You just like that water cuz of the star.

I have always felt the wfc was more of a health food store then a true co-op. Sure you can buy into it, but prices are steep. Co-ops where originally intended to help mitigate costs for those who needed help. I don’t quite get that vibe here.

As far as surveillance, in my experience shops that have this much surveillance worry a lot about their workers stealing, which must make more a great working environment.

I like the increased selection, (oddly they seemed to have dropped carrying Braggs Liquid amino tho) but dunno if I'll shop there more then I have.

the veggitarians i know all shop there exclusively. they are so very careful about what they eat. & then they go outside for a smoke every 25 minutes of their life.
sort of the metaphore i'm looking for here as to what the "co-op" means to me.
sort of like," drove down to earthday..."

I tend to agree with edgewood on his assesment of the new place for the most part. I'm one of the many who are members, but the few who can actually afford to shop there exclusively and pay his rent every month.

I generally purchase my dairy, grains and bulks there, as well as as spices...unless i pick up a box of edensoy or a chocolate bar on sale, Their spice selection simply can't be outdone, so far as I know.

I like the look of the new store. It's in a great location; it's open, airy and well thought out in terms of layout and design (IMHO, of course). They're selling Alakef coffee faster than we can roast the stuff, so SOMEthing's working...

HATE IT. I will confess, that I was put off from the get go by the new location. The old store was just a few blocks from my house. I would walk back and forth on a weekly basis... now... I know that I might walk there twice a summer. Am I that lazy? Perhaps. But that falls in line with newly expanded deli... no longer do I have to even think about making a meal... I can go to the "better fast-food"...

What else? The outside looks cool... too bad the inside looks cold and sterile... and the employee to buyer ratio... oh my... does it make you feel like you are waiting in line for medical service at SMDC?

The co-op has lost its warm and cozy feeling. But we can now drive a car down the isle, or eat a snack while you overlook the trash trown into Brewers Creek.

I've shopped at the new store once so far. I think the layout is OK, seems like a bigger selection, and the location - while a few blocks farther away for us, is still pretty convenient.
My biggest complaint with the old store - and this already happened the one time we shopped at the new one - is they would run out of basic things. Pretty often. So we have to go somewhere else just to make dinner. It got to the point that we would assume we'd have to go somewhere else besides the coop for some produce or something, so we'd just go somewhere like Jubilee or Cub where we knew we could get everything we needed.

I really wish we could do more of our shopping at the co-op, but we just can't afford all organic produce, cheese, etc.

Somewhat unrelated, I think the new store will be good for that intersection. Daugherty's is a great hardware store, even if it's in a weird, totally unfriendly building, and it's a neighborhood with a lot of potential.

My thoughts:

1.3 pounds of deli chicken pasta salad costs $8.

Since they moved, the price of almost every product I usually buy has increased 10-20%.

Good nutrition and quality food should be available to everbody, not just those who can afford it.

It's a co-op in name only.

I still shop there...when I can afford to.

The cameras are creepy, so I make funny faces at them.

Do we have to pay extra to see video of our favorite friends shopping??

How much! I gots my entire family (and, potentially... Hollywood) pre-Christmas sold on an entire first season of "Starfire & Guests Meet Slim Goodbuzz to Shop for Herbs". We're still in contracts, but--shiiiiit; video cameras?! Six words:

MTV Real World: Whole Food's Duluth.

IMHO

Nice GIF, by the way, Starfire.

HATED IT!

I have a chip on my shoulder generally when it comes to fake-ass co-ops, but this one really takes the gluten-free cake. I noticed, as Starfire did, the ridiculous overabundance of surveilance cameras as soon as I breezeed through the store (old habits die hard). And Barrett's suggestion is right on, this about employee loss prevention, not about stopping bourgeois baby-boomers from lifting a $6 fair-trade chocolate bar. And, yeah, the prices are just outlandish.

I wasn't a fan of CW Chips, and this intersection certainly ain't the most beautiful in town, but I'm just not into it. It feels kind of like some creepy trustafarian that rocks sandals and a t-shirt and named his dog Denali, but is always talking about "free-enterprise" and "those lazy-ass poor people", has moved into my neighborhood. And now all his baby-boomer friends all wanna come over and eat fresh foods and fine fruits. Well, fuck 'em.

