Direct Global/Direct Co-ops

10/29/2026

[DLBN] United Natural Foods Inc (UNFI) Teamsters in Southern California and Stockton have a new contract, with record pay increases of $13 an hour over five years. Grocery workers still struggle to feed their family.

https://www.supermarketnews.com/retail-labor/socal-unfi-teamsters-receive-13-hour-pay-raise?utm_rid=CPG06000001744798&_mc=em_SN_News_SN%20Daily%20News%20Updata_News_NL_10022026&utm_campaign=72157&utm_medium=email&elq2=8b34bfdd3f354d01be25af387d6a55ec&sp_eh=e25708b3d155db5b4cdca8f66397c14a7f531c0de801182cef8248e896ed3b25

10/28/2026

[DLBN] The Golden President sets off alarms with his anti-Muslim racist comment in the Michigan Senate race this week: [AI IMAGE by AL]. Watch for more in this series].

10/27/2026

[DLBN] HAMMERED: “Home Depot & Lowe's shares hit 52-week lows as a frozen housing market and high rates curb home improvement spending…both companies face pressure from deferred renovations, tariff-driven material costs.” Trumponomics hits Home.

https://www.marketbeat.com/articles/home-depot-and-lowes-hit-52-week-lowsbut-analysts-arent-giving-up/

10/26/2026

NOSE TO NOSE: The Golden President thumbs his nose at Congress, exempting Russian diesel from the new trade sanctions law named after Trump’s friend, the late Senator Lindsey Graham. [AI image by AL] (Keep an eye out for our continuing Golden President series)

10/25/2026

[DLBN] Walmart will start drone deliveries in Seattle area by 2027 for packages up to 5 lbs. and up to 6 miles away. Soon skies everywhere will be darkened by noon with hundreds of drones dropping packages on us.

https://www.kiro7.com/news/local/walmart-announces-plans-drone-delivery-seattle-area/P6OZX7FCUVAXNNHZUYOGVUKXBY/?fbclid=IwU1NDUAVK33NleHRuA2FlbQIxMQBwZG9mBWZkaWQWUQ-oBFFL6tHzSPn9A9zfwlNABG6hfHNydGMGYXBwX2lkCjY2Mjg1NjgzNzkAAR4tK12B9yODv8TDrrfkrUFdquQ_km0YT2WFby3XeCDDv7xJiFLhYz6dXhMkzw_aem_J7qDbnzSD21WKalBOaRmZQ

Wing said customers will be able to order products weighing up to 5 pounds for delivery by drone.

10/24/2026

[DLBN] REHEARSING IN THE MIRROR: The Golden President prepares for a press conference from the Oval Office on October 22nd, by reading from a script, while looking in the mirror, about corruption and fraud in America: (AI image by AL) [keep an eye out for our continuing Golden President series.]

10/23/2026

Mississippi police shot & killed a 1-yr old during a diapers shoplifting incident in a Walmart parking lot. “Shoplifting diapers is a misdemeanor," the family’s lawyer said. "I mean, it doesn't warrant the death penalty.” Cops said they didn’t see a child in the car.

https://abcnews.com/amp/US/body-camera-footage-released-police-shooting-miss-1/story?id=137487507

10/22/2026

[DLBN] The Golden President bought Russian oil with American dollars, supplying Putin with revenue to intensify his attacks on Ukraine, while unplugging Musk’s Star Link defense system, denying Ukraine advance warning against incoming Russian missiles. These are actual words spoken by the two antagonist allies: (AI image by AL)

