More on the Wal-Mart battle

You can read the initial reports from yesterday regarding the potential Wal-Mart vote by Ald. Ed Burke's Finance Committee which was postponed. Starting with Crain's:

Legislation that could pave the way for a second Wal-Mart store within Chicago has been stalled once again.

The city’s Finance Committee, led by Ald. Edward M. Burke (14th), on Monday also postponed considering a revived “living wage” ordinance that would require retailers that receive city subsidies — directly and indirectly — and employ more than 50 people to pay workers at least $11.03 an hour.

It’s a broader-based measure than the “big-box ordinance” that stirred up controversy more than three years ago and prompted Mayor Richard M. Daley to issue his first veto since he was elected in 1989.

But the Finance Committee postponed a vote on the measure until Wednesday, before the full Chicago City Council meets.

More from the Sun-Times:

The living wage would not have applied to the proposed Chatham Supercenter because that redevelopment agreement has already been executed.

But, it would have applied to four other Supercenters in the works in the 9th, 12th, 20th and 34th Wards in the heart of Chicago’s “food desert” as well as to every other business that gets city help from now on.

Burke was so certain he had a deal, he put the Chatham Wal-Mart and living wage ordinance on Monday’s Finance Committee agenda. But, frenzied negotiations in the anteroom behind the City Council chambers failed to produce an agreement, prompting the powerful chairman to postpone a vote.

“We share the same concerns of many businesses across Chicago -- that this policy is the wrong direction for a city that desperately needs jobs and economic growth,” said B. John Bisio, a Wal-Mart spokesman. “This ordinance does not address the needs of the people of Chicago who want jobs and access to fresh and affordable food. It is being considered at the expense of Chicago's working families, not on their behalf.

“This is a job-killer. I’m stunned that anyone would even consider something like this when we have over a 10 percent unemployment rate,” said David Vite, president of Illinois Retail Merchants Association.

Then we finish up with the Tribune:

But in the end, aldermen, retailers and unions could not agree, and the long-standing impasse remained.

"We'll let them digest this and chew on it a little bit and see if we can come to some kind of agreement," Burke said after setting the proposal aside at a meeting of the Finance Committee.

Burke said the measure -- which would apply only to companies with 50 or more employees who benefit from a city subsidy -- would satisfy labor leaders who have opposed more Wal-Mart stores in Chicago.

Burke, who has made it clear he sides with the unions on the issue, said he also hoped it would respond to concerns by Wal-Mart, which opposed a living-wage ordinance that Mayor Richard Daley vetoed in 2006. That ordinance singled out "big box" stores with 100,000 or more square feet of space.

In return for the new wage proposal, supporting aldermen were willing to give a final sign-off for a South Side Wal-Mart. Because that development was approved some time ago, the new living-wage ordinance would not have applied. Wal-Mart has a store on the West Side.

Hopefully there will be more news on Wednesday.

Let's go back into the past for a second. ABC7 has a video report on the study that claims taht Wal-Mart isn't a job generator