City Council Votes Against Renaming SW 4th

The Portland City Council has unanimously voted against renaming SW 4th Avenue downtown after Cesar Chavez, overturning its previous decision last week in favor of the change.

From the Oregonian:

The Portland City Council pulled the plug on the entire Cesar Chavez street renaming debacle this morning.

"I can see no good reason to put the community through any more of what has become a dysfunctional debate," Commissioner Randy Leonard said.

The council voted unanimously to overturn its decision last week to rename Fourth Avenue in downtown for the farm labor leader and to take off the table a proposal to change the way the council makes street name changes. The council also voted 3-to-2 to reject Mayor Potter's earlier plan to rename North Interstate Avenue for Chavez.

In the end, the Council decided the renaming was too contentious an issue:

Council members said it was time to heal and to talk about race relations in the city -- but probably not street renaming in the near future.

"I certainly don't want to be launching any name changes any time soon," Commissioner Dan Saltzman said.

Potter said the city's demographics are changing to become more diverse, and the community has to start having real conversations about race.

"Race is an everyday fact," the mayor said.

Representatives of the Chinese American community said they were glad the council heard their objections to renaming Fourth. The committee that had been pursuing the Interstate renaming said they would take a break and figure out what to do next.


Read the rest. Discuss.

  • Doug (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Why don't they just put up a statue and call it good!

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I found it interesting that Leonard indicated he would have supported the renaming of Interstate if the renaming committee had agreed to a broader process. That process would have explored at least five streets, with public input and hearings on all the options, and if they had still come back with Interstate he would have voted yes. One has to wonder if the renaming committee didn't snatch defeat from the jaws of victory by taking a hard-line stance.

  • (Show?)

    At least they seem to have not completely lost their minds.

    If they want to name a street after a Latino civil rights hero, they might spend a couple of minutes huddled over a map somewhere. The logic would be that in areas heavily populated by Latino/Americans, they'd get a lot less pushback from residents than, say, an area almost entirely comprised of Chinese/American businesses at the north end and huge blank walled skyscrapers at the southern end.

    SE 181st comes to mind........

  • (Show?)

    Pat, Read what you said. We should only name streets after American heroes if the residents resemble said heroes? Why, Pat? Because people of other races or ethnicities won't appreciate it? While your comment isn't meant to offend - I know you aren't trying to - it is offensive.

    Not wanting to start war, but everyone can benefit from seeing Cesar Chavez's name and remembering how hard it is for laborers all over the country and in Oregon. And laborers of all races, that provide for us on a daily basis in the shadows while we glide our carts and our reusable bags in New Seasons...

    I'm not trying to fight, I'm not. I just want to point out why some have knee jerk reactions when hearing comments like that.

  • Todd H. (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Pat, your logic is miguided at best.

  • holly martins (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Hey – the new plaza going up next to the Fox Tower, -- does it have an official name yet?

    How Chavez Plaza? Maybe a nice statue to go along?

  • (Show?)

    Absurder and absurder...

    If this were a play, the critics would call it unbelievable.

  • andy (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Hey, they finally came to their senses. Chavez didn't deserve a street in Portland, he just isn't that important. Neither was Rosa Parks but I guess that is water under the bridge.

    The council has a process that should work in theory, not sure why they don't actually use it. Rather than pandering to whatever group brings them an idea they are supposed to kick it over to a group that studies the merits and provides input. Chavez wouldn't make the cut list if the process was run correctly since he just wasn't that big of impact in either Portland history or American history.

  • (Show?)

    I liked an idea espoused here recently to rename one of our great Farmer's Markets as Cesar Chavez Square. An apporpriate artwork of the man, the people and the agriculture would make a fitting backdrop to remind visitors of the origin of their food and the ongoing struggle of those workers. Maybe if the City Council were to invite all the F/M's to submit an application then we would see who was interested.

  • (Show?)

    OK Carol, bearing in mind that I have a dog in this fight as my wife is a Chinese American immigrant who moved here (legally) when she was twelve, Where would I have been corect in advocating for this issue.

    Someone's gonna get the absurd end of this stick. Chavez boulevard running through the Chinatown gate? Would that be the sesitivity that you're looking for?

    I'm pretty sure that you're not saying as others have, that as a White American Male all of my thoughts and opinions are totally without merit......

    I'd love to hear a sample of the appropriate sensitive non-racist comment that it might be ok for me to make....

  • djk (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Here's an idea.

    Portland has a process already in place for renaming streets.

    Why not just follow it?

  • (Show?)

    Pat, I have to agree with Karol. You're suggesting that people of one background (chinese) shouldn't care about or honor historic figures of another background (hispanic). So because I'm white, I shouldn't care about the contributions that MLK made to American society? I don't buy it. What's absurd here is the notion that we should just reinforce the segregation that is already inherent in our society through street names.

