SW Cesar E Chavez Blvd?

I don't care which street they rename, but they need to leave out the "E". That is one confusing street name (and it should be "Avenue").

I have yet to see one estimate of the cost of renaming Interstate, and given the suddenness of the new proposal for SW 4th, I am sure nobody has considered that cost, either.

Is there some reason we cannot name, say, a park after Chavez? That would have to be cheaper, and a lot less controversial.

I'm with you Colin: "debate" definitely requires quotes, and this debacle is certainly going to be part of my decision about who to support in future City Council elections.

I don't agree Robert- the council is not stupid, they know how many lawyers, insurance companies,etc have offices on this street, and will have to change websites, stationery, etc. I think it is a brilliant checkmate- if it is OK to force this expense on the small businesses on Interstate, it is OK to do the same to the big guys.
This has never been about Cesar Chavez, it is about North Portland getting tired of being the only place lucky enough to have ALL of the renamed streets. And about a small hispanic group that has DEMANDED they get their way- no compromise. I couldn't believe the quote that they were shocked at the disrespect this showed their group. Huh?

Why can't we just leave everything alone and not mess with anything. Why do we need to re-name anything at all. Mayor Potter is doing this because he is simlply bored with his job as mayor and needs something to do to justify his remaining time in office. Anything else he says is just propaganda lip service. I would have been more accepting of such a thing like re-naming a street, but not after Potter acted like a childish and spoiled 6 year old brat and left a council meeting in a huff. Someone that unprofessional and with anger management problems need not be a mayor in the first place and does not need to have his proposals come forward because of it. Just leave it alone and let it die. We have better things to do than to re-name a street.

Comical. And it gets better every day. You got it Susan. It's a perfect checkmate. Strange though; if the advocates had any brains at all they'd jump and run with this. What could be better than having your hero's name on the street fronting City Hall? I suppose it'll never happen. What will happen next though? That's the question.

But this process has been shockingly bad and what should have been a win-win all around has the makings of the mother of all lose-loses.

But let's assign some blame, Jeff, because I don't like the characterization that "the process" was bad. The process doesn't exist separate from the people involved.

To me, it's clear that the Mayor is most to blame by first promising the advocates something that he couldn't deliver, and doing so before engaging in any outreach to the affected community. But the advocates are also to blame because they made this into a you're-either-with-us-or-against-us situation and allowed no room for reasonable compromise. They tarred ALL opponents as racist (with encouragement from the Mayor) and declared it a civil rights issue.

When I first heard about the renaming, I liked it. Interstate seemed fine to me, but I don't live in NoPO, so I don't really have a personal stake in the decision. But I came to oppose the renaming of Interstate based solely on the childish behavior of the Mayor and the proponents. What I want -- and I think what most Portlanders want -- is a major street somewhere in the City named after Chavez. What I don't want is to reward the behavior of the Mayor or the Interstate proponents.

I don't want any street name changed at all. Changing a street name in this way is nothing more than just a political appeasement tool of propaganda to make whomever is re-naming the street look better than they really are, and to justify their 'status' as a mayor. Re-naming a street is, in reality, a very low priority - especially when there are other higher ones such as, say, safety on the MAX lines - and should be treated as such.

Three things come to my mind on this issue:

1. Doesn't the City Council have more important things to be dealing with than a street name change?

2. Regarding Interstate's name being changed---why not simply have everyone whose work or home address is on Interstate vote on the issue and call it a day. Simple majority--pass/ fail. Although others claim a vested interest in the issue, those who live and work on the street are the ones who will have to deal with the physical switchover of addresses should the change happen.

3. I still don't understand Chavez's connection to Interstate--did he work/live there at one time? What is the connection? Why does it have to be THAT street? Is this really about honoring Chavez or is his name just being used for some political purpose? And why NOW? Has no one ever discussed naming something after Chavez before? Can someone provide some history here (and by history, I mean facts--not some group's personal propoganda on the issue).

Okay, that's my two cents worth--although, in acknowledgement of point #2 I made above, feel free to ignore my view. I don't live/work on Interstate, so in the end I really don't (or shouldn't) have a say in the outcome of this issue. But, like everyone else, I can sure put my opinion out there, can't I?

A statue of Mr. Chavez might be an acceptable compromise to the various interests involved.