I'm very poor. I can't afford to shop at this "co-op"; ever. I can't afford to ensure that I'm not ingesting various pesticides and fertilizers. I can't afford a two dollar cookie. So maybe, you might argue, I'm just bitter. Well, yeah. Isn't this what East Duluth is for. I mean, isn't the whole point in having the rich people live up the hill and to the East to ensure that when thay drop change on the street it rolls towards us poor people? I'm pretty sure it is. (oh! look a quarter![he smiles])

I also can't afford a phone, so I do a lot of talking on the nearest pay-phone, at Last Chance Liquors. It's kind of my office. So if you wealthy, well-fed, bourgeois, conscious consumers drive by on your way in to pick up some over-priced produce, and you notice a large man on the liqour store pay-phone waving his fist, throw me god damn thunder cookie for christ's sake!

Burly: if you need to make a call, don't ever feel bad about using the tele inside LCL.

On the CO-OP: it was probably necessary to raise prices due to the steep cost of thier new digs. I'm not sure what the profit margin for grocery stores is, but I've talked to a couple people who've assured me that it isn't much. Considering that, it's going to take WFC quite some time to pay off that shiny new building. It is quite disturbing, however, when an employee comes to buy $2.99 wine across the street and tells me that even he can't afford to shop there (especially with the ethos WFC tries to purvey). That said, I think the WFC has a very good idea of the market they'd like to tap with this new store. If you spend any amount of time watching their parking lot, as I do, daydreaming of a better life from across the cigarette butt littered street, you'll notice an abundance of very expensive luxury SUVs, Audis and Volkswagons.

As for the the camers, let's just say that the corner of 4th and 6th Avenue isn't the most well behaved neighborhood in Duluth. And no one driving a Volkswagon station wagon with leather heated seats should be made to feel uncomfortable or unsafe--EVER!

I like the new store and the larger inventory,I like the fact it was built using green construction.

I also like the fact that they pay their workers a decent wage.I make a decent wage myself but can not afford to buy all my groceries there.however I don’t blame the store for that.

Organic food is obviously better for you as It contains more vitamins, minerals, enzymes and taste than chemically farmed produce. It is free from insecticides, pesticides, growth hormones, antibiotics, fertilizers and artificial additives so it contains less added chemicals, why does it cost more? The main reason that intensively farmed foods are cheaper to buy in the shops is that you are paying for them in your taxes. Agro-chemical agriculture is heavily subsidized by the taxpayer through the government, whereas organic farming receives no subsidies at all. The second major reason is it cost more in terms of yield per acre.natural gown produce uses no pesticides so a percentage is lost to insects and disease,this loss must be calculated into the price so the organic producers can earn a living.if the organic crop is grown in another county organic marketing organizations insist a fair trade price is paid to the farmers.Then lastly the demand is not as great for organically grown and/or produced food.

I used to see products in stores that were labeled less salt and/or less sugar and wonder why they wee more costly.then I found out its because the company must use a better product as they could not hide the true flavor with salt or sugar.

All the cameras don’t bother me as I don’t shop lift……and we are kind of exhibitionist anyway

which makes it a fine health food store. The Co-op in Ashland (when I lived there) had a buy in of $15 a year for %5 discount then you could volunteer larbor for up to %20 discount, even before all of that is was not as expensive as the WFC. The idea is that through group action the cost is lower/affordable

I'd like to point out that I didn't make the intelligent comment about the cameras being for employee loss prevention; Edgewood did. I don't make intelligent comments, only smart remarks.

I do have to say, however, that everyone's raving about the location and I think the location is really inconvenient. That was already too busy of an intersection, and now with all the SUVs and Volkswagons and frantic soccer moms trying to feed their kids the good foods like Oprah says they should, it's insane. It's only a matter of time before someone gets maimed.

I'm still pissed they bulldozed the HOD to put that place in. Neverminding that the whole foods 'organic' market is the fastest growing and most profitable way to make money selling food.

HOD was bulldozed by MCCU, not the WFC.

i buy all my food at k-mart so i don't give a fuck.

Cameras were installed at the old store immediately after it was robbed at gunpoint. I work there and I like them for that reason - they are there to discourage armed robbery.

As for prices, as organic farmer John Fisher-Merritt told me once, "If your food is cheap, somebody is getting ripped off." No one says you have to spend all your money there. But it represents an honest economy, not a subsidized one, and not one that will have to cleaned up in the future. And it's member owned. Blame 5000 locals, because they're the owners.

Anyway the transistion has been exhausting and difficult. File under best laid plans.

Hey Professor.

Does someone sit in a room and watch all those cameras or are the recordings used for followup if an incident happens?

I would love the job of watching if that ever came open.

i don't really know where there's cheap food anywhere. but i sure know where you can get some really expensive shit.

Things I like about the new co-op...

