Gee, what politicians will do so they can feel good about themselves.

Bob Tiernan

Thanks to Tom Potter for needlessly dividing the community and sparking and flaming racial tensions.
This ego maniac has gone from just being a waste of space to being damaging. It would be great if we had a mayor who wanted to actually do something other than pander to a few retread activists every few months and lecture the rest of us from on high.
Where did arbitrarily renaming Interstate come up on Potter's Vision document, since that visioning exercise is his signature project?
There should be a standard, transparent, and inclusive process for honoring people and renaming streets. Chavez was a great man, and this process and the politics around it were a disgrace. Instead we get knee jerk reactions, pandering, and race baiting self righteousness. In the end though, this is what Portland deserves - we elected this useless blow-hard.
The 4th ave solution seems like the best solution left to get this thing over with and move on. I'm glad a majority of the council acted to solve a problem rather than grandstand and divide.

Bob Tiernan wrote "Gee, what politicians will do so they can feel good about themselves."

Gee, Bob, what procedure would you propose for when street naming becomes contentious?

Should we never name streets at all? Only have numbers? Should everyone's address be a GPS coordinate?

If we're going to have named public streets, someone, somewhere in Government is going to have to approve or coordinate the naming.

There were a lot of problems with process which led to this highly charged situation, but at the end of the day somebody with some degree of authority is going to have to answer the question of "yes or no" to naming a street, followed closely by "where" and "when" and "how".

Can't get around that if we have named public streets.

Or would you simply privatize all city streets?

Thanks for being so helpful.

• Bob R.

I believe that naming a street that goes through the heart of Chinatown, Cesar Chavez is pretty lame. Unfortunately, no matter what street they attempt to rename they are likely to face challenges. However, let's at least keep our numbered avenues, can we please?

How about a park? Or a Farmer's Market? Or a long section of highway?

[Bizarre and inappropriate attack on another commenter removed. -editor]

[Bizarre and inappropriate attack on another commenter removed. -editor]

White men behind closed doors making decisions?

I did not hear any latinos complain about County Commissioners Serena Cruz and Maria Rojo-Steffey (two brown women?) when they made decisions behind closed doors that benefited the latino community.

When things don't go their way they cry racism?

Get over it!

Their are more important issues to deal with in the community. Let's get back to work.

This just goes from bad to worse. So now the council has forced a change on 4th Ave/Chinatown businesses and residents without public input or proper notice?

Instead of blind-siding neighborhoods, why can't the council find a neighborhood or business district that wants the change? What about SE Division St, SW Vista Ave., NE 33rd Ave, NW 23rd Ave, Sunset Highway (probably a state decision), SE 12th Ave., NE 15th Ave., NE Sandy, 102nd Ave, 122nd Ave (I always confuse 102nd and 122nd), 82nd Ave., etc.?

This street renaming "process" (i.e. whatever-we-can-get-away-with) is outrageous. Renaming promoters need to stop calling opponents racists.

If the mayor, council and renaming committee had followed the policies for renaming a street in the beginning, Interstate would not have met the criteria, only one street name change in an area per year. Portland Blvd was changed this year. It seems to many N Portland residents that the proponents and mayor thought this would just slide through with very little opposistion, who cares what happens in N Portland.

I agree with KLC, the main thing was people in NoPo just felt like another thing was being shoved down their throats. What will be interesting now is to see what kind of reaction we get from the SW 4th business community and how City Hall reacts to it. The Chinatown issue is just one example of how rediculous this is (though I'm not sure if NW 4th would change), but now you're renaming where many afflent professionals have offices. Do they want to change all their business cards and letterheads and websites? Are they going to be racists, too?

I think Potter should be glad he's retiring. Adams definitely doesn't need this mess, but he just stepped in it up to his ankles and I don't expect the issue to go away before May 2008.

Also, all the pro street name change people (Potter included) were the first to play the race card without doing any surveys of NoPo opponents attitudes or reasons for opposing the change. Playing the race card just out of political opportunism IS racism! The Latino Network used racism when it was completely unsupported (If they have some valid research, I'd like to see it) and did more harm to race relations. I don't think Cesar Chavez himself would have endorsed Latino Network's tactics.

The fact that renaming supporters didn't hail naming a major street in honor of Chavez as a victory (or at least a partial victory) should make it apparent to anyone that this whole thing was about certain individual egos and "winning".

Its unfortunate that some people placed their personal prestige ahead of community.

I do think that perhaps renaming Division would have been a better choice. Can you imagine, "Cesar Chavez Way" instead of Division.

Bob Tiernan:

Gee, what politicians will do so they can feel good about themselves.

Bob R.:

Gee, Bob, what procedure would you propose for when street naming becomes contentious?

Bob Tiernan:

I wouldn't rename any of them to begin with, nor would I name new government buildings after crooks like Hatfield (who kept people out of courthouses when he inserted such wording into timber-cutting bills). Cascadia Federal Courthouse sounds better.

Bob R.

Can't get around that if we have named public streets.

Or would you simply privatize all city streets?

Bob Tiernan:

I don't see how suggesting privatizing streets deals with the issue.

Again, have at it with new streets (if you allow them). The politicians and special interests can still pick naes that make themselves feel good about themselves.

Bob Tiernan

Inflammatory letter and heartfelt rant to follow.

Here's some fodder for the dim. An open letter to Victoira Taft...one of my local heroes and one of her audience of seven.

Victoria,

This is probably not apropos to the specifics of street name changes.

But it is related and I just gotta say it. I listened for as long as I could stand to the radio broadcast regarding the City Council meeting, and its bald faced pandering to a specific minority, on a stupid street name change.

First, I think the owner of the Nighthawk did a bang up job at holding the cities feet to the fire...KUDOS from an old shipyard guy!

But after listening to council members and mayoral candidates speak eeeeendlessly about feeling this or that; and about not wanting to offend him or her or them, and all the finger pointing and scrambling because they got caught with their little panties down around their ankles….it was all I could do to not scream like a blithering idiot at my radio to the dolts running Portland.

In abject honest inquiry: Is this TRULY the best that Portland can do for leadership? Are these panty-waisted “men” truly what drives Portland perspective? Are these IDIOTS, so concerned about feelings and offense, rather than stepping up and taking care of business in a direct and expedient manner…are these clowns really what drives Portland?

It was one of the most disheartening performances I have ever seen/heard from a public servant on any level anywhere, anywhen...truly embarrassing.

bill

I'll waste no more energy here. Thanks for letting me vent on this stupid issue which could have been handled much more effectively by kindergarteners.

Bob Tiernan responded "I wouldn't rename any of them to begin with"

But Bob, that's just avoiding the issue. Street names have to come from somewhere, and even if the current rename procedures had been followed to the letter (which they weren't), the matter would have wound up in the domain of the city council sooner or later.

If you want to change the law so that any street can never be renamed, you'll have to bring that before the council as well.

The reason I brought up privatization of public streets (which I do NOT support), is because that seems to be the only way you can get your wish to have the city council completely uninvolved in naming decisions.

• Bob R.

I have an idea for all your morons in Portland. Rename the City to Ciudad Cesar Chavez.

The pro name change leaders were just unbelievable. Despicable vulgar tactics of tarring all those opposed as racist (explicitly or by innuendo). They made it clear that for them this was about power and ego, nothing more. Truly disgusting and shameless.

They do not deserve to be associated in any way with the name of Cesar Chavez, ever.

The city charter should be amended so as to lay out an exact process to followed and criteria to be met in order to change a street name. NO EXCEPTIONS. Preferably it would raise the bar so high as to make it damn near impossible. The other option would be to get the renaming on the ballot.

"I do think that perhaps renaming Division would have been a better choice. Can you imagine, "Cesar Chavez Way" instead of Division."

It certainly would have been more entertainingly ironic. Division is all this renaming debacle has engendered. Thanks very much Tom Potter. Thanks very much Latino Network. Great job!

Kevin, you're probably thinking of Beatrice Cannady, a prominent black activist in Portland during the 1910s-1930s, co-founder of the local NAACP chapter, editor of the local black newspaper during that period, anti-segregationist, graduate of L&C Law School, resident of NE Portland (to my best recollection), etc., etc., etc. She's far too obvious a choice to have a street named for her.

Bob R., THERE IS ALREADY A PROCESS FOR RENAMING STREETS, established after the acrimony that the MLK renaming created. The Council utterly ignored it, repeating the mistakes of history. And all to pander to a tiny but exceptionally shrill group of professional race baiters. Morons all. I won't be voting for any of them ever again. They have proven themselves to be not only utterly incompetent, but openly contemptuous of the democratic process.

