, transparency and cost-effectiveness.
Mark nailed it on the head with respect to provincially mandated programs and a bloated bureaucracy tumbling over each other to perform the same tasks.
The SDR can be effective at pointing out these areas. What is done with this report is another issue entirely.
There is only so much a municipality can control - but where it does have control - it needs to do the best job possible and priorities need to be set, benchmarks established with persons being held accountable.
That is what smaller municipal government means to me on a municipal level.
With respect to the canal, I ask, please point out where I’ve stated it couldn’t work?
My two main criticisms have been complete lack of broad-based public input; and the financial realities that, to date, have not been addressed adequately which are far more than the business case outlines with the other required investments to make it work.
A significant difference from what Mark has defined it.
Stating because it worked in San Antonio or Bricktown equally does not mean it will work here. Nor does it mean it will not.
What I perceive Mark is missing, is the constant one-sided propaganda being produced in favour of project x; without discussion of the other side of the coin for a truly informed debate.
This can be achieved through public consultation.
I could be wrong, I could be right - but that is my perception.
Chris, didn’t mean to suggest that you stated you didn’t support the canal. That was meant to be a generic/general statement for anyone who said it.
Not only that, for a “sloppy poster” as myself, I do choose certain words carefully. I always say I support this or these are the arguments against that.
I try to stay away from statements like “This will be a failure”, “This is wrong” etc. etc.. (Again, I’m not talking about you, I’m talking in general)
I also think, that when I you read the feasibility study for the Canal, its the things that must be done in conjunction with a canal to make it succeed are the things that are actually more important than the canal or any other particular feature you put in that area such as a great lakes acquarium etc…
If we’re going to get into it, Why couldn’t the canal plan be implemented piece meal.
Would you agree on the transient component part of the canal project that featured a small ferry dock that could link up to the 7 million dollar U.S. cruiseliner dock in front of Cobo Hall?
The one main reasons I support any canal plan is because it contains that component within it
Oh and btw, on a great lakes acquarium. I believe that no sharks, no dolphins and no colorful fish equal no visitors other than students studying the lakes
An aquarium in Windsor is hogwash. If the Great Lakes aquarium on Belle Isle has a hard time remaining open (in a beautiful century old building) with over 100,000 visitors a year; which does have a connection to Michigan based Universities for studies then how would one work downtown?
I would rather a new library, archives and museum downtown than an aquarium anyday. They could be housed in 2 separate buildings and bring more people downtown because they cater to many more interests (similar to retail areas that offer unique, niche items ala Stratford).
Mark - the best idea in there (subject to trans-government approval) is the transient marina.
As you know, I’m a big fan of Pier 39 in San Francisco. I spent hours there catching the sights and sounds; sampling the various foods or watching the sea lions on the docks. And then spent 3 hours in prison taking the ferry to Alcatraz. THAT was fun!
As I wrote a number of years ago, something along those lines, driven by the private sector, (but on a much smaller scale for Windsor) would be a great addition to the downtown, in my opinion.
The marina component could be the foundation for even better things. The canal - I’ve been consistent - is the icing on the cake, not the cake itself.
re: the Aquarium
Just visit the University of Windsor website and search for information on it. As an employee, I can’t really address the concept, other than to state it is to be a research facility; not a tourist attraction.