1) wide aisles
2) corugated metal
3) wifi
4) deli table
5) expanded selection
6) parking-o-rama
7) seating area with a lake view
8) 5 check out lanes
9) right next to the MCCU

I'll take it.

"Organic food is obviously better for you..."

I agree with laffingeyes and working at a restaurant that strives to sell as much organic, free trade, worker friendly food as is economically possible, I understand the high price of being kind to ourselves and our planet. But to call it a co-op? Like edgewood, I belonged to a co-op in Wisconsin (Sevens Point) where a membership ( at a significantly lower due rate than WFC) meant, in addition to a vote, a substantial savings on the cost of groceries (notice I say groceries and not a small selection of specialty food items unavailable elsewhere). The result, a higher percentage of the local community are co-op members giving a voting base that more fairly represents the wants and needs of the entire community. When my wife and I first move to a new town (there have been several) one of the first things we do after getting the utilities hooked up and finding a local to while away Monday nights over a few pints is to check out the local co-op and get a membership. When we walked into WFC and said -you want how much?- and -we get what % price break?-...
i don't think so.
Did you know that WFC is the only major retail food sales establishment in Duluth that does not support the presence of UFCW Local #1116? Cub foods has many of the same organic and fair trade products as the co-op at a lower price AND they hire union labor. Think on that.

Having said all that, I like the redux on the building and I think it really does spruce up a corner that much needed it. If it can bring more business to the hardware store that is closest to my house, that's great.

(ka-chunk, whoosh, thump)
That's the sound of me getting off my high horse. Sorry, but that's been something that's been festering for a few years and chose now to come out.

"Cameras were installed at the old store immediately after it was robbed at gunpoint. I work there and I like them for that reason - they are there to discourage armed robbery."

I worked at the co-op when this happened; at the time, there was -zero- security. We were all a little idealistic about getting robbed.

I also worked there when someone (probably an ex-employee who never returned his backdoor key) walked in on the Saturday before Memorial Day and walked out with the store safe. Ironically, the week before I realized that it wasn't bolted down and mentioned it to the managers, who said: "But they wouldn't be able to get INTO it ..."

Let's see: 10 hours of hack-sawing, around $3000 ... that's a pretty good hourly wage.

The crime was never solved.

I was going to mention the Union labor at the rest of the grocery stores in town, thanks for pointing that out B Cookie. Who are we worried about getting a fair wage? Our neighbors or the guy in Mexico?

The definition of a co-op is that it follow the seven cooperative principles, not that it guarantee you cheap food or address every item on your progressive wish list. And hey - it ain't like I got no bitches about the coop. I am sick and tired of this and that, believe me. But attacking the soft underbelly of the coop seems a little too easy, since the coop is demonstrably not The Man, who you SHOULD be bitching about/fighting/boycotting. We can play pin-the-tail-on-the-hypocrite all day long, but its much more interesting to me to play it with huge mofo corporations who don't give a shit about the environment or their workers. Someday the workers here might organize, who knows? But maybe everyone's too distracted by the big fat paychecks they're bringing home to feel all oppressed by this local. member-owned business.

Point well taken, thank you Professor.

as i understand it, as long as you don't buy processed foods (like, you cook from scratch), organic is only pennies more (not meat and dairy). could be wrong, but that's what i've read. i've always been terrible at comparing prices--i just can't retain a knowledge of how much things cost.

i'm a member, and obsessive about eating as much organic (and vegan) as i can, so i shop there because i hate big grocery stores. i can relate to the issue of having no dough, but i shopped there when i was poor too. you just have to cook, IMO. i think it sux that they're not union, but it doesn't surprise me. if the workers *wanted* to be union, they would be, i bet--i have a hard time imagining the co-op pulling dirty trix to prevent it.

i like the wider aisles, didn't notice the cameras, and am so very happy about being able to find parking. (in the list of small pleasures: i love their little double-stack carts. they make me happy.) i feel like a yuppie shopping there, but i like that i know lots of the staff and i'm contributing to their well-being by giving the store my $. i'm happy that a grocery store has moved closer to the center of downtown, even though it's now farther from my house. (and honestly, i wonder what the comparison of prices for small grocery stores would be... in my experience downtown or neighborhood groceries are always expensive.) i'm happy for Kate, who owns Sunhillow, because she'll probably get more business because of it. i'm betting all the businesses around there will increase as a result.

it's lost its coziness, but i'm thankful for that. i hated having to work out shopping time before school let-out time to avoid people. i like not having to apologize every five minutes for crowding someone in the bulk foods aisle.

