Murphy Residents,

It has come to my attention that an email regarding the approval of Walmart has been circulating around town.  This email contains the following statement:

I intend to file a referendum with the City to reverse that modification to make it go back to multiple junior anchor stores, then Wal-Mart cannot build because the land won\'t be appropriate for their use.  The City avoids a lawsuit from both the land owner and Wal-Mart, and residents get what the popular vote wants.  I think this was what City Council was trying to lead me to do without saying specifically how to do it.  They had no choice but to follow the rules of the approval process or face discrimination lawsuits.

The statement that Council wants someone to lead an effort in support of a referendum is not accurate.  The Council as a body did not communicate, and has never deliberated or made any statement regarding a referendum. Furthermore, it is my opinion that the Council did not approve Walmart because we had no other choice or were afraid of a lawsuit.  We voted to approve Walmart because after carefully weighing the pros and cons (and there clearly are both), we felt that it was the best course of action for the city.

What are the positives of a Walmart coming to Murphy?  The easy answer is it generates a lot of sales tax revenue.  Murphy is overly dependent on property taxes.  The plan has always been for sales tax revenues to grow and take the place of building permit revenue.  Unfortunately, economic development has been stagnant and build-out (when we get no more revenue from building permits) is not too far away.  Walmart will go a long way toward helping us diversify our tax base and enable us to keep property taxes low.  This is essential to maintaining a vibrant community.

For me, an even more important benefit is the extra business it will generate for our existing businesses throughout the city.  This will help them succeed and become profitable.  It will also help attract new businesses.  The anticipated traffic that Walmart will generate has already led to increased interest in properties throughout the city.  This will help the Marketplace fill out and become a more healthy and sustainable development.  It will help us attract the shops and restaurants we have all been seeking.  I think the increased traffic will also force TxDOT to work with us to address the traffic problems we already face.

If we had denied Walmart, I personally believe they would have looked to build on the other side of Target inWylie.  If that were to happen, we could say goodbye to economic development in Murphy.  All of the energy and synergy would be headed out of town, including the shops and restaurants we want.  Traffic would still increase and we would get no benefits.

Walmart has a lot of detractors and I don’t support all of their business practices, but many of those same complaints could be made toward other businesses in Murphy, too.  Walmart is already a member of the Murphy business community, and my interaction with them has been nothing but positive.  They give generously to support our public service departments and community events.  Allowing them to move across the street and sell more items that you cannot currently buy in Murphy is a good thing, in my opinion.

Finally, we were able to get Walmart to agree to build to a very high level of architecture, landscaping, and building standards (higher than Murphy Marketplace).  It will be all brick and stone with large glass foyers inspired by our City Hall complex.  This was a crucial step in carrying our desired building standards throughout the city.  The prior landowner has always refused to build to those standards.  He rightly pointed out that this property is situated between a storage unit, railroad track, Sonic Drive In and Walgreens (with very low architectural standards).  I don’t think we could persuade anyone else to make the significant and costly upgrades Walmart has agreed to make.

I could go on, but I think I have made my point.  In the end, this was not an easy decision for council to make, and it only came after careful consideration of all the pertinent information, including the input of both the proponents and opponents of Walmart.  I recognize that there are strong feelings against Walmart and that is understandable, but I firmly believe that allowing them to move their business across the street and expand their offerings was the right decision to make.  Given that it was a unanimous decision of council, we all apparently came to the same conclusion.

The matter of a referendum is also concerning, as it could lead to costly litigation involving the city.  The City of Canyon, Texas went through a similar event in which a referendum was used to challenge a zoning ordinance.  After deliberating the issue, the Court of Appeals ruled that a referendum could not be used to challenge zoning on a specific piece of property.   If that is the case, the city may not be able to accept a referendum except through litigation.  Based on our experience with other law suits, it would take years to go through this process and come at a great financial cost to the city.

Sorry to be so long-winded, but this is an important matter.  If you know of residents who would not be aware of this situation, could you please forward this email to them.  I want to make sure we are all making informed decisions and no one signs a petition under the guise that City Council is encouraging this action.

Thank you,
Mayor Baldwin

In response to the letter from Mayor Baldwin, Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem Colleen Halbert sends out a qualifying statement:

All,

This was a letter solely from the Mayor and not a communication from any other member of Council. We deliberated at the meeting and each based our vote on our own understanding of the facts and input. I encourage you to contact each Councilmember individually rather than take this as a City Council communication.

Sincerely,

Colleen Halbert
Deputy Mayor Pro-Tem