10/21/2026

[DLBN] Pushback: Vote ‘no’ on Question 7 to stop state control over local zoning

On Nov. 3, I’m voting “no” on Question 7 — another assault by state mandate on our Home Rule zoning, weakening our right of local self-government.
In Massachusetts, Home Rule authority was granted to municipalities 60 years ago, with the adoption of Amendment Article 89 in our Massachusetts Constitution, and the passage of Chapter 43B in our General Laws. Article 89, entitled Right of Local Self-Government, says: “It is the intention of this Article to reaffirm the customary and traditional liberties of the people with respect to the conduct of their local government, and to grant and confirm to the people of every city and town the right of self-government in local matters.” Home Rule allows a city or town to exercise this power by adopting local ordinances, bylaws or charters.
“In the strongest exercise of Home Rule rights,” explains the Massachusetts Division of Local Services, “communities can enact charters… to organize local government in a way that best meets the needs of their citizens. However, there are significant limitations.”
Despite Home Rule, many local actions require attorney general or state Legislature approval. The doctrine of “pre-emption” allows a local law to stand only if it’s consistent with the state Constitution or general laws. Pre-emption gives the General Court the right to perpetuate ongoing state rule over our municipal affairs.
In 1951, the Supreme Judicial Court ruled in a case known as Attorney General v. Inhabitants of Town of Dover (327 Mass. 601, 604) that the Legislature had the power to restrict a town’s zoning activity.
The Dover amendment (Chapter 40A, s. 3) over 75 years has metastasized deep into local self-rule by exempting a long list of land uses “by right” from local control, such as: commercial agriculture; use of land for religious or educational purposes; land used by a public service corporation; land or structures for a childcare facility, telecommunications and cable television facilities; congregate living for the disabled; family childcare homes; a single accessory dwelling unit per lot; solar energy systems, and battery energy storage systems.
The Dover amendment has become a zoning sinkhole for any land use the state decides is “so important to the public good,” that the commonwealth can “take away some measure of municipalities’ power to limit the use of land within their borders.” Chapter 40A, s.3 ensures that “neighborhood hostility or contrary local preferences” will not stand in the way of land uses considered critical to “meet the public need.” The Dover amendment, which exempts religious uses from local zoning rules, forced the rent control question off the Nov. 3 ballot.
Massachusetts Question 7 is just another “Dover zoning mandate.” It forces all cities and towns to shrink their minimum zoning lot size required for a single-family lot. This state mandate will be inserted into the Dover statute, requiring all municipalities to allow single-family homes on residential zoning lots as small as 5,000 square feet, shrinking frontage to only 50 feet, and requiring access to public sewer and water services. Five thousand square feet is about the size of an NBA basketball court.
The Massachusetts Municipal Association recommends a “no” vote on Question 7: “Zoning decisions are inherently local. Any attempt to preempt this local process with a one-size-fits-all policy strips local residents and officials of their role and their voice… The petition requires access to public water and sewer — at a time when many municipal water and sewer systems are already at or near maximum capacity. The petition also does not require the homes to be affordable or sold at below-market rates.”
In 2021, the state Legislature passed the controversial MBTA Communities Act, which mandates that any community hosting MBTA services must have “at least one zoning district of reasonable size in which multi-family housing is permitted” without special permits or permission. The General Court is now considering legislation allowing duplexes to replace single-family homes by right. If that passes, and we get smaller building lots, single-family homes will be bought by developers — who will convert single-family owner-occupied neighborhoods into duplex rentals owned by absentee landlords.
As of May 2026, the Greater Boston Real Estate Board and the Massachusetts Association of Realtors and its political action committee have funded a total of $850,000 to pass this new state zoning mandate. If municipalities want to downsize building lots and frontage, under Home Rule they can ask their voters to amend local zoning by-laws — without being strong-armed by state mandates.
Vote “no” on Question 7. Tell state government we have the Home Rule right to control our own neighborhoods.

Al Norman’s Pushback column is published in the Recorder every first and third Wednesday of the month

10/20/2026

[DLBN] 33 years ago last night, the voters in the town of Greenfield, MA made international news, by rejecting two zoning questions that would have allowed the construction of a 123,000 sf Wal-Mart plus two outbuildings on 63 acres of industrial-zoned land on the south side of the French King Highway. I was the coordinator of the “We’re Against the Wal” campaign.

In my 1999 book, Slam-Dunking Wal-Mart, I explained how we beat them. Here are some excerpts from the Introduction to that book:

“If there is anything remotely close to a normal day in Greenfield, Massachusetts, then October 19, 1993 was normal: the police received a call reporting a manhole was out of place at the corner of Pleasant and Chapman Street.

The solid waste management district held a special composting workshop at the Elks club on Federal Street.

Wilson’s department store, the 108-year-old downtown anchor business, offered free coffee and donut holes during its harvest sale.

I had lived through 16 years of such days in Greenfield. But this day on Greenfield was not over yet.

Over the span of 12 hours on this cool, overcast day in October, 5708 people in this community that described itself as a “classic American Town” and “everybody’s hometown,“ went to the polls and voted to reject a Wal-Mart store on the edge of town. The vote was a close call – but we knew it would be.

This was a 60% voter turnout! It was the largest turnout in recent history, double the turnout for most local elections and higher than the 1992 presidential election. We had taken both measures by narrow votes to be sure, but this was not a game of retail horseshoes: it was winner take all.

We had slam-dunked Wal-Mart!

By the time I returned home, it was well past midnight. I let the cats out, emptied out my pockets on the kitchen counter: all the phone numbers, and street addresses, paper clips and precinct tally sheets.

And one other thing.

I had been carrying around with me all day a symbol of defeat, just in case. The symbol of the next phase of our fight against megastores. I had prepared myself for defeat by printing up the following bumper sticker:

IF THEY BUILD IT
WE WON’T COME!

There was no speech that went along with it, I would just ad-lib something about this being the official beginning of a boycott of the Greenfield Walmart. I took the folded bumper sticker from my pocket, which was now crumpled and full of notes on the back. I threw it into the fireplace. Some other community might need to start a boycott—-but not us, not now.