Damn you people and all your informed, measured opinions!
That Professor and all his insight! Fuck!
Can't a guy just be bitter? This is MY neighborhood damnit! I'M poor! (sounds of whining)
So c'mmmoonnnn! Go away already!
Where's Alan when you need him? Didn't he quit that hell hole? I'm sure he'd have my back.
That's all I have. Just bitter jealousy. And a sincere hatred for a few of the employees.

And I say again: THROW ME A THUNDER COOKIE YOU BOURGEOIS BASTARDS!

The organics and natural food industry, by offering quality food to people who can afford to care, will attract yuppies who are in a hurry to get those gluten-free crackers and their copy of Utne Reader.

All those stereotypes are based in reality. However, having been an organic farmer and a wholesale distributor of natural foods and an intern of an NGO which fights against genetic engineering and a stock monkey at WFC, I can say that I reserve my burning contempt for the Monsantos of the world.

I'm prepared to cut WFC alot of slack even though I found their management style insufferable and quitting suddenly felt great. And on the issue of unions, as a former organizer with a labor-allied NGO and I love me some organized labor, unions bring a lot of baggage to the table and unionizing the store would probably not lower prices.

Although if any WFC employees think the want to go union, drop the SEIU a line. They'd be up here in a heartbeat.

I'm poor but I shop at WFC because genetic engineering is the wickedty-wackest thing around.

Will I get run out of town on a rail if I suggest that genetic engineering is a technology which, like all technologies (e.g. the internet), can be used either for the betterment of society as a whole or for the enrichment of a few at society's expense?

Modifying corn to be pesticide resistant so that more and more atrazine can be dumped into our environment is an example of the latter.

Corn modified to express a naturally occuring pesticide so that fewer chemicals are used is an example of the former.

P.S. Harmony co-op in Bemidji is great, at least it was in the mid-90's when I lived there and was a member/owner.

Inserting GMO's randomly into genomes leads to their being expressed randomly in the host organism. This is one of the main reasons there are so many unexpected consequences of the modification process itself regardless of which trait or characteristic is being tinkered with.

The hazards are too severe for a moderate position to have much legitimacy in my opinion.

Its all experimental. When your government and the industry says its been proven safe, they are lying. GMO's have not been proven dangerous because the industry owns the courts and the regulators and scientists who speak up have their careers destroyed.

Friends of the Earth has a chilling report on bT corn on their website foe.org.

Youre not going to get run out of town on a rail. We can debate this all day and remain civil.

But if I'm an organic farmer whose livlihood depends on GMO free land and seed stock and my land or seed is contaminated by bT corn or round-up ready soy or something, I'm screwed and Monsanto will come along and sue me for violating their intellectual property rights. Happens all the time.

http://www.foe.org/camps/comm/safefood/gefood/index.html

i think there is potential for gm crops, but I do not think there is enough known about the mechanisims to currently use it. We certianlly are in no danger of world wider food shortages, if anything there is a glut of food. We produce so much corn in the US they are talking about making socks out of the stuff to sell in Japan.

One of the things that truely irks me about GM crops is the sterilization of the plants. Since time immortal people have harvested and used seeds from one crop to the next, a nice "cycle of life" example. Now seeds are sold that create barren plants. You can not harvest the seeds becasue there are no seeds. Not a big problem for agri busness, but a serious problem for develloping countries that buy the cheapest seeds to get started, but can never climb out of the hole od dependance becasue each year they need to invest whatever proft they have into need seed stock.

bah

I think we'd both agree that the way GM crops are being used now is irresponsible. Organic farmers (or any farmer who exports to Europe for that matter) should be alarmed about contamination for economic reasons. Do you know if the powers that control organic labeling consider all genetically engineered crops "non-organic", or do they decide ad hoc?

I think there is a huge conceptual difference between roundup ready and Bt. Bt applied to plants topically has long been considered an environmentally benign pest control. If you look at the ill effects of Bt engineered plants (allergies, toxicity to non-target organisms), they are miniscule compared to what is known about synthetic pesticides (allergies, toxicity to non-target organisms, endocrine disruption in humans and animals, toxicity to people working in or near the fields, reliance on petroleum feedstocks, development of pesticide resistant "superweeds", any more?). I think its a good tradeoff.

I agree with you that the government is too incompetent and/or corrupt to regulate this appropriately, though, and agribusiness gets whatever they want. But, the same is true for synthetic pesticides: according to law, new pesticides are assumed to be safe and are OKd for use. Unless they are found conclusively to be unsafe, they remain in use.

Does it boil down to absolutist vs. incrementalist?

http://www.foe.org/safefood/gapseval.pdf

This report addresses Bt corn specifically and I'm basing my absolutist position on it.

