Stopping a McDonalds: The St. Louis Story

The West End Word had a recent article on recalls in the city. One part, about 15th Ward Alderwoman Jennifer Florida, caught my attention:

Florida called the recall effort against her a “terrible distraction,” but said that the effort against her has not affected the way she does her job, other than to force her to spend a bit more money producing newsletters and progress reports to explain her position.

Oh my, she must now communicate with her constituents!!! Oh the humanity. How dare folks “force” her to explain her position. Of course, her position in theory should be based on the feelings of the community. Did she think she could just get elected, not communicate anything, and not have any issues arise?

“There’s a lot of misinformation floating around out there, and I have to address that,” she said. “I’m trying to learn how to explain what I can and cannot do.”

The recall effort against Florida has been based on her support of a plan to move a McDonald’s franchise down the street from an existing location. Florida’s opponents say the move would be illegal, as the zoning for the new location does not allow a drive-thru, which is included in the design.

Florida said that the new location is commercially zoned, adding that there’s not a whole lot she could do to stop the move. “I think they thought I had more power than I actually have,” she said. “It’s just a small group of people who aren’t accepting [the move]. It’s like they’re trying to punish me for not getting exactly what they want.

I think someone needs to look in the mirror before talking about misinformation. Florida continues to downplay her role in the McDonald’s fiasco. After receiving substantial financial contributions from the officers of an entity seeking to profit in the deal, Florida took on an active role of making the project a reality. Her support, nearly to the point of being official spokesperson, did help influence the various boards that granted variances allowing the project to move forward. Had she remained neutral or opposed the drive-thru it most likely would not be happening now.

“I was always told recalls are about malfeasance in office or negligence. The reason why it’s in the charter is to cover corruption [in city politics]. But now it’s about not agreeing with an alderman’s position on an issue.”

I