Nothing Like a Recall To Bring Feelings To the Surface
The last few days, since the recall attempt of Jennifer Florida was announced, have been interesting. Many views exist on both Ald. Florida and the recall process in general. Similarly, many views exist on the main controversy leading up to the recall petition. I want to share some background information on recalls as well as my latest thoughts on McDonald’s, Florida, Pyramid and such.
First, the so-called recall madness.
In 2003 voters in the 21st Ward were successful in recalling Ald. Melinda Long. Long was elected in April 2001 after defeating incumbent Bennice Jones King in the March 2001 primary. Not even two years later, on March 4, 2003, she was recalled (results). In a four-way race in April 2003, King was reelected to office as an independent candidate (results). Long was one of the candidates that ran again.
In the 4th Ward Peggy Ryan was recalled in a very tight vote on March 8, 2005. Once again, the alderman that was recalled ran for the office. Three others also ran for the now vacant seat. O.L. Shelton garnered the most votes in the special election to replace Ryan on June 7, 2005 (results).
A few months later, on September 20, 2005, Ald. Tom Bauer was recalled (results). On December 13, 2005 William Waterhouse was elected to represent the 24th Ward in a three-way race which included the former Ald. Tom Bauer as an independent.
A recent recall attempt was waged against 22nd Ward Ald. Jeffrey Boyd but petitioners failed to have enough signatures after it was determined not all of the signatures were valid (dead folks can’t sign petitions).
So what does all this say? Are citizens recall crazy? Is it a system run amuck? I don’t think so. In the first two in the 21st Ward & 4th Ward it can be said the recalls were motivated by rival political factions rather than a particular development issue. In the 24th Ward it was several development related issues that got citizens mad enough to take action. In the case of the 24th Ward the development issues were unquestionably mostly at risk of affecting those within that ward although I would argue they had larger implications as well.
In the 15th Ward a different situation is occurring . We’ve got a banned use (drive-thru service) being railroaded through the system on a parcel two blocks from an extreme ward boundary. The bulk of the residents affected by the decision just happen to live in an adjacent ward boundary. And through some twisted logic, these people are not supposed to be able to have an impact on their own immediate surroundings simply because this arbitrary ward boundary was drawn on map.
I think an increase in recalls of late is a signal that citizens have a greater awareness of the dealings of aldermen and what is going on. More citizens are taking an interest in the future of the city and are participating at the grassroots level to bring about positive change. Most Aldermen, in my view, are responsive to citizens’ views only when it comes to fixing a sidewalk, adding yet another stop sign, or requesting a new dumpster — all things an administrative staff person with the city should be able to handle provided City Hall was well organized. When it comes to bigger development issues the Aldermen want to play architect, urban planner and contractor. They do not see citizens in the process but as obstacles to the deal. This is a fundamentally wrong approach to development and eventually repopulating our city.
A recall is, by nature, reactive. Therefore, those participating in a recall are branded as being reactionary. Well, the alternative is to be pro-active but I don’t think a pro-active approach to recalls would be wise. So, yes, recall petitioners are reactionary in the sense that they are seeing what they feel is something unjust and in reaction taking steps to correct the situation. If you agree the actions of an elected official is unwarranted and/or unethical yet do nothing is that being apathetic. Democracy is not served by those unwilling to participate.
Ward boundaries are also brought up as an issue. Are these imaginary lines really that sacred? If so we have our priorities mixed up. The boundaries serve as a way to know whom is your representative. It does not remove it from the rest of the city or region. Taxes are not collected on a ward basis. Wards are not independent entities in the way a municipality is. Furthermore, we change the boundaries every 10 years based on the U.S. Census. The parcel in question was part of the old 10th Ward with Grand as the dividing line to the 15th. But in 2002 the dividing line for the 15th got moved two blocks further East in this area. Two whole blocks. Less than three football fields. People in the 20th Ward will be able to see the proposed McDonald’s from their homes. Yet, by some people’s convoluted way of thinking they are not supposed to be able to have an opinion. However, a person living nearly a mile away on the opposite corner of the 15th ward is automatically assumed to have a say.
I live on a corner lot in the 25th Ward but the other three corners are all in the 9th Ward. Before I bought the building the residents worked to get it shut down due to drug dealing and major nuisance activity. Did anyone tell them not to complain because it was not their ward? I certainly hope not. Eventually the building was condemned for occupancy. After the bank foreclosed on the owner I was able to purchase and rehab the building. By rehabbing a boarded up former drug house I helped the area, not simply the 25th Ward portion of the area.
If we are ever going to succeed in repopulating the city we must think beyond ward boundaries. We must create a strong city based on outstanding commercial arterials and a great network of neighborhood streets. This cannot be accomplished with a ward vs. ward mentality.