Speaking of incompetent autocrats, I nominate Tom Potter for worst mayor in Portland's history. Anyone second the motion?

What Mayor Potter said was almost true: "In my heart, I will always believe that renaming Interstate was the right thing to do." Only, it should have been renamed to Rosa Parks Way. This has been said elsewhere, but, having bus lanes, Interstate Ave is more suited to the legacy of Rosa Parks. Why didn't someone point this out last year when the Portland Blvd. change occured? Because our "Name Change Fever" lacks a guiding vision.

Also, why isn't 82nd street on a list of options for Chavez Blvd? It's a huge street with a diverse population. Again, the reason is a lack of vision. SW 4th was just is a somewhat uncontroversial option slipped into the mix to clean up an unexpected mess.

We could do so much better for our communities and the heroes we're trying to honor by putting context over convenience in these major name changes.

Done.

I understand wanting to "diversify" street names in our city, really, I do. White liberal guilt really knows no ends.

But is it too much to ask that when someone gets a street named after them that they might, oh, I don't know, actually have some kind of connection to the Portland area?

I don't remember this kind of furor when Front Avenue was named "Naito Parkway", why? Because the Naito family is a fixture in the Portland area. They have contributed to the success of our city.

Find someone of equal merit in the local Latino community and name a street (any street!) after them.

The bottom line is that all of this fell apart when Saltzman's office renamed Portland Blvd. They ignored all of the rules and pushed it through. Then Potter ran it downhill from there.

For starters a person must have died at least five years before a street can be named for them. Rosa Parks did not meet that criteria. Then 2500 signatures must be collected to set the plan in motion. Not done on either. If anyone would have approved of that step it would have been Ceasar Chavez. He believed in not only talking to people but listening to then as well.

I can't blame the Latino community or the community around Interstate for being upset. The Latino community went to the Mayor who told them it would be done. He had a responsibilty to explain the process to them. Then he could have helped them to accomplish their goal. Instead he decided that even though we voted against having a strong mayor form of government he would force us to have one.

The Interstate community wanted to follow the process set out by law and to be respected. They got neither. Yes, some people acted in a way that makes me angry and ashamed. That was not everyone and the others deserved better. As a city we will be living with the anger around this for a long time.

Shame on the whole lot of them - Potter, Saltzman, Leonard, Adams and Sten. All of them should have insisted on following the rules that council put into place. All of them have set the stage for this to happen again in the future. None of them should have their jobs for long after this.

Those who argue that opposition to the name change on Interstate was rooted in racism don't have to go far to collect the evidence. After all, this is ostensibly a left-of-center forum, but racism, white privilege and typical white assumption of the victim role are rife in these posts. Imagine what the right-wing forums are like, if this is the best the so-called progressives of Oregon can do.

There was a reason Interstate was preferred by members of the Latino community. It goes through Latino neighborhoods - unlike 4th Ave. This has been reiterated over and over again, but is conveniently ignored.

The idea that a local black leader, no matter how deserving of recognition, can be substituted for a Latino leader who inspired the nation is offensive in the extreme. The proposal basically suggests that all people of color are alike - or that the Latino community has no leaders of their own, or else suggests such appalling ignorance that the writers should just turn off her computer and go back to school.

Portland has named street after many extremely undeserving people, but try to name a street after someone who actually fought to make people's lives richer and better and, if he's brown, the usually hidden racism that undergirds our city comes out in full force.

First, Martin Luther King, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all had tremendous effect on the lives of Portlanders. One reason they are honored is that their lives had an effect far beyond parochial boundaries.

And they had more direct effects in the region as well. For example, the farmworker union PCUN was founded by Cipriano Ferrell, trained and developed by Chavez. And Cannaday may be deserving, but you were suggesting her as a substitute for a Latino leader - and didn't even know her name, by the way.

By the way, I love your assumption that I am a Latino biased against African-Americans, the usual bullying response of whites when someone calls them on their privilege is to make a counter-charge of racism. Anything to avoid looking rationally at the racism inherent in the suggestion that your white opinion is more valid than Latino opinion...or the blithe assumption that blacks can be substituted for Latinos on your say-so.

Check your karma, Kevin.

"There was a reason Interstate was preferred by members of the Latino community. It goes through Latino neighborhoods..." Kija Persson

I think I've read that a number of Latinos have lived or live along Interstate or thereabouts, but have never heard much of anything clearly indicating areas around Interstate as Latino neighborhoods. Does the avenue actually have something like that? Such as a cluster of Latino stores, restaurants, a neighborhood center, churches? Kija, if you know about those things, why don't you tell us of them?

If Latino neighborhoods did exist along Interstate there would likely have been overwhelming support in favor of the name change. So far, that doesn't seem to be the case.

Fer chrissakes, can we all just agree to quit calling each other racists?! It's like that corollary to Godwin's law - once you've compared another poster to Hitler, you automatically lose the argument.

I live less that a block from Rosa Parks Way, and less than four blocks from Interstate. Our neighbors of every color are almost unanimous in opposition to this name change. We've already had to deal with the ramifications of the Portland Blvd. name change, and they're shoving another one down our throats?! Long term residents can't help but feel that we're merely the dumping ground for the misplaced good intentions of the city council.

They should have followed the existing process for the Portland Blvd. renaming AND the Interstate Ave. renaming. If they don't want Arbor Lodge residents getting defensive and upset, they shouldn't have tried to do an end-run around the community vetting process to pander to a growing voting bloc.

Sure, when we all agree to stop beings racists.

Also, if you're curious about what areas have the highest density of Latino populations, check out this map of 2000 census data. If the issue is that we want to site the new Cesar Chavez Blvd. to run through Latino neighborhoods, it should really be in St Johns or Gresham.

Jack admonished me, in ALL CAPS, "Bob R., THERE IS ALREADY A PROCESS FOR RENAMING STREETS"

Yes, Jack, I believe I mentioned it.

I was specifically responding to Bob Tiernan's complaint about the city council being involved.

Regardless of the process, or whether or not it was followed correctly, it is still true that any renaming decision for a public street is going to land with the city council at some point.

I'm not sure why you chose to pounce on my remarks, because I don't think we disagree that there was an existing process defined by law.

• Bob R.

Why do people only suggest only Eastside streets as substitutes for Interstate or 4th? The westside deserves a chance. And Kijja, there are some Latinos on Interstate, recently. Historically it is populated by ethnic Poles and plain old working class white people- so of course they are not allowed a voice in this matter. When the "leaders" who "worked so hard" for the name change are "insulted" that the most central street in Portland is being named after their hero, it demonstrates that they could care less about Cesar Chavez, this is all about their own show of power.

The problem, kija, is that you don't know Kevin is a racist any more than he knows you are a racist. Using a powerful word like that in ignorance says more about the person using it than the person it's being used against.

Actually, I do know that Kevin is a racist. He grew up in America and for a white person to pretend to be unaffected by our racist culture and not acknowledge white privilege is like pretending you can swim in pool and not get wet. I admit quite freely that as a white person, my perceptions are influenced by the racism I grew up in as well. Maybe when people get less defensive when their racism is checked, they might actually examine what they say and do and begin to address racism instead of hiding it under the rug and pretending it doesn't exist.

Racism will never be eliminated if we all have to cater to white sensibilities and our collective falling into a faint whenever someone call us on our racism.

Do I claim racism is the single motivation - no, surely there are businesses who dislike reprinting stationery and so on. They will survive, just as the companies that predicted catastrophe over Union and Portland Blvd name changes survived. Every time a street has come up for renaming, the same brouhaha has happened, this time the Council caved.

Most people who opposed Interstate rooted their opposition in objecting to the process - the usual objection of people uncomfortable with their real objections. Yet now, many are fine with 4th, where's the process here? They pulled it out of their asses. It wasn't even on the list. Yet, this is okay? I think the reaction people have to this process-less solution puts the lie to their pretense that their opposition was rooted in process.

However, I was not commenting on the arguments in the hearing, I was commenting specifically on the racism on this site and Kevin's comment was particularly egregious. You see, I expected better since you all pretend to be liberal I guess you're all more of the "love me I am a liberal" kind of liberals.

I keep coming to Blue Oregon hoping to see something here that really makes you "blue" but keep being disappointed. Gary Delgado once wrote that Portland is the most racist city in America - a statement I thought was ridiculous. But Blue Oregon continues to prove him right.

This seems to be the day for accusing people of positions they haven't explicitly taken.

Kija - Where, in any of Kevin's posts here, did he deny the notion of "white privilege"? Was it when he declared that MLK was one of his "personal heroes"?

The fact that Kevin did not explicitly lead off every comment with "I acknowledge and attempt to compensate for white privilege" does not make him a racist.

