Ald. Gregali on Florida, McDonald’s & Status Quo.

Today I received the following comment on the post about the effort to recall Ald. Jennifer Florida:

You all really need to focus on something else. One, Patterson is crazy. Why didn’t he put out the recall for Ald. Vollmer over the St. Al’s development on the Hill? Why isn’t he taking on the Mayor? Is he going to take on the whole BOA? He’s a wanna be. He lost to Dorothy Kirner and he is spreading his discontent, bitter seed. If he were a leader in the Community he wouldn’t be doing this. It’s malcontent not leadership or the resolution to his problem. He doesn’t even live in the neighborhood.

And who is the real problem? Schmid couldn’t get anything done. Jennifer inherited the mess on Grand Ave.

Schmid created the problem. Ald. Florida has taken the initiative and has made a marked improvement in the Grand and Gravois area.

You can’t let a few zealots control what elected officials are doing. Most of the electeds ideas are good. They will never please us 100% but I think she is doing 100% better than Schmid ever could. He can’tr make a decision or complete a project.

Focus on Schmid and shut Patterson up!!!

The email address used for the above was the work email of 14th Ward Alderman Stephen Gregali. Of course, as you all know, email addresses can be false. Rather than assume it was actually from Ald. Gregali I emailed him asking as much. Shortly after Ald. Gregali responded:

Mr. Patterson, I believe someone is using my name in vain.

If you could forward to me the content of the discussion I would appreciate
it. I do not appreciate someone trying to disparage my reputation.

I took him at his word and sent back the link.

The following email from Ald. Gregali sparked a series of exchanges between us:

I looked at the url you sent me and I find the comments quite interesting. Although I disagree with most of the postings and find them quite hateful and I have to agree with my impostor although, I don’t know you and I would not have made the disparaging remarks.

I also think that an Ald. should at least extend the courtesy to talk to another Ald. and not get directly involved in a project they know little or nothing about. I do think that Ald. Schmid should not have got involved. He should have discussed this with Ald. Florida.

I do believe that the focus should be generated elsewhere. I question your efforts to the extent that you would go after one Alderman and not another? I am refering to the Hill Development. Why not recall Ald. Vollmer? I don’t see the difference. You were pretty vocal about that. Do you live in either of the neighborhoods?

I find it troubling that anyone would take the initiative to recall an elected official on a difference of opinion, on innuendo and false accusations.

Quite frankly, Ald. Florida should be commended for the positive things she has done in her tenure and not based on the opinion of a few.

Have you seen someone else come up with a better plan? I haven’t. Without Ald. Florida’s actions that area of the City would continue to decline.

Change your focus and work with her.

If you wish to discuss this matter please feel free to contact me.

Thanks for your consideration.

I responded to him with:

I respectfully disagree with your take.

Yes, aldermen should have the courtesy to talk to the other. It would have been nice had Ald. Florida extended such a courtesy to Ald. Schmid given that the parcel is question is within eye shot of his ward. Also, since Craig represents the overwhelming majority of the Gravois Park that would have been a nice courtesy. He did, in fact, speak with her in private prior to the hearing on February 19th. Florida is attempting to make it out as though she was attacked but once again the facts do not support her argument.

Furthermore, one might expect an alderman to actually talk with the neighborhood in which she is placing a drive-thru. Florida did talk with Gravois Park and assured them the McDonald’s would not be located in their neighborhood. They were the ones blindsided by her actions.

My role as an urban critic is not to advocate recalls. I look at development patterns and comment on them. I wish someone had started a recall against Vollmer over St. Aloysious. Had someone started a recall, as they have done over the McDonald’s, I would gladly supported the effort. Even though I know Matt Villa through his sister’s family, I would have probably supported a recall against him in an attempt to stop the horrible Loughborough Commons. Same for the monstrosity known as Sullivan Place by Pyramid up in the 5th Ward.

As a citizen of the City of St. Louis I have a right to be involved in how our city develops. I have the education & professional experience to back up my views. We must stop acting like a city of 79 neighborhoods and 28 wards. We must be a strong & unified city competing in the region and across the country for residents. The narrow view of living in a certain ward or neighborhood will continue to hold us back.

You find it troubling that someone recall an alderman over a difference of opinion? Well, you don’t recall someone when you agree now do you? Furthermore, are you suggesting that not wanting a noisy and dirty drive-thru literally less than a 1,000 feet from your house is simply a “difference of opinion?” Your view seems to be as dismissive as Florida’s.

Please share what is innuendo and false accusations. [S]He lied to me personally, right to my face. She claimed not to have a site plan that she did in fact have. When she did admit she had the plan she then claimed it was not the plan, and that the city had not received a plan for a hearing two days away. Again, that was false. The site plan was submitted to the city weeks prior and her copy was the same one I later received. How can you possibly defend someone who goes to such great lengths to conceal the truth. It makes me question your ethics.