Furthermore, I believe we need to reevaluate our neighborhood boundaries. Major streets such as Grand are used as dividing lines. Look at the case of Cherokee Street between Jefferson & Gravois. Originally that street was the centerpiece of the neighborhood but since at least the days of former Mayor Vince Schoemehl Cherokee has been viewed as the edge of two neighborhoods rather than the commercial center. This is really a subject for an entire post, so I will stop here.
Some posters here and elsewhere seem to question the recall process altogether — that an official would have to do some sort of major criminal offense before a recall is warranted. Others seem to think it is OK to attempt to recall an official as long as it is warranted. The big question that is coming up, therefore, is whether or not this recall is warranted. It is no secret that I think the recall is just.
All officials have to make unpopular decisions, that is part of their jobs. No matter the decision someone will be unhappy. And no, we do not want them to make decisions based solely on if it would spark a recall attempt. But, if an official strays too far away from the wishes of their constituency then a recall is warranted. I do believe that is the case here.
The McDonald’s/Pyramid land swap has apparently been in the planning stages for some time but it came to the forefront in January when a building permit was applied for. Gravois Park residents, some of whom live in the 15th ward and some that do not, contend they were previously told by Jennifer Florida the McDonald’s would not be relocated to their neighborhood. Jennifer Florida outright lied to a group of people (including me) during a meeting in Dutchtown. What I wrote on February 15, 2006:
I sat next to Alderman Florida on Monday as the proposed McDonald’s at 3708 S. Grand was discussed before the Commercial District Committee of the Dutchtown South Community Corporation. She claimed to not have any graphics to show the group of the proposal, instead she showed site plans for the nearby Southside National Bank project. Yet, in her possession was a site plan for the McDonald’s project. When questioned on the subject she claimed the site plan she had was not the final plan. Digging a deeper hole she said a current site plan did not exist, that nothing had been submitted. We were puzzled at the idea of a public hearing on the zoning of a drive-thru could be held without a site plan. The truth is it can’t.
The site plan in her possession was the final plan submitted to the city in January. I finally obtained said plan through the Sunshine Law process but due to some delays on the part of the city I was not able to get a copy until after the hearing had been held. I believe she intentionally held back the plans for the project because she knew that neighborhood groups like Gravois Park and the adjacent Dutchtown would not be pleased with the standard formula McDonald’s.
I understand elected officials can’t make everyone happy. But, elected officials can operate in a manner in which everyone is informed, debate occurs and then a decision is reached. That wasn’t the case here. A decision was reached by Florida, she kept the information hidden as long as possible from the public, and then belittled anyone that dare speak out against the project. This is not conduct befitting an Alderwoman.
Early on she should have sensed where this was going. She could have asked Pyramid to withdraw the permit application to allow for public hearing to resolve disputes. That didn’t happen, they forged ahead without a chance for any real public input. Public input didn’t happen until the first conditional use hearing on the drive-thru held on February 19, 2006. This would be the hearing where the administrator entered into the record that they had letters of support from Mayor Slay, State Sen. Coleman and State Rep. Mike Daues. Again, through the Sunshine Law, I was able to see these letters did not mention McDonald’s at all. At the hearing nobody from the general public supported the McDonald’s but many from the neighborhood spoke out against it. Florida, however, called the McDonald’s a “linchpin” for future development and has suggested it will reduce crime. The hearing really didn’t matter, decisions had already been made. You see, Florida and her buddies at Pyramid & McDonald’s had no interest in public discussion. And since opposition began they’ve been even less interested.
Good politicians have the ability to step back and say, “You know, I thought this would be a benefit to the area but I can see many are not happy. We should get together and work on a master plan for this section of Grand to see what we can come up with.” This area has been in Florida’s ward for four years now. When I expressed to her that I was pleased to see the Lawrence Group would be doing some additional buildings in future phases of the South Side National Bank building she indicated she was insistent on them being two stories and up to the street. On one hand she comes across as getting urbanity and being able to push developers to do better. That Jennifer Florida I really like. It is the other Jennifer Florida, the one that yells at residents, “You can’t get everything you want” that I don’t care for.
Placing a drive-thru on the old Sears site is a very poor decision, one that will have effects on the area for a good 20-30 years until it can be razed. But how much damage will it have done to the perception of the commercial street and the adjacent residential uses? This is fundamental land use planning issues folks. This is not the addition of a stop sign or a replacing a dumpster or simple things an alderman can do without much long-term impact. Land use decisions for a major corridor used by thousands of citizens from many neighborhoods and wards is simply too critical to be left up to one person.