Tonight at the end of this long day, the voters had rejected Wal-Mart! I was probably as surprised as Wal-Mart that we had won. I didn’t think we could pull it off. But we did.

The following morning was like a retail obituary for the folks in Bentonville. “Wal-Mart is of course very disappointed,“ the company’s local attorney was quoted as saying. The October 21 edition of the New York Times carried this typically terse and bitter comment from Jane Arend, a Wal-Mart spokes woman: “That was the only site we were interested in in Greenfield. There are thousands of other communities in the northeast where we can continue our expansion.”

——————————————
This is a copy of my first book, translated into Japanese by a group of business-owners who came to Greenfield to learn more about the Greenfield campaign.

https://www.amazon.com/Slam-Dunking-Wal-Mart-Al-Norman-ebook/dp/B004I8WLSY/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=108AFOX3GZI45&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.6n3f2lltvS_KKX9NdZGPi9X6cN24Pvbl9gSNASdOv2E.X5S_rCv2GPZj43VNMRUxDGDOnXA8deeSheWZtvnbM4U&dib_tag=se&keywords=%22Slam-Dunking+Wal-Mart%22&qid=1791726747&sprefix=slam-dunking+wal-mart+%2Caps%2C197&sr=8-1

33 years ago this evening, the voters in the town of Greenfield made international news, by rejecting two zoning questions that would have allowed the construction of a 123,000 sf Wal-Mart plus two outbuildings on 63 acres of industrial-zoned land on the south side of the French King Highway. I was the coordinator of the “We’re Against the Wal” campaign.

In my 1999 book, Slam-Dunking Wal-Mart, I explained how we beat them. Here are some excerpts from the Introduction to that book:

“If there is anything remotely close to a normal day in Greenfield, Massachusetts, then October 19, 1993 was normal: the police received a call reporting a manhole was out of place at the corner of Pleasant and Chapman Street.

The solid waste management district held a special composting workshop at the Elks club on Federal Street.

Wilson’s department store, the 108-year-old downtown anchor business, offered free coffee and donut holes during its harvest sale.

I had lived through 16 years of such days in Greenfield. But this day on Greenfield was not over yet.

Over the span of 12 hours on this cool, overcast day in October, 5708 people in this community that described itself as a “classic American Town” and “everybody’s hometown,“ went to the polls and voted to reject a Wal-Mart store on the edge of town. The vote was a close call – but we knew it would be.

This was a 60% voter turnout! It was the largest turnout in recent history, double the turnout for most local elections and higher than the 1992 presidential election. We had taken both measures by narrow votes to be sure, but this was not a game of retail horseshoes: it was winner take all.

We had slam-dunked Wal-Mart!

By the time I returned home, it was well past midnight. I let the cats out, emptied out my pockets on the kitchen counter: all the phone numbers, and street addresses, paper clips and precinct tally sheets.

And one other thing.

I had been carrying around with me all day a symbol of defeat, just in case. The symbol of the next phase of our fight against megastores. I had prepared myself for defeat by printing up the following bumper sticker:

IF THEY BUILD IT
WE WON’T COME!

There was no speech that went along with it, I would just ad-lib something about this being the official beginning of a boycott of the Greenfield Walmart. I took the folded bumper sticker from my pocket, which was now crumpled and full of notes on the back. I threw it into the fireplace. Some other community might need to start a boycott—-but not us, not now.

Tonight at the end of this long day, the voters had rejected Wal-Mart! I was probably as surprised as Wal-Mart that we had won. I didn’t think we could pull it off. But we did.

The following morning was like a retail obituary for the folks in Bentonville. “Wal-Mart is of course very disappointed,“ the company’s local attorney was quoted as saying. The October 21 edition of the New York Times carried this typically terse and bitter comment from Jane Arend, a Wal-Mart spokes woman: “That was the only site we were interested in in Greenfield. There are thousands of other communities in the northeast where we can continue our expansion.”

——————————————
This is a copy of my first book, translated into Japanese by a group of business-owners who came to Greenfield to learn more about the Greenfield campaign.

https://www.amazon.com/Slam-Dunking-Wal-Mart-Al-Norman-ebook/dp/B004I8WLSY/ref=mp_s_a_1_1?crid=108AFOX3GZI45&dib=eyJ2IjoiMSJ9.6n3f2lltvS_KKX9NdZGPi9X6cN24Pvbl9gSNASdOv2E.X5S_rCv2GPZj43VNMRUxDGDOnXA8deeSheWZtvnbM4U&dib_tag=se&keywords=%22Slam-Dunking+Wal-Mart%22&qid=1791726747&sprefix=slam-dunking+wal-mart+%2Caps%2C197&sr=8-1