Dealership questioned about name

Some city leaders want Acura of Jackson to change its name, saying they don’t like that the business is located in Ridgeland, yet touts the city of Jackson in its title.

Officials with Acura of Jackson – located on 828 Adcock Drive in Ridgeland – received approval for renovations to their existing building this week, but questions about their name and signage were left unanswered.

During discussions at a work session Monday, Mayor Gene McGee and Alderman-at-Large Gerald Steen both voiced their disapproval of the dealership being named “Acura of Jackson” when it is actually located in the city of Ridgeland.

“I want to convey to them that we really feel strongly about that and want it changed,” McGee said.

“Personally I think it’s a negative on the city of Ridgeland,” Steen said. “If you’re going to be in Ridgeland, let’s go Ridgeland all the way.”

Howard Glatstein, who was present to represent Acura of Jackson, explained that they never intended to insult the city in any way.

He went on to explain that it is the company’s feeling that a name change at this point could hurt business.

“They feel very strongly that if we had to change again it would have a big impact on their customer base,” Glatstein said. ” Also they have over ($500,000) in advertising already invested in that name.”

He went on to say this by no means meant that the dealership wouldn’t be good corporate citizens and that they would continue to support the local community.

Ward 3 Alderman Kevin Holder spoke out against it during Tuesday’s regular session.

“This is Ridgeland and we’re proud of that,” Holder said. “Jackson has their own issues why bring them into it.”

Ward 5 Alderman Scott Jones was the only member of the board to defend Acura of Jackson saying he felt it wasn’t the board’s job to critique the names of businesses.

“I just think it sets a dangerous precedent for us to start naming businesses,” Jones said. “We’re voting on a site plan, not a name.”

At Tuesday’s Ward 6 Alderman Linda S. Davis made a motion to approve the site plan, but asked that the business come back before the board before any signage was approved. The motion passed unanimously.

Madison County Journal
7/3/8