I don't think we can say a pesticide-producing genetically modified crop is preferable to traditionally applied chemical pesticide. The process of modification itself leads to genetic instability.

As a consumer I believe I have a right to organic produce w/o sprayed chemicals or genetically modified to generate its own pesticide.

Like a selfish latte drinking SUV driving WFC customer, I want to know that I'm getting what I'm paying for.

I don't believe organics and gmo's can co-exist.

Whether or not Bt generating corn is preferable to spraying shouldn't have to concern me since I desire food with neither. But the fact that Biotech and Agribusiness constantly undermine the organic standards just reminds me how little control I have over the production of the food I eat. If the government and industry actually respected the right of people to consume organics, which would entail strict standards of separation and labeling, then people who chose to eat conventionally produced food could debate among themselves if they prefer atrazine sprayed or GMO Bt-expressing corn.

I choose neither because I support growers who don't go for the chemical fix or the hi-tech gmo solution.

There is no need to trade a chemical solution for a genetically modified one if both have negative effects and there is another option which has no negative effects. If I'm an absolutist on pesticides and gmo's its because the industries who promote them would deny me the right to absolutely pure food. I resent their attempt at total control at the expense of food quality and diversity. The environment and my health are non-negotiable.

And keep in mind that I eat plenty of greasy french fries and non-organic restaurant food.

Its that Big Biotech and Agribusiness are worthy of our deepest contempt just on principle. I don't want to have to choose between food which will give me cancer in 15 years versus food which will destabalize my DNA in 30 years.

Which is why I patronize WFC.

boy am i learning allot
thnks, boys

The Friends of the Earth literature definitely supports the need for regulation independent of agribusiness.

But, back to the specifics of Bt engineered plants, it seems like FOE's consensus is that they may have a similar allergenicity as proteins in milk, eggs, or the Bt spray. IMO that's not a real compelling case for banning them.

Its true that genetic engineering requires the use of vectors which cause DNA rearrangement, but these vectors are either naturally occuring plant pathogens (e.g. tobacco mosaic virus) or transposons native to the host's genome. (Barbara McClintock described the natural genetic maleability of plants in the 1940's; this was groundbreaking work for which she won a Nobel prize. Also she was a great pioneer for women in science, but that's another story. And here it is: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barbara_McClintock ) If a genetic element in plants could somehow survive the human digestive tract and cause a malicious rearragement of our DNA, it surely has happened independent of the efforts of Monsanto scienists.

As for an individual's decision to eat or not eat organic food, I think that is kind of a false choice. We exist in the environment, not just in our own kitchens and in WFC. Even if we don't patronize non-organic producers, what they do matters to us. We can choose not to eat crops produced using pesticides, but we can also still benefit if those producers use less pesticide. Even if it were feasible to totally separate the organic and non-organic production chains, I think society would be be better off if non-organic producers adopted more organic techniques. Confining organic food to boutiques in an "us vs. them" strategy might save individual souls, but it isn't going to save the planet. Reasonable compromises based on sound science (incrementalism?) might.

With that said, I patronize WFC occasionally, and organic bananas taste about a hundred times better than Cub bananas. Also, I don't have any financial or other interest in Bt crops. I do study a genetically engineered mouse model of human cancer, so in some small sense I do have "a dog in the fight".

It would be preferable to see more organic techniques used throughout food production.

I don't think its useful to have and us versus them mentality. But with Wal-Mart stating its intention to be the prime mover and shaker in organics at the same time the organic standards were just weakened, the presence of organics at Wal-Mart does not make me more likely to shop there. People can put their dollars wherever they want. Is it good for organics to be an increasingly corporate venture? Its out of my hands.

But on the subject of false choices, the reduction of pesticide use put forth as a 'value-added' trait for Bt corn ignores the hazards of inherent in the modification process.

The transposons or jumping genes identified by McClintock do move between genomes naturally.

For a long time, science played this down. Now that its become undeniable, its used by pro-biotech advocates to say that GMO technology is no different than this naturally occurring process.

The question is whether there is any reason to increase the amount of horizontal gene transfer happening in the environment.

Does the fact that viruses move genetic material between species mean that its a good idea to use viral promoters to start mixing previously uncombined genetic material?

http://www.i-sis.org.uk/FSAopenmeeting.php

Whether you or I are incrementalist or absolutist in position doesn't change the fact that the technology surrounds us. There was no debate; Monsanto et al bought our elected officials and wrote the regulations themselves.

You and I agree that more regulation is in order we should not lose sight of this.

But I personally don't believe that reduced pesticide use makes Bt corn a good idea. If you farm organic, you don't use pesticide and you don't have to rely on an untested technology put forth by companies whose agenda is control of the food supply.

