Smith's is dragging its feet

-A A +A

In a recent Los Alamos Monitor story on the status of the Trinity Site development, referring to people’s comments on what they would like to see in the development, George Chandler of the Trinity Site Revitalization Committee is quoted as saying, “They always like to say Walmart. But Walmart will always say that they’re interested, because they like to tie up a piece of land and just sit on it.”  
Just sitting on land sounds terrible! However, Smith’s, not Walmart, is the company that has been dragging their feet for years, first with Boyer and now with NADG.
It should be clear that Smith’s goal is to make sure that they continue to enjoy a monopoly in Los Alamos and will do what it takes to meet that goal.  Smith’s owns MeriMac so they have plenty of land to build a new, larger store if that is their objective.
Walmart became the world’s largest retail corporation by building stores in most towns and cities in the US, not by sitting on land as claimed by Chandler.
The only reason they ever “sit” on land is when Walmart opponents put all kinds of obstacles in their way (the new store in Santa Fe being a good example).  
As also reported in the same Los Alamos Monitor story, during their discussion council suggested “petitions and a letter writing campaign by local residents to urge Smith’s to commit.”
This struck me as particularly ironic since there have been several recent petitions (e.g., the placement of the new municipal building, voting on capital projects, removing roundabouts on the proposed Trinity Drive “improvement”) that the council has ignored.  
Now the council thinks petitions are a good idea?  
If so, please check out some of the recent petitions that have been submitted.

R. Wayne Hardie
Los Alamos


Smiths not the problem

I guess my previous was "deleted," so I try again.

Retail in and of itself is not the issue of money leaving hill. The cost to rent retail space in LA is controlled by the govt in that their presense in the townsite elevates the rents so that regular business cannot thrive or even exist in LA. Move the lab back across the bridge, zone the downtown retail or mixed, but NO GOVT CONTRACTORS or contracts, and you will see many business come back to town. Coupled with the rent issue is the fact that the schools are on open enrollment, so anyone who wants to drive their kids to LA can put them in our schools. This is on the backs of the property owners in town. If this were to change, then you would see middle class coming to town, buying property, renting apartments just to use the school system. There's not incentive now. Why would anyone who makes a modest living ever want to live in LA when they can live in the valley and commute their kids. Anyway, Smiths is not the problem, its the county council and the land owners (downtown that is). There is no real middle class in town and there never will be with things they way the are now. Thanks Russ Gordon for any sense of normalcy in town. Without the summer concert series, LA would really be nothing more than a m-f 8-5 suburb of Sfe full of banks and gas stations.


NO MORE SMITH'S, I do not think the community can make this any clearer, why is no one listening. If we can have a Walmart, we NEED that! It would increase GRT! My family spends at least 80% of our money off the HIll. Time for that money to be spent here.