Oh, and as for me, I acknowledge at attempt to compensate for white privilege. If I haven't phrased that to your precise liking, please tell me exactly what to write to avoid being labelled a racist. Thanks.

• Bob R.

Kevin, Am I the only one who notices that all your praise for MLK and others comes after I noted how offensive your post was?

I am going to try to seize a teachable moment amid the mind-numbing conversation:

1. The terms "Latino" and "Hispanic" do not necessarily describe the same people.

2. There is no single Latino "community."

3. There is no single Hispanic "community."

4. Cesar Chavez's ethnicity was neither "Hispanic" nor "Latino."

5. His ethnicity was "Mexican American" and "Chicano."

6. "Latinos" and "Hispanics" are not necessarily either "Mexican Americans" or "Chicanos."

7. The Latino "community" involved in the Interstate controversy does not reflect either Mexican American nor Chicano points of view.

8. The self-appointed "Latino leaders" are exactly that.

9. The Portland State Department of Chicano and Latino Studies recognizes the difference between the two cultures. Here's the link:

http://www.chla.pdx.edu/program.htm

1. Like Cesar Chavez, I am a Mexican American and a Chicano.

Kija - you say that Kevin had no praise for MLK or others until after you noted how "offensive" his comment was.

Well, I scrolled up to find Kevin's very first comment in this thread (sorry if I missed an earlier one), and it says:

I agree. Not to take anything away from Chavez but wouldn't it make more sense as well as be more inline with Portland's street naming history to look to LOCAL heros?

I'm at work and don't have access to double-check the name but my copy of Portland magazine mentioned a local black women who had fought hard for civil rights in Portland. I'd never heard of her. Why not name a street after her or some other LOCAL person? And then after those individuals names have been exhausted THEN look to heros from outside of Oregon?

I'm struggling very hard to find "offensive" material here, and struggling even harder to find racism. And quite plainly, Kevin is already including praise for others in here, if not by exact name name but by reference.

• Bob R.

Sean - Thanks for the teachable moment.

Bob R.

There is nothing you can write to prove you are not a racist. As soon as you make an intelligent argument that goes against the raced-pandering political agenda of many people, you are a racist. Besides, they don't like intelligent arguments.

Go ahead and call me a racist. I have spent enough time debating people here at BlueOregon to become immune to the word

I'm probably not making any friends today by going contrarian on just about every angle posted here, but I disagree that promoting a street name change is somehow a disservice or detrimental in an era of other higher priorities.

We are a big enough city, with a diverse enough array of people, that we can address more than one topic at a time, of hugely significant or minorly significant importance.

This does not excuse the way the current situation unfolded, but in general there is nothing wrong with promoting "feel good" initiatives at the same time as we try to address substantive, daily life issues.

Unfortunately for everyone, there isn't much left to "feel good" about after all that has happened regarding the renaming.

• Bob R.

bob, I was not going to respond to any more of these posts because it has become the usual whites assuring whites how not-Racist they are while making counter charges of racism. It's a pattern that repeats anytime someone calls privilege.

However, you honestly seem to asking what's offensive. First, Kevin's was not the only offensive post, just the one that really struck a match with the privileged assumption that blacks and Latinos, or in this particular case, one Black woman and one Chicano man, are interchangeable. If his rationale were geographical, then why not suggest Cipriano Ferrell? He would have been an appropriate substitute for Chavez, not some anonymous black woman whose name he could not be bothered to remember.

Additionally, given the role of the NAACP in opposing Martin Luther King on several fronts in order to win white approval, the suggestion that an NAACP chapter founder would be a better choice than MLK runs into another discussion altogether. Disregard for the history of the civil rights movement and the farmworker movement is part and parcel of this suggestion he put forth.

That insouciant disregard for history or ethnicity or name - that bespeaks white privilege.

As to the real values of Blue Oregon, the reason I posted in the first place was because of the relentlessly hostile to Latino postings I read here in this thread and others. It's disappointing that in what should be a progressive refuge from the hate-mongering and race-baiting of Red Oregon, Blue Oregon sinks in the same mire, only using more polite words.

Kija

And yet you are the one using the hate-mongering and race-baiting. I guess you consider yourself morally superior to everyone else.

Goodbye....and good riddance.

"First, Kevin's was not the only offensive post, just the one that really struck a match with the privileged assumption that blacks and Latinos, or in this particular case, one Black woman and one Chicano man, are interchangeable."

Kevin stated no such assumption, although a very casual reading of his first post might give that impression. However, Kevin specifically disavowed such a notion in his subsequent comments, which you seem to have ignored.

As for whether or not he "could bother to" remember the name of a local hero he read in an article, that's a real stretch to prove "white privilege" or especially racism. Personally, I'm terrible with names ... In business I have to concentrate extra hard and repeat the name to myself numerous times, and I still forget it unless I maintain an active relationship with the person. There's a name for this problem, but I forget it at the moment. :-)

Still, criticising a guy for remembering an article about a civil rights activist but not remembering the activist's name is a pretty weak argument.

Now I see you're using the word "insouciant" -- that is clearly inappropriate because Kevin has not displayed a "undisturbed, carefree, or blithe unconcern" as the various definitions have it. He is in fact actively engaged and offering up constructive alternatives.

Perhaps you should consider that the negative reactions you are receiving, at least in what should be friendly quarters, are in part due to an insistence on your part to escalate the adjectives in the discussion beyond what is actually happening.

• Bob R.

I also do not think renaming a numbered street is the best idea. Especially one as popular and big as 4th Ave, nor one that runs into China Town! How about Powell Blvd, or Division, or Killingsworth? Even Couch St would work because it fits in with the Alphabet. Those street names are kind of ugly. Or better yet, why not name a city building or city park after the guy? Why does it have to be a street? I don't see how renaming a street is "honoring" anybody. It is just confusing and annoying. Renaming Portland Blvd was bad enough. How many more streets are they going to try to rename? Also, how much time and money is this taking? Renaming a street and having to change all the maps and street signs and such does not seem like it is worth all the effort and money.

Insouciant was deliberate as offering up an NAACP activist as preferable to MLK is blithely unconcerned about the active role the NAACP played in opposing MLK. And looking at his subsequent comments, I see some ass-covering and more offensiveness such as his "a local Latino leader, NO MATTER HOW OBSCURE"

It's as though he can't help but telegraph his particular bias against Latinos.

And Mike, I didn't say I was never posting again, just that I am tired of this thread because it is an almost perfect example of white reaction to someone pointing out racism. Rather than even consider the possibility, you all jump on the bandwagon insisting that he can't be racist, not listening at all when I suggest that he is racist, as am I, as are we all, and we will be trapped in racism unless we start listening instead of flapping around in denial.

Kira -

It's as if you can't help but receive a telegraph that was never sent. Seriously.

Also, you did not merely "suggest" that he might be a racist, you flat out called him one, thereby shutting down any meaningful debate.

You take his "no matter how obscure" to be dismissive of Latinos, whereas I took it (and he clearly explained it) to mean he has a bias in favor of naming streets after local people.

Now, you might want to test him on that ... ask him if he would prefer renaming some streets named after national leaders who were white, starting with "Washington", after local people ... that might be an interesting way to clarify where he's coming from.

But instead of trying to have a dialogue and find out exactly what Kevin's position was, you went straight for the racism declaration, way beyond a mere "suggestion".

This is not a thought experiment, these are actual people, who impart actual meaning to terms, and "racism" is a big strong word and not to be bandied about lightly.

• Bob R.

Kija - I see that I typo'd your name in my previous comment. It was unintentional (and evidence of my problem with remembering names). Sorry for the mistake.

If Kija is remotely representative of the kind of mentality behind the Interstate renaming committee, no wonder the effort was such a failure. What an amazing disconnect this effort has shown to the sensitivity of people concerning such a dramatic change to their neighborhood.

Regrettably, the effort was overwhelmed and undermined by a particular faction somewhat common to activist efforts; that adrenaline craving faction that thrives on throwing the force of a huge chip on their shoulder against anyone offering the slightest resistance to the intentions of that faction. It's kind of like, 'any that don't see it our way are racists, so join up with our anti-racist encounter group, or else'. Hey...go have a soda and fuhgettaboutit.

If the council cannot follow process this is a reason for a RECALL !

Posted by: ws | Nov 16, 2007 7:00:32 PM: "If Kija is remotely representative of the kind of mentality behind the Interstate renaming committee, no wonder the effort was such a failure."

You got that right. What a bizzarre attempt to graft the right-wing's style of wedge-issue politics onto progressivism. I'd put Marie Lisa Johnson up there with Bill Sizemore and that anti-tax kook Professor Stupid. The fact that she's still trying to demogogue the City Council's pathetic deal into a betrayal shows how she holds herself immune from any responsibility for this mess.