My absolutist position is that of someone with his back against the wall- the scientific evidence has convinced me that the technology and its application have no benefit except for the companies who now dominate the agenda of the biological sciences and modern agriculture.

The gulf between what the technology allows us to do and the wisdom to use it properly if it all is so huge that it justifies towing a hard line.

As for your oncomouse, well, what can I say? The linked website has plenty of material about gene therapy and so on.

I had a roomate in DC who worked at Human Genome Sciences and he was surprised to find that rigid containment protocols of that laboratory environment were a stark contrast to all the open air field trials of the GMO crops I was always going on about.

Sure the technology could be used wisely. But we are headed in the opposite direction. Perhaps we should discuss how much regulation we'd like to see and why.

I appreciate this thread. My opinion of the co-op has always been negative, but some of the comments here have made me think I should take another look.

The reasons for my original negative opinion are already mostly represented here -- frou-frou ambience, seems to be the purview of Guilty White Liberals, very expensive, do I really need a $6 turkey sandwich when there are kids in town whose families can't even afford a bologna sandwich?

The cameras to spy on employees and what appears (from this side of the counter) to be a corporate business style just turned me off further.

But what about these "seven cooperative principles"? Could someone outline them or provide a link to them?

I, too, belonged to co-ops in the past and there doesn't seem to be much resemblance. Dues were cheap. If you couldn't afford the dues, you could work them off in the store. Members got serious discounts. Organic food was still more expensive, but cheaper than shopping for them anywhere else. (Though for non-members, it was a bit pricy, but not outrageous.)

Why is the co-op different? Can anyone explain the comment about subsidized groceries and the idea that if your food is cheap someone is getting ripped off? How were these earlier co-ops keeping prices so low?

Is the WFC making any effort at all to make their ethos and their organic foods available to everyone or to combat their Guilty White Liberal image? You have to admit it's a bit of a slap in the face to move a store that expensive into a largely low-income neighborhood. And it's hard to blame the neighborhood for getting pissed when they see people driving in from Lakeside and Skyline Parkway to buy food that the people who live right there can't afford.

I don't know that it's unreasonable to expect the co-op to address these things even if demonizing them for everything is also unfair.

Maybe it would be a good idea to educate oneself as to what a cooperative is before stating opinions on what a "real co-op" is.
this link is a good start http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cooperative__

The wonderful thing is that
everyone is free to start their own co-op, but doing something would probably be alot harder than complaining about what others do.

I apologize for implying that the WFC is not a “true” co-op, I was projecting my experiences from different situations onto the current. Of course the WFC is a true co-op.
Implying that people should either shut up or start their own organization is a bit harsh. There are issues that keep a lot of people from joining, if you think these are trivial or the WFC should not address them then you are excluding many people from ever participating.
I do not buy into the line that we should give positive organizations a pass from criticism. It should be fair criticism, which I think the balance of such comments in this thread has been. There are plenty of positive aspects to the WFC as people have pointed out. But, my _personal_ experience has been less then stellar, especially in comparison with other organizations formed for similar purposes.

How's this for some proposed changes in how GM foods are regulated:

- Since the genomes of most commercial crops are either fully sequenced or in the process of being sequenced, no GM plant should be released unless the exact sight of transgene insertion is known.

- Toxicity, allergenicity, should be evaluated by scientists independent of parties with a financial interest. (This is how the FDA used to work, before Clinton's "Fast Track" policy let the pharmaceutical industry provide and evaluate their own science. The FDA used to work pretty well.)

- To decrease liklihood of horizontal gene transfer of a GM construct, compare sequences of the construct with other genomes and reduce homology as much as possible. (The horizontal gene transfer occuring naturally is cause for more concern, though; the current bird flu issue is a case in point. The virus can infect pigs, birds, and humans, and swap genetic material amongst them.)

- Consumers have little voice in agribusiness. Even if you buy only organic, our taxes support unsustainable farming directly through subsidies and price supports, and indirectly through research grants. How about a phase out of public support for unsustainable farming and an increase in support for sustainable practices?

-GM crops should, until they are proven safe, be physically contained while being studied. There are strict isolation procedures for transgenic mice, but GM crops, even while still under development, are out in fields, exposed to pollinators, migratory birds, other plant species, etc. That doesn't seem too safe. Would it be feasible to confine a GM crop to a greenhouse while its being evaluated?

Any other ideas? This has been a good discussion. Candidate, I think we share the same goals, and I have been questioning my "incrementalist" position (though I stand by it, for now). Science needs more contrarians!

