A few days ago, in my post about the Shadow Art Fair, I took the opportunity to go off on a tangent about how I’d like to have us, the citizens of Ypsilanti, look into the passage of legislation that would keep chain stores and franchises out of our historic downtown. I wasn’t clear on the specifics as to how something like this might be accomplished, and didn’t offer any illustrative examples of other communities where such things have been attempted in the past. Basically, I just shot my mouth off, and then quickly moved on to something else.

At the very least, I should have done a bit of research into other towns where such things have been put to a vote, and how property owners responded. I should have also called around to see whether or not something like what I’m suggesting is even feasible under Michigan law. (Doing that, however, would have kept me away from my important research on things like the proper application of Presidential back rubs and the proper training regimen for
European masturbate-a-thons.) So, as I do too often, I just kind of tossed the idea out there like it was something that could easily be done, and then walked away, without acknowledging the complexity, or the other points of view. Fortunately, a few readers of this site were not so lame. One of the more interesting responses was this one from a man that I will call Mr. X. Here, with his approval, is the relevant part of his letter.

The whole anti-chain thing is a risky position to take. I grew up near Ligonier, PA. It’s a small, very affluent / Republican town just outside of Pittsburgh. A lot of Pittsburgh executives come there to retire. The most dominant family is the Mellon family of Mellon Bank and Carnegie Mellon University fame. The patriarch at the moment is Richard Mellon Scaife. He’s the publisher of the Pittsburgh Tribune-Review. You may remember him as President Clinton’s number one enemy. He bankrolled the whole notion that when Clinton was governor of Arkansas, Little Rock was port for most of the drugs into the US.

Ligonier has a similar policy on chains as you are suggesting. There has always been a Dairy Queen there, but it’s beautiful as compared to a traditional DQ Brazier and went more by the name “The Gay 90s” than it did Dairy Queen. In 1988, there was a big scandal when a Subway was allowed to move in to the outskirts of the business district. (It was probably as far from the downtown as Harriet Street is from Michigan Avenue.) There are no McDonalds or other franchises in town. It’s a bustling downtown, but probably too antique-y for your tastes. Regardless, it’s indie in Ligonier.

The idea behind their ban on franchises was not to keep the downtown independent as much as it was snobbery. I know that’s not the position you’re taking, but in a town with a reputation of having a City government that hard on businesses, I’m not sure putting even more restrictions on growth is such a good idea.

I keep hearing how everyone wants to keep Starbucks off of Michigan Avenue. Starbucks isn’t coming to Ypsi. While I appreciate the concern, I believe in order for any idea to work there has to be a business case backed with solid numbers. At the moment, we don’t have enough business for Starbucks to be interested, but more importantly, we don’t have a space big enough to house them. For someone like Starbucks to invest more than $1M in our downtown, they are going to need a large space. The only two spaces I can think of are the first floor of the Kresge building or Dalat (the old Smith Furniture building is for sale for $1.5M and the ground floor of BW3 is across the street from a strip club — probably not the image Starbucks likes to project). The Kresge building is becoming a restaurant. Dalat is still there for now, but was for sale for around $1.1M. Can you imagine the money they’d have to dump into that place in order to get the aluminum siding off? Starbucks stores are very homogenized and all have pretty much the same look. They aren’t going to set up shop in a place that looks like Dalat currently does.

If anyone disagrees with my analysis, I’d love to see a list of sites that could house a Starbucks. For the math to work, the space has to be big too. I’d prefer to leave potential sites in the Water Street development out of this for the moment. While I agree that could be the eventual location for a Starbucks, the business case for Water Street doesn’t exist yet either and suggesting that for a potential site is premature at best.

Look at Sandee and Bill French. They have Aubrees and Cady’s in Depot Town. They also have an Aubree’s Pizza in Ypsi Township, one in Ann Arbor, and one in Traverse City. I would definitely consider them local and independent. If they weren’t located here, how would you feel about them wanting to open a branch in Ypsi? Maybe the better example would have been La Shish. When does a successful independent business become chain-like? Would the community have welcomed a La Shish to downtown?