Kija, If you ever read this post again, I want to thank you. I agree with everything you said, but I could never have said it so well.

And to the rest of you who attacked her position so vociferously without considering she may be making a point that we should each consider as we look inward and strive to be the best people we can be, shame on you.

My heart hurts. Peace be with you, Kija.

The problem, kija, is that you don't know Kevin is a racist

Oh, I don't think that is true. You can't see into someone's heart, but you can judge people by what they say and do.

The problem with the arguments about "process" is that its not clear the process for changing street names has ever been used. That it an issue now, but wasn't for for Front to Naito or Portland to Rosa Parks. That looks to some folks in Latino community, especially its real and self-proclaimed leaders, like they are being treated differently because they lack the same political clout that got those changes made. So this has become, in part, a power struggle about race and politics.

As for the argument that Cesar Chavez and MLK are not local figures, that doesn't seem to concern anyone about Washington or Jefferson or Jackson or ... Its not an accident that Chavez heroism and historic importance to both Portland and the country is more likely to be recognized by people with brown skin who speak spanish and whose lives he helped transform, than by those with white skin. That is what racism does.

Many good and not so good arguments on both sides of this difficult and contentious issue. I just wanted to weigh in here (foolish me) with some thoughts about the term "race." First, it is a socially constructed term and doesn't reflect the reality of ethnic diversity in the least. There are some modest differences between people and alot of variation, but modern anthropology and the results of research in genetics have clearly demonstrated that there is nothing that corresponds to the term "race" - merely minor differences in skin color, etc. For that reason, when folks call others "racist," for better or worse reasons, I would much prefer they use the term "ethnocentric" instead. Is there "ethnocentrism" among many in Portland - yes. But can we somehow get over the inappropriate use of the term "race", which is meaningless in scientific terms? I sure hope so! Thanks for listening.

We're talking about CURRENT name changes

So what?

First, it (race) is a socially constructed term

Yes, it is. And for that reason it has little, if anything, to do with "ethnocentrism". My wife ancestry is Swedish and mine is Norwegian, we have "ethnic" differences. Race (and racism) is an entirely different thing.

Dear God.

How pleasant would it be to be able to blithely believe that race, as an artificial construct, is irrelevant to real life?

Race is an artificial construct just like, say, marriage, and every bit as relevant to life.

All I can say is that, as a person of color reading this thread, I would feel significantly less safe attending a Progressive Happy Hour with you folks than I did when two men accosted me last week (at the north end of Interstate), declared that they were proud to be racists and informed me that there was no room for black people like me (yeah, they used the N-word) "around here."

I am not a coward; I look with puzzlement at people who think it's unsafe to ride TriMet late at night. But I would not feel safe in a room with the writers of most of these posts. Are you as proud of yourselves as were the racists I met on, ahem, Interstate Avenue?

Of course, Latinos/ Hispanics/Mexicans are faced by a certain opposition today. Bush and buddies posing against so-called illegal aliens is all that is and not much more. Many, many Hispanics are well received and working throughout the tri-county area, have decent jobs, places to live and vehicles to drive. Of course the situation of some hispanics could be better, but they're still shopping in the same stores I do, sitting wherever they want on the bus and drinking out of the same water fountains as everyone else.

There is a lot of support for hispanics. They are well received despite the bush-ites. Why do people like Maria Lisa Johnson and Kija not draw from that support but rather, focus on isolated examples of racism to chastise an entire community and even the city as a whole?

So please don't try and sell some notion that facing opposition over their determination to have the portland street of their choosing named after a notable person of their ethnic origin is an experience similar to that of black people down in the old south. It's just not.

Doretta (comment Nov 17, 2007 9:01:39 AM)helps to inform by offering some of the nastier gems arising from one of the community meetings. But really, so what do those incidents imply? Are those few crackers truly representative of the larger identity of the Interstate community?

Where is the swelling support from the Hispanic community within the Interstate neighborhood itself (if in fact there really is one, and that seems doubtful) for this name change? From what area did they get those signatures? So far, the evidence adds up to the fact that the Interstate to Chavez naming committee did not do their leg-work. They did not successfully go into the Interstate community itself to build up a base of support that would have made the name change a slam-dunk. Maybe they shouldn't be faulted for being suckered by the illusion of Potter's quick and easy formula for street name changes, but they should stop right now, this hokey game of racial blackmail.

I am not a BlueOregon regular and damn, this thread is exactly why! I am sorry but this Kija person is frankly just a damaged person. Unlike her rantings & ravings about "white privelege" and racism, I am basing my opinion strictly on what she wrote, not assumptions. What a bitter, foul, empty life she/he must live to be so angry and to perceive her life as such a victimhood. Pathetic. And the other dude who wrote about "Bob's boys" and all that: Nice. Calling someone a pedo really moves the debate along. Oh yes, and all the faux-intellectual "race is a construct" jibberish! Sheesh. Seriously, honestly, I have a question: When you guys (kija, Doretta, et alia) read your own blitherings are you proud? Do you think you read smart? Do you fell "superior?" What? What is it? Because us folks out here in reality are just stunned...

The thing about fear, Pat Ryan, is that it's not a precision tool. Humans didn't evolve for it to be. So, yep, I'm afraid of you.

What you might not know is that my personal experience of this catastrophe has included hour after hour (after hour) of people telling me (shouting at me, blustering at me, blithering at me, whining at me) that they're not racist, honest they're not. And I never once asked them if they were -- I certainly never suggested that I thought they were -- most of these people I DIDN'T EVEN KNOW.

Which suggests to me that the good white people of Portland are protesting one heck of a lot too much.

More specifically, you personally (yes, you, the one who claims to have "personally and physically" stood up to protect people like me) suggested that it's relevant to this discussion to address the phenomenon of people "calling everyone who opposes my POV a racist." I won't deny the phenomenon exists, but it hasn't happened here.

A lot of the weepy white people who seem to be begging me for absolution have claimed that they heard it. So far, nobody has managed to tell me just who called them racist, or give a convincing description of what was said.

At least one weepy white person WHOM I DID NOT KNOW FROM ADAM tried to convince me that I had called her racist in a public forum.

My personal guess is that some anti-change rabble-rouser sent out a flier claiming that the Chavez committee members were accusing all their opponents of being racist, and that a lot of people swallowed it.

And when you regurgitated it for this thread, you didn't do it calmly -- you were pleading with the BO gods to save you from the horror, the horror of being called racist.

The way that post of yours registers in my gut -- the one that's been kicked by a lot of years of overt and subtle racism, sexism, homophobia and religious discrimination -- is as a statement that you've got something to feel defensive about. I don't have to know what that might be to take it as a warning sign. Defensive people lash out. They just do.

I'm sure many people find you a fine human being. Because I've been reading your posts for years, I can say that I would likely enjoy your company. But after your statements on this thread (including your willingness to swallow the soundbite that white people are the victims here because they're feeling guilty), I wouldn't count on you to have my back when a fight turned nasty.

Specific enough?

Oh, and I didn't say the posters here scare me as much as the proud racists of Interstate. I said you good folks scare me more. I'd rather have my face spat at, any day, than have my back stabbed.

Finally, Kevin, Kija said you share a racist conditioning that everyone in our society shares and she/he thinks it comes out in your comments.

There are two problems with that argument, Doretta.

First, the idea that racism is everywhere, in everyone, unavoidable, and a large percentage of the dark matter in the universe has the unintended consequences of minimizing -- and in fact legitimizing -- racism. If we're all racists, then what do we call the assholes who harrassed Suzii? Uber-racists? It's meaningless (and absurd) to lump those of us who oppose the Interstate renaming in with those guys. If we're all racists, then you just made what they did seem okay, because hey, how could they escape their white privilege?

Second, the argument that we're all racists has the effect of stopping any meaningful debate. Some have argued that's exactly why the renaming committee made the charge, because they didn't want to have the debate, they just wanted to win. I don't agree with that, but it does make me wonder: Are whites required to agree with the recommendations of any committee that is made up predominantly of people of color? In your mind, is there any way for us to disagree without being racist (or without using our "white privilege" to our advantage)? If not, then you've basically constructed a world where whites and non-whites cannot have meaningful debates -- and that's a sad world, one that I don't want a part in.

I said this on the other thread, but I think it bears repeating. There are racists who opposed the Interstate name change, they were the cowards in the back of the room who shouted racial insults and worried about hispanics "taking over" their part of Portland. The existence of these bigots shouldn't surprise anyone. But the renaming committee and the Mayor made the leap that ALL those who oppose the name change were racists (or, at the every least, had race "issues" somewhere deep down that were being vocalized through their opposition). That is unfair, it is a judgement based on the color of the opponents' skin rather than the content of their character, and it's exactly the kind of behavior we should be trying to rid our society of.