Then we have the issue of the redevelopment plan. Ald. Florida argued under oath the plan’s prohibition on drive-thru uses is only applicable when seeking tax incentives. So what does she do, she gets the LCRA to approve an amendment to the plan removing the prohibition on drive-thrus for only the parcel McDonald’s wants — a clear case of spot zoning. Next she introduces BB39 on the first day the Board of Aldermen are back in session to legally amend the ordinance to allow drive-thru uses on that parcel. Again, she argued just days earlier that the drive-thru prohibition is only applicable if you are not seeking tax incentives. Thus, it would appear they are setting the ground work to give McDonald’s some sort of financial incentive to move.
Many new readers are just joining in. This is a very complicated issue and I can see where those just now hearing of it may draw the conclusion that people rushed to recall her. The truth is Florida and major campaign contributor Pyramid are rushing this through the system without adequate public participation.
If you are interested in knowing the details check out my category called “McDonald’s on Grand.” The posts are in reverse order so you’ll need to start at the bottom and work your way up. Along the way you’ll begin to get a clear picture of the process and timeline as well as see supporting documents. If, after reading all this, you still don’t think the recall is warranted then we’ll have to simply agree to disagree. For me, if this is not grounds for a recall then I don’t what is.
– Steve
I can tell you that this type of unilateral decision-making is bad for the city, which is why I am involved, even though I live outside that ward.
Sam Snelling, a 15th Ward resident, and member of St. Louisans for Urban Progress, of which I am a member, introduced this issue at our meeting, as we finished working with Lyda on the Lindell Tower Project. I saw this as an immediate concern, especially upon visiting the site, talking to Keystone Homeowners, and other 15th ward residents.
The placement of the McDonald’s violates a city ordinance, and only through the unethical repeal of a strongly supported ordinance, and complete disregard for 15th Ward residents will the McDonald’s be built. 850,000 dollars was used to demolish the old Sears building, and the lot was given freely to Pyramid. Upon announcement of the McDonald’s, taxpayers are moving away. Why should we pay 850,000 for demolition, then give the lot freely to Pyramid, with an official promoting the project, which drives away hard working taxpayers?
This kind of “representation” cannot continue if our city is to reach its apex of 8-9xxx,xxx again. We must join with our fellow neighbors to ensure that our leaders make decisions, which represent the will of the community.
Furthermore, this strip of Grand has the potential to be the next U-City Loop, with its already urban design, diverse shops, and unique crowd, however a slew of drive-thru restaurants will certainly put a cork in this idea. Shouldn’t we want an urban atmosphere, which draws residents, increases population, and provides jobs? Why should we settle for politicians that promote developments that repel taxpaying residents?
For this reason I have been gathering signatures in the 15th ward. Many of the residents that I talked to, signed the petition with other stories of Jennifer’s political “representation.” The bricks on Gustine, an apparent drug house that she did not act to close, harassment of citizens due to poor landscaping, and street barriers, are only some of the complaints I received. It seems that almost everyone I spoke with on Saturday morning was unhappy with Jennifer for various reasons, and I only hit a few blocks on a Saturday when some residents were not at home.
This movement is not from those outside her ward, which is an argument that Jennifer will use to negate this movement. I have only volunteered to help my fellow 15th Ward neighbors, as well as due to the tax issues. Do not believe the hype. Do not let her act as a victim. 15th ward residents are the victims.
Indeed. You elected your representative, who represents your interests, and the 15th elects theirs.
If aldermanic courtesy is an issue and you feel that your alderman is rubberstamping imprudent decisions, then recall yours.
Anyone think that moving the ward boundary two blocks east had something to do with Pyramid’s scheme for this area?
In this system, you need a cooperative alderman to make a deal happen — not an independent thinker like Craig Schmid.
As we see, if Schmid’s ward had retained its boudnaries to include the Sears site, this McDonald’s deal would never have gone through.
Coincidence?
Great essay Steve.
A comprehensive and fair summary of the discussions to date. And yes, the residents of any ward should have the option of a recall. Still, I firmly believe that the recent uptick in / culture of using recalls as a tool for intimidation of and/or retaliation for politically unpopular decisions is wrong. As you point out, they’re very much a reactive tool, and a crude one at that. (By the time an alderman is actually recalled, the damage is usually already done and unfixable.) Better, as you alluded to, to be proactive. It won’t happen overnight, but it will take changing the existing “culture” of local government, the one where each alderman “want[s] to play architect, urban planner and contractor.” The one where “they do not see citizens in the process but as obstacles to the deal.” The culture where each ward is ruled as a fiefdom, thanks to aldermanic courtesy.