It could include a plaque explaining what he stood for, including his vehement opposition to illegal immigration.

Much more educational than just renaming a street.

The whole thing is silly. Chavez doesn't deserve a street named after him, he just isn't that important of a historical figure. There are at least 1000 more historically important people than Chavez that we haven't named streets after.

This is nothing more than pandering by Potter. He is so eager to pander that he fell into a trap and now he can't figure out how to get out. I guess that is what happens when we elect amateur politicians instead of pros.

Portland, indeed, Oregon has an ugly side that has worked hard at making newcomers of all stripes feel unwelcome, but especially people of color. We see it in the original constitution, in the reaction to the Black migration during WWII, in "no coloreds" signs in windows (did Yaw's really refuse service to Blacks?), in the reaction to the renaming of Union Avenue in the 80's. The process to rename Interstate Avenue in honor of Cesar Chavez may well have been flawed, but the hostile, if not racist, reaction of some of the community along Intestate is sad, disappointing, but unfortunately in line with that ugly side. Que Lastima.

Its remarkable to live in a city that at first glance is accepting, open, liberal and happy then something like this makes you think twice about moving.

Something like what, Karol? Neighborhood residents asking why the City isn't following its own process when renaming Interstate? Residents questioning whether Interstate is the best street to honor Chavez? Or advocates who recklessly accuse others of racism in a power play to get what they want? It's the latter that I have a problem with.

Yes, at the community forums there were a few racist remarks hurled by cowards from the back of the room. It shouldn't surprise anyone that those people exist, and that they were using the Chavez renaming as a cover to voice their bigotry. But I can't figure out how anyone can make the leap from those comments to the broad brush accusations made against North Portland residents, such as the ones made by Lenny above.

Tom Potter Goes To Council meeting throws a tantrum,walks out and resigns by the end of the year. Sam the Tram man is installed as interim mayor and the name Interstate Av For the fella from AZ.

Miles

Because racism is used as the universal debate stopper. If you can't make a winning logical argument, call the other person a racist.

My understanding is the renaming process was put into place because of the debacle that happened renaming Union into MLK. Racism doesn't have anything to do with the people against this. This was completely sprung on the neighborhoods affected and keep in mind the same thing happened to them very recently with Portland/Rosa Parks Way. I'd be pissed off if someone decided to change my street name without even asking me if it was ok. It's called being polite and the renaming committee is anything but polite. If you ask them to make a compromise they call you a racist. It's a give and take and they just want to take and take. Also Interstate has a bunch of mom and pop stores. It isn't a bunch of rich corporations that can easily change things like stationary and such. I believe the estimate was something between $1-2,000 per business for this name change that they would have to pay out of their pocket. Is that fair to the businesses?

Just to throw a little gas on this fire, if someone suggests renaming a street "Ronald Regan Way" will the people who support the Chavez renaming support or oppose that. If you oppose Regan, why?

Where is the Petition ~~AGAINST~~ renaming INTERSTATE AVENUE? I WANT TO SIGN IT. I don't want them to change the name of Interstate!!

I do NOT want Interstate Ave changed. I've lived in Portland for 57 years and lived in North Portland (1/4 mile from Interstate Ave) for 20 years.

Mayor and the City Counsel shove this stuff down our throats and don't allow the PEOPLE who live there the voice. Why can't THEY leave our street the way it has been for YEARS??

Why can't they chose a new project so they aren't placing economic hardship on businesses?

How selfish and unconcerned these MEN are!! I am NOT a racist. I do not hate anyone because of their skin, religion etc.

torridjoe

Ronald Reagan was not a positive historical figure

Well at least I know who to ask on issues of historical significance.

Sometimes, you guys make this too easy

Jeff

Don't let my typo prevent you from answering the question. If that is the standard here, very little would ever be discussed.

The Interstate to Chavez name change proponents have burned their own ship. They never had a sea to float it on in the first place other than Potter's play pool, and now the water is gone from it. If they were smart, the name change proponents would withdraw their proposal as gracefully as possible under the circumstances, and let another untainted committee take up the proposal effort. Maybe the next committee will have a little more sensitivity to the factors that allow a street name change to be received favorably. The good ship Cesar Chavez deserves no less. This whole scene is starting to remind me a little of the way Rajneeshees bullied their way into renaming the little town of Antelope in Wasco County, Oregon, to Rajneesh.

