It is a crazy world, when somehow an organization like Goodwill – that is noted for funding non-profit thrift stores for low-income people, based on donations – can become the bad guy in a local land use dispute, but that is precisely what appears to have happened.
And that is exactly what has happened as the public laundromat, The Wash Mill, located in the Davis Manor center, in a neighborhood that serves working class families and students, is being forced to move from a location where they have resided for forty years. They have been forced to do so by the landlord at the behest of Goodwill, so that Goodwill can move into an adjacent store and expand.
The loss of The Wash Mill leaves Davis with only one public coin-operated laundry facility, The Laundry Lounge. An excellent facility, but one that is a good deal of distance away.
Writes local resident Meg Sloss, in an op-ed in the local paper, “I don’t believe selfishness and greed are intrinsic to human behavior, but rather a distortion of the human spirit brought about by our environment of materialism. That being said, I am saddened and angry about the loss of the Wash Mill, which has been pushed out of tenancy at the Davis Manor Shopping Center to make room for the Goodwill.”
She goes on to argue: “Even though the laundromat occupied a mere one-eighth of the total space required by the Goodwill, the company still felt the need for its space.”
Stunningly, this has become a story about callous indifference, as well. The president of the property management company, Mark Bitterlin, told the Bee that the closure was “not my problem.”
As Ms. Sloss describes, “The landlord of the Manor (sounds positively medieval doesn’t it?) complied with the needs of Goodwill by booting out a 40-year-old business.”
She adds, “It’s hard to imagine the landlord of the Manor can turn his back on a business owner who has provided so vital a service to the community for such a long time – 40 years! Essentially, this new agreement can put her out of business.”
We have had a long debate here on the Vanguard about what the impact of this move will be.
Meg Sloss describes: “This move leaves some Wash Mill customers walking 12 blocks to the next, and only other, laundromat in town. It’s hard to imagine that the big ol’ Goodwill didn’t notice a humble laundromat with humble people cleaning their humble clothes. And they want to sell more used clothes by taking away some people’s only means of washing them?”
She concludes: “Shame on you to the landlord of the Manor and the CEOs of the Goodwill. They both have given into greed and selfishness at the expense of their customers and another business owner. Don’t they realize they owe their wealth to their customers? Does this all sound way too familiar?”
A follow-up letter noted, “The Wash Mill served the nearby community at Eighth Street and Pole Line Road, who live in a densely populated neighborhood and may or may not have much in the way of amenities since the structures are older construction.”
“I consider laundry facilities a basic service,” Lynne Cunningham writes.
She adds, “It seems this move, by the corporate decision-makers of Goodwill Industries, the landowner/landlord of Davis Manor center and city Community Development decision-makers allowing the expansion of a retailer, Goodwill (and thereby the closing of the laundromat), to impact the laundry users in a big way. This downgrades the quality of life for the patrons who need the laundromat.”
Ms. Cunningham writes, “I would ask anyone who doesn’t think this matters to stand with bags of the week’s laundry, at an unsheltered bus stop in winter weather, or walk on foot to the only laundromat now open, with a couple of children or other family members in tow.”
She concludes, “Davis is a good community based on good walkability and livability in its design. However, the result of these decisions is a large ding – a big negative – for the community that has depended on an open, accessible, well-maintained, reasonable-cost laundromat for their basic services.”
What I do not believe some people really understand is that there is no replacement for these laundry services for people who live in the area, who lack a reliable vehicle, and lack the ability to afford the pick-up service.
The Laundry Lounge is an excellent facility, but for people without cars, it, too, presents a problem.
They offer a pick-up service which is good and convenient. The problem is that, to do that, you are no longer just paying for the cost of the wash, you are paying for their service, which adds up quickly, at a given price per pound of laundry. For a typical family, a trip to the laundromat could cost $75 to $100, as opposed to $20 or $40 for just the cost of the machines.
As the owner of The Wash Mill, Sharon Miller, explained, “The older homes don’t have washers and dryers, and there are apartment (buildings) with only one washer and dryer… There are a lot of people who work swing shifts. People come in from West Sacramento. They say, ‘You’re the only place that’s open 24 hours.’ “
The question is, what can the council do about this? In my opinion, the city needs to have more say about what vital services need to be offered in neighborhood shopping centers. The Davis Manor facility has been run very poorly for a number of years and, while the ownership seems to have stepped up to fill its stores, it has done so at the expense of providing a critical service to a community.