One lesson to take from this debacle is that we should always seek to understand people and their motives on an individual level rather than as part of a pre-defined group. Another lesson to take is that it's impossible to do that over the internet, and it's impossible to do that if you're unwilling to engage in face-to-face dialogue. Would any of this have happened if the renaming committee had simply met with the neighborhood residents and businesses BEFORE getting City Hall political support? Not to the same extent, and it's for that reason that I blame the renaming committee and the Mayor for a failure of PROCESS. And I reject any assertion on your part that my opposition is, deep down, based on race.

It's not.

I finally figured out today why the latino leaders are so adamant that those against the Interstate rename are racist. The Oregonian quotes one of the leaders as saying the neighborhood was against the name change because people would think it was a low class, mexican neighborhood. My husband and many of his friends grew up in the Interstate neighborhood, and have been involved in working to stop the name change. I can honestly say that I don't think this idea ever occurred to any of them! It isn't like we are talking about Lake Oswego or something, these guys are proud of their lower middle class roots, and feel they are entitled to keep a little heritage of their own, as lowly as it may be.

I can't help but think that Cesar Chavez would be appalled at the latino community leaders who find themselves victimized, demeaned and disprespected because the council chose the most important street in town to name after him instead of the one they had personally picked. Cesar Chavez knew real persecution, but this group had to go to great lengths to find persecution where there is none.

Miles, nobody is arguing that all the people who opposed renaming are racist. Seriously. Nobody is. You just wrote hundreds of words about a straw man.

But one can smile, and smile, and be a villain. Not everybody who says "I'm not a racist" is telling the truth.

What we can call the people who stopped me for that chat is "honest racists." What we can call many people who opposed the renaming is "ordinary racists." What we can call all the people who opposed the renaming is "people who opposed the renaming."

(Frankly, I'm sure there were supporters of the renaming whom we could call either honest or ordinary racists. But they haven't come to me begging to be labeled ... )

susan, many of the opponents, including some who are arguably far from racist, said they feared loss of property value. Do you think property value would be an issue if, for instance, people proposed renaming it "Two Rivers Way"?

One opponent (I've been told that she's not racist) made the perfectly reasonable observation that people driving south on "the Interstate" (i.e., not "Interstate Avenue") would see three consecutive exits: MLK Blvd, Chavez Blvd., Rosa Parks Way. And that they would therefore choose not to invest in North Portland. And that, again, property values would plummet.

You go right ahead and be proud of your husband who saw right through the arguments about property values. But one example does not prove your point.

pat, dear, I didn't call you racist. I called you unsafe.

And no, not everybody who disagrees with me is unsafe. But most of the posters on this thread? I wouldn't trust you on my team.

And no, that's not a blanket statement. If you want me to go through the whole thread and tell you which posters I would or wouldn't trust at my back -- I won't do that. I told you which list you're on because you asked. Maybe you didn't see it as asking for absolution, but you did ask me whether I'm afraid of you, and you did preface it with two paragraphs of singing your own praises -- it was pretty clear which answer you were lobbying for me to return.

And seriously. Fourth Avenue is "the most important street in town"? I thought we were talking about Portland, OREGON.

Sal, I know Pat's a good man. I said so. I agree that I don't detect any hidden motivations in his posts.

And I agree that it is counterproductive to suggest that race is a factor when it isn't. Just as counterproductive as it is to suggest that race isn't a factor when it is.

I am going to be very blunt: I would need to see proof (police reports at the very least) before I would believe any of "suzii's" claims of her victimhood to race-related violence. Fake claims are not unheard of and her sheer and disturbing level of hatred would indicate one would do well to question any of her claims. This is how these advocates and fringe dwellers operate, by attempting to claim a moral highground that they feel will make them untouchable. It's bunk. Suzii's "experiences" are just too perfect for propelling her angry worldview...

Hey Doretta..."I'd also venture that you've pretty clearly demonstrated Suzii's wisdom in not trusting you to have her back." Kinda like you had the Kenton Neighborhood's back in this entire renaming fiasco? When over 80% of residents are anti but you go ahead and try to vote "yes" for all your Chavez committee chums? Nice...

Yeah, right, I'm going to call the police every time some bully spits in my face or calls me nasty names.

You do live in a soft, cushy little world, don't you?

Our out-of-commissioners just wanted to erase their blunders by choosing Fourth to be Chavez thinking nobody would care, and besides, if City Hall is there, who could complain? Instead they look stupid. Now they just started a brand new fight instead of resolving the first one. The Latinos are disgusted and walked away, Old Town says why us, we're Chinatown, and downtown businesses feel picked on again. Great work from our leaders. Nobody is following this one, so take a step back and admit you made a stupid, rushed decision.

The people who were asked by the mayor's office stepped forward and took part in a good-faith effort to engage civic leaders and to follow the process as they were asked to do.

Sal, this is not true. The renaming committee was not "asked" by the Mayor to step forward, they met as an insular group and decided which street they wanted to rename. They then took that decision to the Mayor, who supported it and said they should hold some public hearings. (One has to wonder why public hearings are only being held after the decision has been made, but that's kind of a larger Portland problem.)

folks who who suggest that racism has not played a part in this discussion are sticking their heads in the sand. It may not be your personal motivation, but that does not mean that it has not played a significant role in this process.

I guess I wonder what you mean by "significant". It sounds like you are making the same accusations the committee did, and the Mayor did, that "most" or "a lot" of the opposition is racist. There were only a few people who said anything remotely racist during those public meetings, so what do you base this on?

If you think that all, or even most of the blame on this particular issue, lies with a handful of community leaders who have stepped forward when asked, then you are sorely mistaken. And if you are criticizing those people, without at the very least acknowledging the very real concerns that people have, then you are part of the problem, in my view.

I do blame the renaming committee, almost completely. The Mayor is also to blame, but I didn't have high expectations of him anyway. Had the renaming committee engaged in an outreach process BEFORE the decision had been made, this whole thing would have turned out differently. The opposition was truly grass roots, neighbors who are not politically involved standing up and saying "Not Interstate." I'm surprised that anyone would NOT blame the renaming committee for this mess.

I can't stomach reading any more of this garbage---the idiocy of the anti-white, openly racist "progressive" position exhibited by the likes of kiija, Suzii, and others here (not to mention the self-appointed name change committee) is so self-evident that anyone with half a brain cell can see how morally and intellectually bankrupt it is. The virulent racism that the proponents of the Interstate name change exhibit every time they open their mouths is just as responsible for its failure as the pandering incompetents on the City Council who like to play Bush-style autocrats on our dime.

But I do have to respond to this little gem by Byron, a common lie put forth by anti-science leftists, as clearly evidenced by those who have chimed in to agree: "modern anthropology and the results of research in genetics have clearly demonstrated that there is nothing that corresponds to the term "race" - merely minor differences in skin color, etc."

Complete and utter bullshit, blissfully uniformed by scientific fact. Do yourself a favor and read some real science for once, not the pseudoscience of cultural anthropologists. The REAL science (biology, physical anthropology) is crystal clear on this subject. Race is real, race is biological, race is NOT a social construct. I know a lot of you leftist ideologues can't be bothered to crack open a peer-reviewed science journal, but if you're going to repeat lies, at least make sure they're not so easily falsified.

Just goes to show that anti-scientific nonsense is not limited to the lunatic climate change deniers on the Right.

"Yeah, right, I'm going to call the police every time some bully spits in my face or calls me nasty names." Suzii

I put the emphasis in there, because according to you Suzii, it wasn't just some bully. It was a racist. When something like that happens, if you're not even going to bother making some kind of formal report to the police or other organization about it, one has to wonder how serious you really are about combating racism. If victims of racism aren't even going to mention those kind of incidents unless their request to have a portland street named after their hero is turned down, it's going to be tough to determine what degree or scale of racism exists in a given area.

Miles said: What kind of psycho-babble double-talk is that?

Kevin wrote that, Doretta, not me.

Sal writes: Miles, your perception of how this process started differs from what I have been told and from the accounts in the press.

I'd appreciate a link to articles that describe it differently, because I've been following this closely for weeks and have not seen it described differently. Friday's Oregonian includes a timeline that starts with: "July -- A group of Latino leaders approaches Mayor Tom Potter's office for help in renaming North Interstate Avenue for the labor leader. Committee members talk to commissioners, assuring them that they have community support. As news of the proposal spreads, so does protest in North Portland."