  • Chuck Butcher (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Since I don't live in Portland and never have; and don't know a whole lot about the street/neighborhood/ethnic make up of the place you might think I'm out of line, but my wife spent most of her life through her mid-30s there and her suggestion was the same as Pat's when I asked where wouldn't it get big push-back.

    Nobody really cares what a street in a new subdivision is named, as long as it isn't something like "Dogpile Lane" but long established street names in an older city gain a status that is not easily overcome. 4th Ave has no particular loading, Chavez does, and toss in Chinatown which has a definite social loading and you get...this. SW 181st is inappropriate why? A lot of it isn't very nice - I know that one a bit - but MLK has neighborhoods that have quite a few crime reports.

    I've lived in a place where about the only white thing about Washington St was the name, and frankly that President should be ashamed of such a street's existence. There are social realities that don't go away because of some "feel good" thinking, if you want a street named Chavez then it might be a good idea to not beat your head against a wall.

    Me, I don't like street changes, maps get messed up, and if you have an investment in address oriented publications they become wastepaper. Phone books are wrong and people will give you directions with a street that no longer exists. For pete's sake, name something that doesn't put out everybody on a street and raise issues that don't really exist. Racism comes up first, what is racist about not wanting your street re-named? Why is it important that it be done? It has to do with race? Well, neither 4th nor Interstate have any racist overtones. A race isn't "honored?" The ethnic Chinese have been in the NW longer than the Hispanics and had more to do with the developement of the NW and been treated considerably worse and where is their street? Well there you go. This is exactly what happens.

  • (Show?)

    Is it really racist to suggest that having the main street running through the gates of Chinatown is not exactly the best choice for having it named after a chicano farm rights labor leader?

    There are better avenues (pun noted) to honoring César Chávez, through better street choice to rename, or other types of dedications (farmer markets, plazas, schools, etc.)

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Not wanting to start war, but everyone can benefit from seeing Cesar Chavez's name and remembering how hard it is for laborers all over the country and in Oregon.

    Well said, Karol. I still hope we can have a Cesar Chavez avenue/blvd/street in Portland sometime soon. Chavez was a great American who has had an impact on pretty much anyone who consumes the bounty from our farms.

  • (Show?)

    "Someone's gonna get the absurd end of this stick. Chavez boulevard running through the Chinatown gate? Would that be the sesitivity that you're looking for?"

    I really don't see a whole lot of difference between a Chinatown business owner telling customers "We're at the corner of Couch and Chavez," as opposed to "We're at the corner of Couch and 4th." In either option, there isn't the slightest relationship to anything Chinese. Are they uptight about the Flemish invading their turf over on Flanders Street?

  • Larry McD (unverified)
    (Show?)

    There's something inherently unpleasant in one group of people deciding that they're going to start renaming streets and landmarks in another group of people's neighborhoods... even if everyone involved is of identical ethnic, religious, and sexual identities.

    Renaming anything only makes sense when a group of people get together and ask the city or county to change something in their own backyards. Sometimes a whole city can get together and do that; other times neighborhoods do it. Then it's appropriate and should be fairly non-controversial.

    That said, let me suggest that anyone who's serious about honoring Cesar Chavez with a street should consider NE Airport Way, in which case everybody who inquired about PDX or who arrived there would be aware that the City of Portland chose to honor him in a major way. Frankly, I'd rather save that street for somebody whose contributions were specifically to Portland and/or Oregon... but, hey, to get all this name-calling and nastiness out of the way I'd go for it in a Vancouver minute.

    Hey! There's a thought. How 'bout we rename Vancouver?

  • (Show?)

    Are they uptight about the Flemish invading their turf over on Flanders Street?

    Na-a-a-a-a-ah TJ.

    Informed residents understand that it was named for Ned Flanders, and that the naming was a plot by Roger Ailes to devalue asian culture.

    Or maybe it was to honor war dead from WWI. Who knows? Not me.

    <hr/>

    Some of the Chinese spokespersons yesterday framed it as an insult to latinos to devalue Chavez' sacred memory by placing the street name in Chinatown.

    So it goes. And goes. And goes.

  • (Show?)

    TJ, given that both streets were named Couch and 4th around the same time that Chinatown was moved to its current location from its original one after the 1894 flood, might have relevance.

    As a side note, Couch street is named after John Couch, one the founders of Portland and the land-owner of the platted land north of Burnside when it was incorporated, which is eventually where Couch now runs. Additionally it is somewhat ironic that John Couch was the person who numbered the streets in NW Portland running North/South and named the East/West streets alphabetically in what has now become known as the "Alphabet Area" of NW Portland.