A better plan? Well, glad you ask. I have written much about a better plan. She finally conceded the plan that had been calling “urban-style” and “pedestrian friendly” was not in fact either. Her tune later changed to calling the original plan a standard McDonald’s (a true statement). They are submitting a revised plan to address the valid planning issues that I and others have raised after I showed examples from Chicago as well as detailed planning standards from Toronto. So, in this respect it was me that helped show a better way. Of course, had Jennifer Florida taken the time to consult with Rollin Stanley prior to submitting anything she might have gotten the same information.

But in terms of the best plan it is simple. Rebuild the McDonald’s on its current site in the Toronto urban fashion and build the mixed-use project on the former Sears site. To date nobody, including Florida, has been able to give a good reason why this is not possible.

I’m very disappointed in your responses but frankly I’m not at all surprised.

Ald. Gregali returned with:

Changes that occur during the “discussions” of a particular development are typical. Sometimes public input offers solutions to certain issues and sometimes not. That is part of the public process. Everyone has a say if they so choose. Will we all agree in the end? No. There will be difference of opinion and that is determined by the Board of Adjustment. That is where the public has the opportunity to make the difference. Not recall because you don’t get your way. I understand the Mayor supports this project and has helped the Ald. Are you going to effect a recall against the Mayor also?

The McDonald’s already exists in the neighborhood, people from the community work there, it’s not the best kept because of it’s location and from what I can gather generates a good amount of tax revenue. People use it. I wouldn’t want to lose it.

Reality is; The people that live along Grand Ave. made a choice of living in the environment of a Commercial District. What do they expect? It was their choice to do so. Noise, foot traffic, auto traffic, and unfortunately trash are all associated with commercial districts. The folks that live outside the neighborhood have the right to discuss the issues if they make sense. From what I’m reading no one has done that. We Ald. deal with these issues on a daily basis and there are no real solutions. We rely on people making the right choices when they visit our Communities. We can’t legislate behavior!!

Our constituency is constantly asking what are we going to do with the vacant buildings and lots, begging us for retail development. I haven’t seen anyone come up with a real idea, a developer or the money. They ask “what are you going to put there?”. Put? This is part of the problem. People in general have no idea what is involved in re-developing this City and I’m
learning everyday. I am no expert by any means and quite frankly haven’t met one.

Quite frankly, from what I have read on your site looks more personal than reasonable. The bottom line is that compromises exist and I think that’s where you all should be putting your resources.

All this he said this and she said needs to stop. I appreciate your right to comment but by your comment question your advocacy.

We all learn from our mistakes and our developments. Things change as they go along but to insinuate that someone is being purposely hurtful to a neighborhood is absurd.

There are so many good things that are going on in this City. I don’t agree with all of them but this type of thing creates an environment for elected officials to shy away from the tuff decisions. Do you want a leader or do you want a cynic?

I am one who advocates compromise when all else fails.

Be a leader and advocate for compromise not failure.

I then send back the following response:

You clearly have a distorted view of the facts in this case.

The McDonald’s is in one neighborhood, where it has been located since 1974. Florida told residents of a different neighborhood, Gravois Park, the McDonald’s would not be located there when this rumor go around over a year ago. What changes happened? No development changes other than she went ahead with the plan despite having told people it would not happen. That is not a change in discussions but outright deception.

Homes near commercial districts further up Grand and in places like the CWE are in demand because of their proximity to restaurants. The people who worked to make Keystone Place happen were expecting a mixed-use project, not an auto-oriented fast food chain.

Advocate compromise? Sure, the compromise is we let McDonald’s stay on their current site even though that type of facility is a detriment to an urban neighborhood and discourages creating a denser pedestrian-friendly atmosphere. McDonald’s can very well rebuild on their current site, they just don’t want to and/or Pyramid is eager to build more senior housing they cannot rent (see Sullivan Place).

I don’t see us agreeing on this issue. You are clearly entrenched in the old guard way of thinking. Your advocacy of compromises is clearly evident at the corner of Kingshighway & Chippewa.

Ald. Gregali’s response was the following:

Clearly you are misguided and unreasonable. You are entrenched in spreading misinformation and innuendo.

I won’t even answer your comment about me and SouthTown because you obviously don’t know what you are talking about. Once more you are misinformed but you go ahead and believe what you want and say what you will.

I am a firm believer in listening even when I don’t agree because everyone has a right to speak and maybe, just maybe there might be a compromise. It’s obvious that you don’t believe in compromise by your “my way or the highway” compromise below.

There comes time when time is wasted and I not going to waste my time any longer, I have better things to do.

So there you have it, opposing sides of a number of issues. Ald. Gregali is up for re-election in March 2007.

– Steve