The Committee complained that they followed the process that the Mayor and Council set out, only to have Council pull the rug out later. But the problem is that they didn't engage in outreach at the beginning, before settling on Interstate. By the time they approached Council, it was already too late to mollify neighbors who felt blindsided. Who else should be blamed for that fundamental failure if not the renaming committee?

I haven't followed this issue very closely, not living in Portland.

But it seems to me part of the problem was not following established procedures---if it is true there is a law or regulation against renaming streets with rich history, and the history of Interstate Ave. relates to the history of the Interstate Bridge, it should not have been designated as a potential name change, no matter whose idea it was.

But I didn't get to be 61 years old without seeing various aspects of racism, from "we don't want their kind" to localities where black people didn't feel safe after dark, to the fact that in some parts of this country in 1984 Geraldine Ferraro had more trouble running for VP as an Italian than as a woman (are they all gangsters?) to people whose face looks a lot more like Bill Richardson than like presidents Carter, Ford, Reagan, or any member of the Bush of Clinton families being presumed guilty of something or other unless proven innocent.

Whether it was the Irish a long time ago ("no Irish need apply") or Asians in a previous generation or Hispanics now, sometimes it seems there is a "go back to your country" mentality. A couple decades ago when there was a multi-candidate primary for state rep. in my district, the canvassers for the woman my family supported were offended by going to homes the Hispanic candidate (a lawyer born in this country) had visited and having people say "well, at least I know your candidate was born in this country".

Similar things have happened with gender. A female friend of mine who was working as an Affirmative Action officer lived in Eugene and decided (knowing them both well) that Peter DeFazio deserved her vote in the 4th Dist. Cong. primary more than Margie Hendricksen (then a well known legislator ) did. And thus she didn't take kindly to another well known female legislator (who lived in Mult. Co. and was thus not registered in the 4th Cong. District ) saying "anyone who doesn't support Margie Hendricksen doesn't support women". HUH?? Women have no right to make up their own minds on how to vote?

I think ego got involved in all this street renaming controversy and we saw the worst side of human nature. This is why regulations and protocol exist--to avoid such situations.

I do agree with what Sal said. Pointing out bigoted behaviour when it occurs is not "playing the race card". Sunlight, as they say, is the best disinfectant.

There have been incidents in the past (not just in Portland) where a leading local official "promised" a vote on something without checking with the other members of the council or board or whatever. Then when the other members get angry that their vote had been promised without asking them, there is a public explosion and the person who didn't seek support before speaking looks bad. If Potter promised it would happen without first getting council approval, that was stupid. But with the discussion getting so heated, it seems to me there were some remarks made which were not appropriate.

Fear and division are old tactics used by knowledgeable people (on both sides of this particular debate) to drive the less knowledgeable to do their bidding.

Phony appeals to reasonable debate have been the bedrock of racist resistance to change for a long time as well. Should we only debate the constitutional merit of "states rights" rather than the underlying desire for those states to perpetuate racial discrimination? This has been a time-honored approach of the Strom Thurmond's of the world, whether as a Dixiecrat or as a Republican.

Did anyone notice an emotional debate over making 82nd to Avenue of the Roses? Were there complaints that it didn't follow the proper process? The reality is this debate is about race. There are plenty of good arguments on both sides of the issue, but that is not what has turned it into an emotional battle. Its about people who don't want their neighborhood identified as "Latino" and those who do.

If we're all racists, then what do we call the assholes who harrassed Suzii?

We call them assholes. Not every racist acts like an asshole, that doesn't mean they aren't racists.

I think it is important to remember that Cesar Chavez was the director of the Community Service Organization, which was basically a civil rights organization, and left to organize farm workers. He was clearly a civil rights leader who became a labor leader. Just as Martin Luther King was a religious leader who became a civil rights leader.

Doretta! This is stunning! "I've never pretended to represent the entire Kenton neighborhood. When I vote I represent me." You need to be removed from the Kenton Neighborhood Assoc. IMMEDIATELY if that is your take on your responsibilites. Unreal...The arrogance of that comment just stuns.

I posted a comment (which is really a post on my blog) on another thread about this topic. When I read the comments on this thread, it makes me realize just how far we still need to go in addressing race here in Oregon.

Not saying pain is always a bad thing, but the pain coming through here is HEAVY. Here's my comment with some highlights...

After listening to yesterday’s testimony at City Hall I finally “get it”. I’d been thinking that a tribute to honor Cesar E. Chavez could take many forms. A community center replete with recreation, employment, housing, and social resources named in his honor was 1 idea I had. You know; let the city put its money where its mouth is. Another thought I had was to name a street in an upscale part of town after him. Make those rich folks squirm a little bit. I couldn’t figure out what the big deal about renaming N. Interstate was all about. My question was answered by folks presenting testimony.

One woman spoke of how N. Interstate runs parallel to N.E. Martin Luther King Boulevard, and that’s important because of the struggles the Black and Latino communities have shared in Oregon. That makes a lot of sense. Another point made by several people was that the Commissioners had given their word that this was going to happen, and had reneged on that promise. I wasn’t aware of this (which I’ll go into further), but that makes their word pretty worthless in general. I guess what really got to me most was a man who spoke of “wanting a win”. In his 2 minutes of testimony he was able to express the frustration of a minority group that seems to always be on the losing end of things. He articulated the feelings his people have about not getting to live self directed lives. He was talking about PRINCIPAL.

Having said that (to quote Randy Leonard), I want to share a few thoughts about the process involved, and how people in this state do things. I live 3 blocks west of Interstate on N. Emerson St. I heard both proponents and opponents of the name change saying they had each done extensive neighborhood outreach to find out what people on and around Interstate thought of it. No one came to my door. No one sent me any letter. No one left any flier on my porch. Perhaps if they had done so, I wouldn’t have been as ignorant and uninformed as to what both sides were thinking. I guess you had to be on the inside to have that information. The fact is, I didn’t even know there was a problem until AFTER a meeting with the Overlook Neighborhood Association had occurred. A quarterly newsletter they send out told me about a row that had taken place.

Why do Oregonians believe that secrecy and small groups of insiders is the best practice for improving the community? I’ve written about this phenomenon several times in regard to the developmental disability community here. It’s not only a weak modus operendus, but in my opinion it’s blatantly unethical. Open and honest dialogue is what gets things done in a sustainable way. If you’re going to run around trying to be Bush Junior, your karma/God will catch up to you, and in the end things will go belly up. I’m not a religious man, but I do believe in the Golden Rule. Do you want to be left out of the loop on issues you care about? Didn’t think so...

We have merely seen the tip of the iceberg on the issue of Cesar E. Chavez/N. Interstate Ave., and now S.W. 4th Ave. Ultimately there may be some serious discussion on race, class, and phony politics. I believe that may result in some healing. It will be painful but good; but only if it’s done in an honest, transparent way. In the meantime, I want to go on record as saying RENAME NORTH INTERSTATE AVE. to NORTH CESAR E. CHAVEZ BOULEVARD!!!!!!

"Did anyone notice an emotional debate over making 82nd to Avenue of the Roses? Were there complaints that it didn't follow the proper process? The reality is this debate is about race. There are plenty of good arguments on both sides of the issue, but that is not what has turned it into an emotional battle. Its about people who don't want their neighborhood identified as "Latino" and those who do." Ross Williams

Is this comment attempting to say, that had 82nd Avenue been asked to change their street name to Cesar Chavez Avenue, the residents of that neighborhood would also have objected, as Interstate has in their case? That's quite an amazingly simplistic theory.

Double-name...now that would be a curve ball in this game. Considering that option, the next big thought would likely be over which name would run first: Interstate-Cesar Chavez Ave, Cesar Chavez-Interstate Ave, S.W. 4th Ave-Cesar Chavez Ave, Cesar Chavez-S.W. 4th Ave. Would the renaming committee settle for what a spot in the name order they may see as second billing? Is the Interstate renaming committee even part of this process anymore now that city hall more or less took the lead on this deal?

Doretta writes: 1. the current code calls for the people who are suggesting the renaming to pick the street 2. there is no process specified for going out to the community to choose the street to be renamed 3. every street renaming of this type since Martin Luther King Jr Blvd has begun with the proposers suggesting the street to be renamed

The code calls for those submitting the name to collect 2,500 signatures from Portland residents, or signatures from 75% of the property owners abutting the street. The Chavez renaming committee did neither, which is why the Mayor's ordinance had to waive the city code in order to rename Interstate.

If any other group in this city came forward with a proposal to change someone's neighborhood, and didn't actually consult with the affected neighbors, we would all be criticizing them for failure to be inclusive. So why aren't you willing to criticize this committee?