But, is this a scientific issue, or is it mainly economic / political? I've worked in science a long time, known hundreds of scientists and worked closely with dozens. I've never met an "evil scientist". The real problems come when science gets into the hands of marketing departments, in my opinion.

Should we move this to a new post? I'm sorry for mucking up the WFC discussion with the GM crop issue.

I've been anticipating the WFC's bigger & better move for months now but, like others, felt dissapointed upon shopping there. Why? I don't like change -- even this improvement because I can't find the things I want.

There are tons of more brands of toothpaste, but first I had to figure out what aisle they're in, then
discovered that they don't have the brand I want (Tom's of Maine Cinnamint.) Like many of you, I'm poor,poor, poor. I only treat myself to this toothpaste maybe once a year, maybe less. The rest of the year I contend myself with Flavorite's generic Crest-like toothpaste. Perhaps they don't make my "treat" toothpaste anymore - but last year it was shelved at the old co-op and I knew where it was.

The second thing I searched for was WFC peanut butter. I finally found a fridge case with cashew butter, but no PB. Then I was complaining to another about how I couldn't find it, and she says there's an aisle where you can make your own. This is great, but where the heck is it? If it were by the other jarred PBs, perhaps I would have seen it. In fact the fridge case with the cashew butter was no where near the PB & spreads aisle.

Perhaps I just need a tour. And probably need to robb their neighbor, the credit union, before shopping there. The prices are much steeper.

Besides, I'm still bitter that they cancelled the WFC Halloween party because of this move. I want my party and toothpaste back.

_

I shop there...sparingly, but as much as I can and as I need to...mainly to supplement the groceries I buy at Cub...I'm well aware of the practices of the Big Box stores of Cub's ilk, but the fact remains, I need to feed not ony myself, but my growing family. As many of you know already, that's not an easy task these days...

WFC is useful to me to a point. I can consider myself to be a member of this community that actually pulls in a bit better than a living wage without working two jobs. For that, i am fortunate, but not so much that I can afford to shop there exclusively. Nowadays, I purchase the bulk items at WFC, simply because Cub just doesn't have it in the quality and quantity I want/need. Spices and dairy are my two main purchases. The occasional oh-so-sinful Dagoba bar, dried fruit, nuts...etc...I get my 3rd St cookies at the bakery around the corner for 10 cents cheaper...

On the other hand, I'd love to be able to offer my table as much healthy and GMO free food as I can possibly provide. Again, given the cost of providing that type of food, I have to make some cost-effective choices...they're not as drastic as say having to decide between buying food and prescriptions, but there are similarities.

Cub in the last year or so has done a lot to improve the overall quality of their offerings, particularly in the produce department. I've noticed a fair increase in their organic produce selection, at relatively competitive prices.

That said, I'm not trying to give props or praise to Cub or any of the other chains, I shop there becuase I kinda have to. I generally spend about $70-80 every couple of weeks (so, on average, about $160 a month) on food...staples, essentials. That $70-80 will feed me and my family for two weeks. The same amount spent at WFC doesn't bring home nearly as much.

somehow im always amazed to see how many things we can find to complain about! at least we have a f*cking co-op.

we also have a u in fuck. use it or lose it.

but most of us can't afford to shop there. we're members. yesterday, we bought 6 items there (things we can't get anywhere else) and it came to $70. we got 2 + weeks of groceries at cub for $140. so while wfc is nice to have, the have not's simply cannot give up heating our houses etc. to support the co-op full-on.

im sorry that i did not use my profanity correctly. i guess the point im trying to get across is that it's going to be expensive. it really is - with the quality of product - how it's made - how much it costs to produce it, sell it, store it. these things all add up. especially being a business in duluth where you might not get the support you need from the community. im SURE they are NOT asking you to support them "full-on". there are things at cub that I choose to purchase because i know the cost will be much higher at wfc. also there are things at wfc that i choose to purchase because of the quality or the fact that they carry that product. if cub doesn't carry the product that you need or want i guess its just a shitty price we pay as americans.

Drifter, I think your recommendations are excellent and I'd be happy to participate in any thread or project that deals with the issue of genetic engineering in agriculture.

While I stick up for WFC I certainly don't fault anyone for getting their groceries at cub based on lower prices.

Higher prices and a frou-frou environment are just part of the natural foods business.

Hello. I’ve been following this thread (as have many of my co-workers). After much thought, I’ve decided to try to educate those who will listen. So to those who are listening…

Before I address some of the concerns I’ve read, I should say that I agree that we should not be immune from criticism. In our customer service trainings we discuss taking a complaint as a gift. We can’t do things better if we don’t know what’s wrong. It’s sad that we have to read about them on a website instead of having a conversation with an actual person, but with that said, some of the claims that are being made are just flat out incorrect.