First, just to be clear, I think Reagan was a horrible prez and would never support naming anything after him. I picked him solely for the reaction I knew I would get here.

Nick Worth

My point is, who gets to decide who is worthy of a naming? Just because a small group thinks someone is, does that mean they should have a street renamed for them. This is the problem whenever you start naming things after human beings. A hero to some is not a hero to all. I am certain the people here would not deny Ronnie a street simply because he is white. Would they?

How do we choose? Our current process doesn't seem to be working? Any ideas.

Ronald Reagan is a good example as someone who is much more significant historically than Chavez. It just proves that this whole mess isn't really about honoring "significant" achievements, it is about pandering. Potter thought he could score some quick points with the Latino crowd by throwing them a street re-name.

While we're on the subject, what the heck was the deal with Rosa Park name change? That was really reaching for someone significant. And why throw two renames to the black community when nothing to the Latino or Native American. I mean if we're just going to pander shouldn't we do it equally?

I live on SW 4th Ave, a few blocks south of downtown and I can't seem to find any information on the boundaries of my street's new name. Does anyone, anywhere know whether all of 4th Ave will change or will it only be within some area downtown?

Chavez was a great guy. So why isn't some neighborhood in Portland rushing forward, pleading to have one of their streets named after Cesar Chavez? It's crazy. Instead someone has devised a system where any street in Portland is up for grabs for renaming if they just play the numbers. That's stupid as recent events have clearly shown.

"When someone stands up in a meeting and says MLK, Rosa Parks and Cesar Chavez all together in one area presents the "wrong idea" about a neighborhood - yes that happened at my neighborhood meeting - I would hope you could understand why I would feel that is derogatory." Karol

"...someone...". There's the operative word: one, as in one person, not two or three or dozens, but only one. One fool musters sufficient callous audacity to boldly state something about a "wrong idea" in the course of a public meeting. Based on that statement, others extrapolate the idea that the part of the community opposed to the name change proposal is unanimous with the one voice and of the same suspect racial bias. Unbelievable.

Where is the supporting evidence on Interstate to back this notion up? Graffiti, public demonstrations, incidents, is there anything beyond that one, let's say 2,3 6, or maybe a dozen voices that would clearly determine that the Interstate neighborhood does not choose to receive the honored name of Cesar Chavez due to bias associated with his descent?

How sad this all is really. If hispanics and latinos had actually gone first to the Interstate neighborhood and personally attempted to build up a base of support, this might have turned out far differently. In that manner the neighborhood might easily have been persuaded that here, in the great legacy of a man standing for the rights of common people, was someone it could proudly, willingly be associated with.

Having gone to the Ockley Green meetings and watched last nights council session, I can attest to the fact that not one word has been spoken against Cesar Chavez. Everybody agrees he was a great man, so lets stop the "I liked him more than you did" talk. Unfortunatly this debate had nothing to do with honoring Cesar Chavez, as was proven by the response of the organizing committee to the compromise of renaming the City's central street, instead of a street in a neighborhood that has had the benefit of all of the other name changes. They wanted to prove that they, personaly, had the power to force the Interstate name change through.It is this group that is being disrespectful, by using the Chavez name for their own glory and aggrandizement.

Karol, I like how you and others who decry white racism conveniently ignore the anti-white hatred being spewed by certain vocal members of the "Latino community." Read the Mercury's extended description of last night's kangaroo hearing and tell me that the nonsense that flowed out of the mouths of Ron Herndon and Maria Lisa Johnson isn't the rankest sort of bile. Everything the latter has said to the press has reeked of anti-"Anglo" prejudice. Of course, she's whiter than I am, but that doesn't stop her from publicly denigrating non-Mexican whites every chance she gets.

From the link above: "This is one of the whitest days in the history of Portland," Herndon adds.

That's a great way to smooth over race relations and to convince us of the worthiness of your position, Ron. But I guess we "Anglos" (never mind the fact that my mother is Japanese) are supposed to take such racist garbage with a smile, huh?

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 sweat 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. 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. This 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 N. INTERSTATE AVE. to CESAR E. CHAVEZ BOULEVARD!!!!!!

Karol wrote: I would have assumed - crazy, I know - that some thing like this would be seen as a wonderful change. But it was met with very conversation that to a person of color, smacks a bit hurtful, derogatory, and yes, racist. I will not label all detractors racist, but it seems with so many against it, doesn't that make a reason for it?