That's quite an amazingly simplistic theory.

Yes it is and it is entirely your invention.

Now that is an excellent solution to the problem and one I have a feeling might be to late in coming.

Fred, how would you feel if that solution was applied retroactively to Union/MLK? This has gotten plain silly. The point was to honor Cesar Chavez, not to cut the baby in half.

You need to be removed from the Kenton Neighborhood Assoc. IMMEDIATELY if that is your take on your responsibilites. Unreal...The arrogance of that comment just stuns.

Actually its refreshing to hear someone who is part of neighborhood association acknowledge they can't represent the opinion of the neighborhood, just their own opinion of what is best for the neighborhood.

Excuse me while I take a break from this chasing-its-tale discussion (did so, did not, did so) to pick myself up off the floor from laughing too hard. 82nd Avenue is going to be Avenue of the roses? Has anyone driven down 82nd lately?

Race is real, race is biological, race is NOT a social construct.

So explain how someone with threw white grandparents and one black grandparent is black. And their children are black.

I once read a contemporary account of a pioneer logger in Northern Minnesota commenting that it was strange to be the only one of his "race" in his crew, "all the others being Swedes."

"How come none of them made it a point to build a coalition of support from the residents and business owners of North Portland before the name change was brought to the City Council?" Fred

"You are making a lot of judgments about people you don't know and whose actions you are not very clear about. What you are suggesting they should have done is exactly what the Chavez committee did try to do." Doretta

You claim that the Chavez committee tried to do that, but you don't list what they did. That leaves us to presume you're referring to the several community meetings the Chavez committee presented at, where the racist bonehead's spew was allowed to represent overall neighborhood opposition to the name change as racist. Where's the fairness in that? It's not clear the Chavez rename committee did their legwork, but maybe they did some work in that respect that hasn't been reported. In the absence of what information may exist in that regard, I'm thinking about the following excerpt from David McDonald's post, back aways(Nov 18, 2007 1:15:27 PM):

"I live 3 blocks west of Interstate on N. Emerson St. I heard both proponents and opponents of the name change saying they had each done extensive neighborhood outreach to find out what people on and around Interstate thought of it. No one came to my door. No one sent me any letter. No one left any flier on my porch. Perhaps if they had done so, I wouldn’t have been as ignorant and uninformed as to what both sides were thinking. I guess you had to be on the inside to have that information. The fact is, I didn’t even know there was a problem until AFTER a meeting with the Overlook Neighborhood Association had occurred. A quarterly newsletter they send out told me about a row that had taken place." David McDonald

Regarding the comment of Ross Williams:

"Did anyone notice an emotional debate over making 82nd to Avenue of the Roses? Were there complaints that it didn't follow the proper process? The reality is this debate is about race. There are plenty of good arguments on both sides of the issue, but that is not what has turned it into an emotional battle. Its about people who don't want their neighborhood identified as "Latino" and those who do." Ross Williams

"That's quite an amazingly simplistic theory."ws

Yes it is and it is entirely your invention." Ross Williams

No Ross. You came up with the analysis, you drew the conclusion and you ventured the theory. It's your baby.

A long, long time ago this conversation was about Cesar Chavez and finding a way to honor this great Mexican American hero. It is so far from there now, it is fading from memory.

Has anyone considered asking the Hispanic Chamber of Commerce for some advice or any sort of comment at all?

They're headquarted on Fifth Avenue, a few blocks from Chinatown.

One would think that they would be fighting to rename Fifth Avenue instead of Fourth, but that is all a mystery....

Doretta (Nov 18, 2007 7:19:21 PM), thanks for those additional bits of info regarding your knowledge of how the renaming community worked to develop community support for the name change. I don't believe the exact details of their efforts have been widely reported, aside from a few community meetings they presented at, so that leaves me wondering why you would be surprised that some people wouldn't know of them.

At any rate, despite gathering the 2500 signatures, wherever it is they gathered them from, they obviously failed to develop sufficient community support to implement the name change. Any racist incident is significant, but here the question is whether racist incidents associated with various people opposing the renaming reflect fundamentally representative sentiments of the greater part of the opposition to the extent that those sentiments became the over-riding obstacle in the failure to rename Interstate to Chavez.

I know that the Chavez committee did in fact collect signatures from Portland residents and I challenge you to present a single shred of evidence that the petition requirement was the reason for waiving the code. I don't have first-hand information about how many signatures were gathered but the media reported that at the hearing last week they submitted 2600+.

Marta Guembes testified at Council that she had 1,600 signatures, but she wasn't going to turn them over to Council because she and the committee wanted to keep them as a memory of the support they had for renaming Interstate. So my first-hand knowledge comes from one of the leaders of the renaming effort. And it's far short of the 2,500 required.

The reason for waiving the code was that they did not follow a number of the steps required. That fact isn't under debate, as both the committee and the Mayor will tell you that's why they had to waive code. You're correct that Naito and Rosa Parks didn't follow the procedures either, so that's not actually why I'm blaming the committee (that IS, though, why I'm blaming the Mayor). I'm blaming the committee because they tried to secure political support from the Mayor before securing community support. Ask the business owners and residents -- were they notified? Were they included in the process? Not until after the Mayor said it was going to happen, they just had to hold a couple of public hearings for cover. Most of the events you cite happened after it was a fait accomplis.

So again I ask, do you believe that the correct way to go about effecting social change is top-down? Do you believe the right way to change someone's neighborhood is by first securing political support, then consulting with the people most affected? Would you allow any other group trying to do anything else in Portland the same lattitude you are giving this renaming committee?

However, I can assure you there was more racist and more fear in the community back then than what we have today.....on both sides.

If you consider the discussion of immigration that is going on, the level of fear and hostility is comparable to the 1940's in the south. It is a different community that is the target, but I am not sure the level of fear is any lower.

Would you allow any other group trying to do anything else in Portland the same lattitude you are giving this renaming committee?

Was the process for Rosa Parks, Naito and Avenue of the Roses any different? Or MLK for that matter. And at this point, shouldn't the folks concerned about process be on the same side as the committee? Afterall, changing 4th to Cesar Chavez didn't follow any process either. Both sides ought to be demanding the decision be reopened. I suspect for many opponents the concern about "process" stopped as long as Interstate was off the table.

BTW - I think the process stunk. But that is not really unusual in Portland.

Let's not forget that MLK went through the heart of what had been the black community in Portland for many years, making it a logical choice. (and, I might add, that I believe property values have gone up since the change) The small Latino community that exists in the Interstate neighborhood is recent, increasing the feeling of the locals of 'why here, again?".

he small Latino community that exists in the Interstate neighborhood is recent, increasing the feeling of the locals of 'why here, again?".

Isn't that the racial component of this discussion? Fundamentally this is not about renaming a street, but who it was renamed for and the fact that Cesar Chavez is a hero to many in the latino community. This has been, and continues to be, about the "race" of the person being honored.

Was the process for Rosa Parks, Naito and Avenue of the Roses any different? Or MLK for that matter. And at this point, shouldn't the folks concerned about process be on the same side as the committee?

First, to reiterate the above posts, Avenue of the Roses is not a real name change. It is symbolic. It will still be "82nd Avenue -- the Avenue of the Roses" (resolution 36351 if you want to look it up). 82nd Avenue will still be the postal address. Really, they're just putting up some fancy signcaps. I suspect opposition would have been significantly reduced if the proposal was "Interstate Avenue -- the Avenue of Cesar Chavez."

Yes, Naito and Rosa Parks followed a similarly flawed process. And the way those two changes were pushed through made people sensitive to further renamings. As for 4th avenue, you bet I think it stinks. Council refused to just take a step back and start the process over again, and I think all hell is going to break loose again. (By the way, are the opponents in Chinatown racist? Or are they just burdened by asian privilege?)

Would black people be voting in the American south today if it weren't for "top down" in the mid 60's? Although it's been nearly 150 years, if it had been left to the local community I'm not at all sure that we still wouldn't have legal slavery in that part of the country.

Doretta, do you understand why it's frustrating to have proponents of the name change say "We know that not all opponents of the change are racist", and then in the next breath have you compare the proponents of the name change to the civil rights leaders of the 1960s and the abolitionists who ridded our country of slavery? By inference, that puts the opponents in bed with the slave owners and segregationists. Even if that's not your intention, that's the practical outcome.

If I'm right that no matter what street was picked or how it was picked and no matter how much the committee did in the community the result would have been substantially the same then how do you think it should work? If the larger community is always going to have a majority against renaming a street for a minority is the right thing to do to just leave all the streets that are named after people named after white people?