Quiznos became the whipping-boy for franchises in Ypsilanti yet we have a McDonalds, a KFC, a Subway, a Taco Bell, two Dairy Queens, an Ace Hardware, a handful of pizza joints, a NAPA auto parts, a Sherwin-Williams, THREE national income tax businesses, a cell phone store, a prominent gentlemen’s club, and at least half a dozen gas stations. Did anyone boycott the Frenchs for renting space to Quiznos? I sure didn’t hold it against them.

Again, I’m with you on the whole no franchises thing, but legislating it at this point may do more harm to Ypsilanti’s reputation than good. (I can see where it will be a good idea in the future though.) I don’t know if you heard the story but when Liquid Swordz were trying to move their tattoo parlor from Perrin to N Washington, they had to go before the Planning Commission to make their case. I went to that meeting and spoke on their behalf trying to make the case they would fit in with other businesses in the area and tattoos fit into the “Cool Cities” genre more than anything else this City was backing. The most startling thing of that whole meeting was the Mayor spoke against them moving. She didn’t say they shouldn’t be allowed to move there, but she asked the Planning Commission to consider whether or not a tattoo parlor there was in the best interests of the community.

Can you imagine that? The figurehead of our City government speaking out AGAINST local businesses. It was frustrating for me — someone sans tattoos. Can you imagine how demoralizing that must be for someone wanting to open a business here? The minutes of that meeting can be found here.

Her official comment was “It is for retail — it is a land use issue. Would a tattoo establishment on N. Washington Street add or detract from the vibrant retail mix that we are hoping to put together — that would be the question.”

I’m not trying to change your opinion on franchises. Again, I’m not in favor of them, but I’m not sure it’s prudent to come out against any type of business at a time when we are trying to overcome our reputation as a city of being hard on businesses.

I respect Mr. X’s opinion and I understand why it is that he’s torn on the issue. I am too, to some extent. I know where he’s coming from when he says that we’re not really in any position to turn away business, especially as new businesses would most likely be coming in and rehabbing long-vacant buildings. I get that. I also get that they might create a few new jobs, maybe even ones that pay slightly over the minimum wage and offer benefits (after a few years of service).

I was just suggesting that the short-term benefit may not be in our best interest in the long-term. Ann Arbor, Plymouth and any number of other local town centers in our area are losing their individual character at a rapid pace, and I don’t want to see it happen here. Maybe I’m not the norm, but I’d much rather get a cup of coffee at the Ugly Mug (even though they don’t seem too happy to have my business for some reason) than at Starbuck’s. And, while we’re on the subject of Starbuck’s, I disagree with Mr. X when he says that it’ll never happen here. It will. Starbucks needs to grow to survive and they’ll find a way into Ypsi.

And this wasn’t the only comment on the subject. A note was also left by Lisa from the group Think Local First. She had this to say:

In regards to keeping Ypsi chain/franchise free, a variety of localities have passed formula business ordinances (including a neighborhood in San Francisco), which either ban or require neighborhood approval to locate a ‘formula’ business. I’m not sure how it would work with the laws in Michigan – a few people have mentioned that this might be more difficult in Michigan than elsewhere. I never looked into it because when I first mentioned the idea in Ann Arbor it wasn’t warmly received. However, it might be worth a discussion in Ypsilanti. If you’re interested I have all sorts of information about this and other options for encouraging local ownership of businesses.

So, maybe it’s a dumb idea. Maybe we don’t need to erect any more roadblocks to job creation right now. I just think that we should have an open, honest discussion about it now, and go into this with our eyes open. If we don’t discuss it now, after all, it’s not like we’ll get another chance later on.

Oh, and a third comment came in as well. Steve Cherry wrote in to suggest that if we don’t like franchises, we just shouldn’t shop at them. He’s right to some extent. It worked in the case of Quizno’s. I just don’t share his faith that the people driving through our town on Michigan Avenue will share our sensibilities. Once a Starbuck’s-shaped tumor forms there, it’s staying.