Rather than mandate that shopping centers provide things like laundry services, it seems to me that the owners that ought to be compelled to provide such are apartment buildings.
One thing the city can look at is whether their requirements for apartments is sufficient. Clearly, the current buildings do not provide sufficient or reliable services.
The other thing the city can look into is grant money to assist apartment owners to increase the number and quality of the laundry facilities they offer to tenants of existing complexes.
Those are two things the council can do immediately, and it is well within their authority.
This is an issue likely to greatly impact a huge segment of the population. Those who dismiss it are not able to put themselves into the shoes of those less fortunate.
But I am still at a quandary as to what Goodwill is thinking here. Have they really grown so large that they do not care, that they have lost sight of what was once a worthy mission?
—David M. Greenwald reporting
Thank You, David for continuing to keep this issue in the spotlight. I suggest that the extended community using the Wash Mill* meet at Council Chambers at 06:30 PM on Tuesday night, January 15th (the next Regularly Scheduled City Council Meeting) to express their concerns directly to the City Council. At the beginning of a scheduled meeting, the Council provides the public with an opportunity to bring up items not on the current agenda for future consideration. Forewarned is forearmed!
_________
* Regular and occasional users such as me and my wife who use the laundromat to wash and dry large items such as sleeping bags, bed spreads, and comforters, etc.
We can talk ’til we are blue in the face but it’s Goodwill and the landlord who can make this right. I hope they at least realize what is happening, that there is an issue. One that can affect the community’s feeling toward them and that they don’t put it past Davis to boycott them when we already have other good places such as SPCA and R&R to give and get out reusables. They can just take the plenty large available space and leave the laundromat in in place. It’s that simple
“We can talk ’til we are blue in the face but it’s Goodwill and the landlord who can make this right”
That is correct, but Goodwill survives on people’s charity and if their good name is wounded, then they have a problem. In my view, they are the pressure point that can be leveraged.
It certainly is the landlord’s problem! Ironically, there’s a concept in business called “good will,” and the landlord is in the process of squandering his.
Maybe I’m not as easily confused by the difference between goodwill and free will. How did Goodwill force the landlord do anything? And how did an owner who has had a month to month contract for 40 years never come up with a contingency plan?
I too feel it is landlord’s problem. The people have to consider this as their fault and so if any complaints are to be made, it should be against landlord.
Anti aging products
Mr. Obvious, I don’t know if this is the case, but Goodwill may have said we need all the space or we won’t take any. I’ve seen this happen before but I must be in a generous mood so I won’t mention any names. Of course the landlord wants to lease it so he goes for the current plan. As for a contingency plan, there is an awful lot of plumbing and the like to open a laundromat. I also don’t know if it has been month to month for the whole 40 years, but still I see why there may not be a plan for moving.
dlemongello, I accept that fact that you don’t know much the topic before posting.
Even if Goodwill made the demand there was nothing forcing the landlord to make the change. Let’s not escape the fact that good will could force nothing in this situation. Even of the laundromat hasn’t been in a month to month for 40 years it is a bad business model to have no contingency plan. I have a family member who has five years left on a lease in their currently leased business/property. They have a contingency plan if the owner loses the business.
“Even if Goodwill made the demand there was nothing forcing the landlord to make the change.”
You are correct, nothing is forcing the landlord to make the change and therefore they have blame in this. However, Goodwill clearly pressured the landlord who was faced with the prospect of not being able to fill the R&R space unless they acquiesced to the demands of Goodwill, therefore Goodwill has to shoulder a lot of blame here.
Why does Goodwill need the Wash Mill space in addition to the already huge showroom/backroom spaces left behind by R & R Consignment and All Things Right and Relevant? Those are already huge spaces. And Davis isn’t all that big of a thrift store market anyway–the only thrift stores left are ATR&R (in its new upscale boutique location) and ASPCA. Could Goodwill be over-reaching here? The demographics have changed a lot since the ’90s when there were four or five thrift stores in town.
It has become the way businesses plan and grow, they create a model and try and adhere to it, even if it might better be tweaked for unanticipated reasons.
What seems obvious is that laundromats also create customers. What does one do while they wait 45 minutes for the dryer? They shop.
Having an active laundromat is good for all of the businesses there, including the future tenant Goodwill. Perhaps contacting those businesses might be a good avenue to pursue to try and reverse this decision. If they are willing to make a statement.