This is a great question, and probably the heart of our disagreement. You assume that the reaction would be the same no matter how much community outreach was done, that there is a permanent majority against renaming streets for minorities. Given that assumption, you believe it's okay to force the change on people because it's the right thing to do and we can't trust people to do the right thing.

I disagree. I think we can trust people to do the right things, particularly here in Portland. I believe that people are naturally fearful of change, and this fear is exacerbated when that change is advocated by people they don't know and who don't consult with them. I am optimistic that when we engage in true community outreach, when we actually listen to people, when we empathize with their concerns, we can make progress even on difficult issues.

Imagine the possibilities if the renaming committee had talked to every business owner on Interstate before they solicited political support from City Hall. Imagine if they had attended full neighborhood meetings before they went to City Hall. Imagine if the business owners and neighbors had personally heard the heartfelt push by this committee BEFORE they read about the name change in the paper. You think they'd still oppose it. I don't.

I want a major street in Portland to be renamed after Chavez. I live in southwest, and if they came around talking about renaming Vermont, Multnomah Blvd., or Barbur, I'd speak up in support. But if I read about it in the newspaper first, I'd oppose it. It's that simple.

"If you consider the discussion of immigration that is going on, the level of fear and hostility is comparable to the 1940's in the south. It is a different community that is the target, but I am not sure the level of fear is any lower." Ross Williams

True, according to news reports, some of that 40's hostility has been going on down around the U.S./Mexico border in today's time, associated with the illegal hispanic immigration issue, but very little of it here in Oregon. Oh, sure, there's isolated incidents, such as the drunken mob of fools beating up on a couple Hispanic guys this summer at the Clackamas River, but there seems to be comparatively little consistent, day to day pattern of fear and oppression of hispanic/latinos/mexican people.

If people want to work on making things better for people of all ethnic origins, that's way cool. Same with zeroing in on and routing out white power morons like Suzii says she had the misfortune of meeting. I don't doubt that some of those idiots have gravitated to and have been hanging out around Interstate during all the years that part of town has languished. Getting the community to work with you to accomplish those kinds of things may be much harder if it has been recklessly labeled racist, out of a poorly prepared effort to rename the major street running through the community.

Miles, I appreciate your summary of the situation;(comment Nov 19, 2007 11:40:32 AM). Majority rules is often not the best way to do things to ensure fairness and equality for all. Intelligent people though, will respond to an appeal to reason and principles of fairness if it's brought to their attention that the majority's position on a particular issue may not be representative of fairness and equality.

As the renaming committee encountered incidents of racism in their efforts to gather support for the renaming of Interstate to Chavez, they should have worked harder to accurately determine the extent of that racist tendency in the community. With that knowledge, they then should have appealed to more reasoned minds in the community to weigh in on what would have been the best and most fair for the people of the community as a whole.

I guess the ability to think critically and honestly about this conversation is best exemplified by Bob R's assertion that my use of the word insouciant was "inappropriate" and "escalating the adjectives" in a thread in which I have been called a race-baiter, a hate-mongerer, a dumbfuck and perhaps a dozen or so other epithets. But for Bob, it's that word insouciant that rankles, that "escalates" that's is "inappropriate". I think nothing could better illustrate how impossibly closed some people's minds are.

I am glad that others were willing to speak up and better articulate exactly the examples of privilege in the posts than I did. Thank you Doretta, you captured exactly what I was thinking when I read the messages before making my first post.

I also should acknowledge that Blue Oregon is not responsible for the racism and anti-progressive nature of the people posting here. Some of the most rabid posters are self-described libertarians and "independent populists," both of which are threads within the Democratic party but are not the whole cloth.

However, Blue Oregon's name and the many party officials and regulars who post here do give it the impression that they have the imprimatur of the Party. That is unfortunate - because it is my hope that the racism so proudly and loudly defended here reflects badly on both organizations. Even if you are not responsible for the people posting here, that they are the dominant voice speaks volumes.

Sorry, started rewriting the last paragraph and really made a mess. I started to say it was my hope that people could become less defensive because I think we need to talk about racism more, not less. Then realized that will never happen with this group and backspaced and instead voiced my concern that the racism here reflects badly on Blue Oregon and the DPO. Any way, it ended up with a sentence that is seriously not correct. I don't hope this reflects badly on Blue Oregon, I fear that it does. I do hope we could discuss this more rationally and honestly, but as I said, have no faith in the honesty and integrity of people who think insouciant is worse than dumbfuck.

I do not see oppression from the majority limiting the opportunities of the minorities. Nor do I see brown people raped, lynched, maimed and murdered for standing up for what they believe in. If you have seen any of this, please call the cops now.

Of course you don't. And white people didn't see those things happening to blacks in the south in the 40's either. And they would have, like you, told black people to call the police.

The fact is that "brown people", including American citizens, have been waking up to find armed immigration officers in their homes - no search warrant required.

As for racism, somebody made the comment that somebody who is wrongly accused of racism isn't as much a victim as the racial minority who makes the accusation. What you're really discussing is prejudice directed toward someone based on their skin color, physical appearance, cultural manners, etc, when logically there is no reason to judge someone's thoughts and values on such a superficial basis. The human central nervous system is basically the same for all of mankind. The argument against racism at its most fundamental, therefore, has to cut both ways. I'm not denying that certain races have suffered disproportionately from racism, but on a case by case basis, who is to say that a white person in America can't be just as deeply hurt or injured as a result of prejudice thinking?

All this about the Interstate or Kenton community really doesn't make a lot of sense. Are people that claim racism as the key factor behind the opposition of the name change of Interstate to Chavez really suggesting that they did not know the scale of racist sentiment in that neighborhood until they proposed the name change? Amazing, especially from people that claim to have been long term residents familiar with their community.

Well, I suppose if they say that area is racist, it must be. Now that the entire public knows this, will any member of the public dare tred into that hotbed of racist activity? Except of course, racists. Just being led to imagine the racist vandalism, beatings, rape, and lynchings that must have been going on behind the scenes around Interstate all these years will probably have ordinary people deciding to avoid the area.

It is easy to deny being racist if you define racist solely as the sort of people who join the Klan, Volksfront or other white supremacist groups. But though all Klan members are racists (though most of them deny this as loudly as folks here deny it) most racists are not Klan members.

Of course, if you define racist only in terms of lynching beatings and violence as ws does, then you can assure yourself that you most definitely are not a racist -- and under that extreme and false definition, I would have to agree. But using that definition is dishonest and if you were not so defensive, you would admit the dishonesty of defining racist in such extremist terms.

"Of course, if you define racist only in terms of lynching beatings and violence as ws does..."Kiija

No Kiija, that is not what I am doing. That is the interpretation you have chosen to draw from my words. Everyone...everyone is potentially a racist. Whether or not and to what degree I am or am not a racist is a personal subject independent of the question regarding the nature of the opposition within the Interstate community to the renaming of Interstate Ave to Chavez.

The facts that reasonably aware long-term residents of the metro area have available to them, quite clearly establish that the Interstate community was not identified with any particular racist tendencies until the Interstate renaming committed met opposition to their idea of changing the name of Interstate Ave to Chavez.

My own perception, according to news and comments people have made on this thread, is that other than a number of obnoxious individual racist outbursts made to people involved with the renaming effort, the Interstate community has not had a racially tinged nature that would have precluded Interstate Ave from being renamed to Chavez, had the effort been conducted with greater consideration for the residents of that community.

Hey, look...maybe racism is a big problem in the Interstate community. Maybe it was the driving force behind the opposition to the name change. I don't know any more than most other people reading the news, listening to and thinking about what people are saying about the issue. That is what were supposed to do isn't it?

I just think that if some group is going to identify an entire community as racist, they'd better have the goods to back it up. If it turns out the group's claim of the existence of rampant racism in the Interstate community is valid, then all reasonable people would have that as substantial ground to mount an effort to counter that racism. As things stand, there really does not seem to be much going on over on Interstate other than a lot of people upset that the long term name of the central street running through their community was possibly going to be pulled out from under their feet.

Ross,

Have you heard? I have been black since 1964.

Fred

Fred, I know you are black. Which means you likely have zero personal experience with whatever fears may now exist in the latino community.

Maybe you have failed to note the argument that racism is not reserved for white people. As I noted above, this appears to be a dispute about those who want their neighborhood identified as Latino and those who don't. Is it really surprising that some who don't are black?

In fact, I would be surprised if there wasn't resentment of the latino community trying to claim a traditionally african-american part of the community as their own.

"But using that definition is dishonest and if you were not so defensive, you would admit the dishonesty of defining racist in such extremist terms."

<h2>Madam, what race are you? And if you are white, how can you know racism directly without experiencing it?</h2>