For example, the statement that our food costs have gone up since the move is a lie. Our pricing structure and margins have not changed. If the person who wrote this has a specific item they are concerned about, our Buyers welcome questions and would be happy to explain any changes. For example, if our supplier raises their price, we raise ours, too since you can’t stay in business if you take a loss on the items you are selling. If there is a tsunami that affects the vanilla crop in Madagascar, the price of vanilla, vanilla beans, vanilla extract and items containing large amounts of vanilla will go up. This was a real situation that happened this year, and yes, vanilla went astronomical in cost. This is the price you pay when you pay for real vanilla, not vanillin, which is made from wood pulp. This is also true with many of the fresh, perishable items we carry where the wholesale price is affected by season, weather, etc.

Shopping of any kind is about choices. If someone (including Staff) decides that they’d rather go see a band, or buy beer, or order a pizza than make different food choices, then that is their decision. It has nothing to do with organic apples being fifty cents more than non-organic apples. It has to do with personal priority. We have plenty of affordable food. A short walk down the Bulk aisle and a look at my personal food budget (most of which is purchased at the Co-op) will prove my point. Last week I had fish in a lemon caper sauce with Brussels sprouts and a banana for lunch for under $5. You can’t get that at McDonald’s.

The fact that we’re “not a co-op” seems to be cleared up, but for those of you who don’t know, a real co-op is a group of people or companies who get together to provide a product or service to its members. If the members want us to change the Food Policy and carry food with GMOs or more non-organic produce, then the members have a responsibility to vocalize their desires. We have a Food Policy Committee that any member can belong to. This same member also has to accept the majority decision if the majority decides something different than their beliefs. But no member is barred from the process.

Looking at Co-ops nationwide, our Co-op membership cost is right in line or less than most. Folks who wish to become members have up to 2 years to pay for that membership and we have funds available to assist low-income individuals who wish to become members. Any member can become a working member to receive a 5% discount on purchases. All of this information is available on our website, in the Owner’s Manual, from Staff and at the Customer Service Counter. Unlike Sam’s Club or your gym membership, it is not a yearly fee and you don’t have to be a member to shop here – we are open and available to everyone.

I’d also like to comment on the distain for anyone who makes a decent living, but the last I checked, that isn’t a crime. I’m sorry that the writers of these comments believe that anyone who doesn’t meet with their approval shouldn’t be allowed in “their” neighborhood. I wonder what would be said if the reverse of that commentary were made.

For folks who just don’t like change, there’s not a lot we can do other than to make ourselves available to answer questions and help you find your way. Ask us & we’ll try our best. Remember that we’re learning, too.

And as for the cameras, which began this whole debate; the number one concern from Staff and from many customers when they heard where we were moving was about security. We have several Staff members who worked for the Co-op the night we were held up at gunpoint a few years back. We didn’t have cameras then and the culprits weren’t caught with the assistance of eyewitnesses. These Staffers in particular wanted to be safe in their new workplace including entering and exiting the premises. As a business, we wanted to have a way to go back and identify someone should they commit a crime. This is part of being fiscally responsible to our member/owners as well as being concerned for the safety of Staff. The sheer square footage requires more cameras and they are obvious. You know you’re being filmed. Unlike someone who films you without your knowledge and puts the footage on the Internet. Something to think about.

I have one additional comment to make re: the idea that it's a "slap in the face" to move into a low-income neighborhood. The co-op also brought more than 50 new jobs to the neighborhood by more than doubling its staff. Presumably that is not a slap in the face, but a good thing. Peace and perspective. Professor out.

never seen so many negative people on one site before today. wow, no lives and nothing better to wine about.

Overall I'm glad that WFC was able to expand into a big new location. But even though I worked on the construction of the building, I certainly can't afford to shop there. I never shopped at the old location, although I worked on that when they moved in as well, so I have no idea if the prices have gone up. But how exactly are they paying for the new building then? Believe me having been there during construction and knowing the general contractors well, this was not a cheap build. So I can certainly understand the frustration of people who would like to buy organic and patronize the WFC but simply cannot afford too. But it is what it is. And there's not a hell of a lot anyone can do about it. I did get a kick out of the news story that ran when they were getting ready to open. There was this whole angle about how that neighborhood was making a comeback. With the new San Marco Apartments and the WFC about to open. They actually wrote that the people that lived in that neighborhood would now have a convenient grocery store within walking distance(insert own joke here).