This will take finding good, thoughtful, responsive candidates. This will take funding their campaigns, getting out the vote and getting them elected. This will also take a continued improvement in the local economy. Politicians do want to do more than just “fixing a sidewalk, adding yet another stop sign, or requesting a new dumpster”. But if the only “real” project for them to become involved with is trying to keep a viable business (in this case McDonald’s) in the ward, the alderman will be, by default, both highly visible and at odds with many of their constituents (who also have only this one project “on their radar”). This will also take making recalls a tool for only extreme transgressions. None of us is perfect, we’re all going to make mistakes, and we’re going to make more when we’re “new to the job”. It takes a while for any politician to get “up to speed”, and if we keep recalling them in the first year or two, for whatever reason, we’ll continue to get the poor results that seem to be generating the current spate of recalls!
The argument about ward boundaries is one you’ll never solve. No matter where they’re drawn, a certain minority will be “just across the line”. The answer gets back to thinking more globally. The city is not just a bunch of disparate wards. It’s (supposed to be) a large entity, that should be governed by balancing local concerns and issues with a larger vision for the greater good. Will this take a shift in thinking and culture? Most likely, yes! But it will take time . . .
A couple of asides . . . would this be different if Starbucks was wanting to build a drive-thru instead of McDonald’s? And coming from Denver, where there’s a formal process to register neighborhood organizations and both a statutory requirement and a culture of involving neighborhoods early in any zoning change, would a more formal process of empowering neighborhoods help here?
http://www.denvergov.org/dephome.asp?depid=442
[REPLY – One again thank you for your well reasoned responses. This is so much nicer than someone’s argument being I’m crazy.
I really agree with you, aldermanic courtesy is a problem and needs to be addressed. And yes, recalls are a bit crude. I don’t think this recall was started for the purposes of retaliation or intimidation. I believe it was started in an attempt to get someone out of office the residents feel is not serving their interests. I believe the actions of Ald. Florida do qualify as “extreme transgressions.”
I think to the residents concerned about noise, pollution, traffic and trash from a drive-thru would have the same perspective if it were a Starbucks or even a suburban BreadCo. With the Starbucks one could make a valid argument that most of their product is beverages and therefore would not have the bags to throw out like a food place does. A drive-thru is a drive-thru regardless of the brand or food. – SLP]
“Furthermore, I believe we need to reevaluate our neighborhood boundaries…Look at the case of Cherokee Street between Jefferson & Gravois. Originally that street was the centerpiece of the neighborhood but since at least the days of former Mayor Vince Schoemehl Cherokee has been viewed as the edge of two neighborhoods rather than the commercial center. This is really a subject for an entire post, so I will stop here.”
I couldn’t agree with you more. But don’t forget that the same is true of Cherokee east of Jefferson. If you’re on the northside of Cherokee St. you’re in Benton Park, if you’re on the southside then you’re in Marine Villa. But all of it is in the Benton Park National Register district, and Benton Park puts more of its identity on Antique Row than Marine Villa. Probably because MV has a fairly weak neighborhood association. I live a few houses south of Cherokee, but anytime someone near me gets involved in Benton Park, we’re accused of wanting to identify with BP only because it is currently “trendy”. Despite the fact that our section of the neighborhood does have more in common with BP than the majority of MV, which is south of Broadway. Anyway, the topic would make for a great post, so I hope you do that in the future. Neighborhood and ward boundaries are completely confusing, and then add on top of that different historic district boundaries, no wonder no one wants to get involved in local politics.
I wish Florida would concentrate more on the problems we have with the 15th ward. The trash on Grand & Gravois is a disgrace. We have major crime (for myself, 2 cars stolen, 2 stereos stolen – separate from the stolen cars – 2 hit & runs, & 1 attempted theft of a vehicle – all within a span of 3 years). Two recent murders. Slumlords that continue to bring down the neighborhood. I have been yelled at & demeaned by Florida for trying to clean up the neighborhood and bringing it to her attention.
We now have construction on Gravois & Spring that I hear will bring in a pager/cellphone store and a nail salon (a nail salon is located right next door to this site already). Do we have to accept any business just so we can have more businesses? The cobblestone speed bumps are nothing more than a pain in the butt for those of us who live here (again, another one of Florida’s smart ideas that she thought would be best for the ward). To Florida: Take care of what you already have. Development is good but it shouldn’t be at the expense of those who already live here. After all, we also pay taxes. Without our taxes, you would not be paid. Please remember, the citizens of this city are your bosses. It’s not the other way around. We hired you and we can fire you. It seems too many of our politicians will bend over backwards for developers but just ignore the citizens that the City is trying so hard to retain.