Karol, this is a really interesting point of discussion. Potter raised a similar point at the end of last night's hearing, when he said that in cities all across the country there is almost always opposition to renaming streets for Chavez and Martin Luther King, jr. While it usually takes the form of an "historical concern" or attachment to the current name, Potter believes the mere existence of such opposition indicates that race plays a huge role in the discussion.

It's possible that he's right, although the problem with that theory is that there have been very few major street name changes in the last 20 years that have been for a famous white person, so it's hard to know what the opposition would have looked like. Had we proposed to rename Interstate to George Washington Ave., would there have been opposition? The Chavez renaming committee doesn't think so, but I do. I think those same business owners and neighbors would have protested the change, and said things like "What did Washington have to do with North Portland?" "Why do we have to recognize him HERE?"

But I think my real opposition to the argument Potter is making is that it's an easy way to discredit ALL the opponents, whether race is a factor in their thinking or not. It's painting an entire group of people with a broad brush, rather than seeking to understand each person as an individual. It's exactly what the civil rights movement was against.

There were clearly racists who opposed the Interstate name change. And after listening to last night's testimony, I think I understand why the committee dug their heels in so deep on Interstate, because they believed it would strike a blow against those bigots and empower the minority community in Portland. But I think they overlooked the fact that it would disempower and alienate another group -- the opponents who truly opposed the decision on economic or historical grounds. The committee wanted a win, even if it meant another group of upstanding, thoughtful Portlanders had to lose.

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. In this case, I really think the Mayor and renaming committee failed to do that, and hurt their cause in the process.

Chris wrote: My understanding is that the advocates of the change did follow the laid-out process closely and completely. Also that they came to focus on Interstate because they were directed in that direction by the powers that be.

I don't think that's correct. City code lays out a process for renaming streets that is pretty detailed (involves signatures, outreach, planning review, and finally a Council vote). The Chavez renaming committee didn't do those things, they settled on Interstate and then approached City Hall for support. In fairness, though, the committee was following the same process that was used for Naito Parkway and Rosa Parks Blvd., so it's understandable why they assumed it would work the same way. Council is at fault for not following their own rules to start with, and encouraging other groups to do the same thing.

As for keeping commitments, there is definitely a difference of opinion regarding what was said to the committee. They believe the Commissioners expressed support. Adams and Leonard believe they expressed support IF the committee received support from neighborhood groups. Sounds like an honest misunderstanding to me.

"My concern is that people who came up with this don't understand how disrespectful this is to the people who worked so hard," she said. "I don't know if it's ignorant or malicious."

So let's say you've had your house the color blue for about 60 years now and somebody moves in next door from another neighborhood and thinks it would be great if your house was green, with all kinds of good ideas why green is better. The new neighbor casually mentions one day that she thinks green would be a better color, but you just casually dismiss the idea. Then one day you come home and find that the new neighbor went out, bought the paint, hired some painters, and painted your house green for you.

Would you be disrespectful to the new neighbor who worked so hard to change the color of your house if you got very upset, complained to ONI, and demanded she paint it back to being blue?

Miles wrote: "It's possible that he's right, although the problem with that theory is that there have been very few major street name changes in the last 20 years that have been for a famous white person, so it's hard to know what the opposition would have looked like. Had we proposed to rename Interstate to George Washington Ave., would there have been opposition?"

With 95% of our streets ALREADY named after white people, why would a white person want more? As for George Washington; there is so much "Washington" all over this country I'd think that even a hard core racist would oppose another street being named after him.

Gotta go catch a flight to Cesar E. Chavez D.C.

Jeff

Ronald Reagan does not reflect the values of this city.

I bet I can find 76,900 +/- people in Multnomah county who disagree with you. Are you saying you can dismiss those people?

Just because you disagree with them, doesn't make you right.

Chris, here is the city code relating to street renamings. Not only is it detailed, but it actually prohibits City Council from initiating a street renaming for a person of historical significance -- that right is only given to citizens who apply and meet the criteria. This group didn't follow the process, and thus the Mayor's ordinance would have waived City code in order to rename Interstate.

<h2>Emma Goldman Blvd....now that was an enlightening statement. All the better to understand your point of view.</h2>