  • (Show?)

    Another bit of irony Pat is that Flanders is actually named after George H. Flanders, and whose uncle owned the brig Mars which John Couch (whom I mentioned in my previous post) sailed on a voyage as a boy, and whom later Couch became business partners with and who married his sister.

  • Ted (unverified)
    (Show?)

    HA HA HA HA HA HA HA...

    The Joker from the Batman franchise would be having a big laugh at this while he plans to spray poison gas from street cars and fountains around Pioneer Square.

    What we see now is reverse racism, which exposes racism for what it really is, a euphemism for socio-economic class conflict. City Hall was only turned back by a fierce (and multi-racial) backlash from the people of North Portland. Yet it only took a few days to retreat from "done deal" on SW Fourth to "no deal" once they ran head first into the power of established business interests (whether Anglo, Chinese, or African American).

    I knew there wasn't a single City Commish with a big enough walnut tree to run head first into that nutcracker. The real lesson here? NoPo was poor, so they thought they could force it through. Downtown is rich, so they turned tail and ran like Hell.

    Let's not forget how these guys voted in the first place, folks.

  • Ted (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Absolutely nobody (!!) should be mocking the people who died in the Flanders during WWI. You want to name a street after something meaningful, call it, Menin Gates Memorial Avenue. That would have some real meaning. Don't insult the dead over something you know nothing about.

    Pat, your little joke about Ned Flanders and "WWI, who knows...?" was innocent, but obscene. Those men lived waiste deep in mud, blood, shit, lice and corpses with little hope of waking up to a new dawn for weeks at a time. Maybe war is just a John Wayne movie to you. Maybe your family tree didn't lose a few limbs from that conflagration, but mine did, so fuck off!

    Read "A Storm In The Flanders" by Winston Groom, author of "Forrest Gump." Try not to cry.

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Cesar Chavez is a labor hero, a champion of the working class, a member of the grassroots public that resolutely stood up for the little guy. It's to his credit, in part, that the integrity of the american agricultural industry's treatment of its workers improved. These are the kind of things that hard working, fair-minded people recognize and appreciate above and beyond concerns related to ethnic identity. If there's a good argument for renaming Interstate Ave as Cesar Chavez Ave, this is it.

    "...he(Chavez) just isn't that important. Neither was Rosa Parks..." Andy

    Rosa Parks not that important? ?? Why thank you Andy, for that great, wizened opinion.

  • (Show?)

    I thought the issue with renaming a road after Rosa Parks was that not enough time had passed since her death to qualify for a road to be renamed after her.

  • (Show?)

    Karol, well said.

    Pat, if I were looking to rename a street after a woman, a feminist hero say, would you suggest that I find a neighborhood that was predominantly female so that it would be appreciated?

  • (Show?)

    I'm still trying to figure out what was so special about Interstate Avenue. (And sorry if this has been answered on another thread, I've been away from the blog for a while.)

    Why were the pro-renaming folks so adamant about Interstate? And why were they opposed to 4th Avenue?

    Was that a process-objection? Or is there some actual substantive reason why Interstate makes sense and no other street (or at least 4th) doesn't?

    And for the love of god, would someone PLEASE tell me why we can't double-name streets like they do in most other major cities? (In NYC, 6th is Avenue of the Americas. Mail gets delivered either way.)

  • (Show?)

    But ws, the entire impetus to rename interstate after Chavez was/is because of his ethnicity. Because he was a chicano, he is being used as a "we need a 'latino' street name" because of the renaming of Portland Ave. to Rosa Parks and no street is named after a hispanic person.

    While I agree that Chavez was a great person because of his stands for working people, organizing exploited workers, and should be honored for that, everyone should be honest and acknowledge that he has been chosen because he is chicano as an "us too" for the latino community.

    That said, there are valid reasons why people in North Portland feel as though their neighborhood is simply a political/social pissing match for outside interests to make their pet project, particularly given the timing and lack of following the process.

    Then fold into it the political gaming the GOP is pushing to gin up the "illegals" debate for electoral reasons in the rapidly approaching election cycle, a Mexican-American organizer of immigrant and migrant workers and of course, it is on a collision course with the "leaders" pushing for the name change, some of who themselves have a history race-baiting and playing the race card to shake-down institutions and the government... and here we end up, no official honors for someone who did make a significant and praise worthy impact on the American experience, a more divided community, valid and totally irrational and illegitimate accusations of racism, classism, and vitriol.

    Just my 2/100ths of a dollar.

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Lestatdelc, after I posted and read my comment, it occurred to me that I might have added an additional sentence to the last paragraph, something like;'Any additional credit arising from the efforts of Chavez related to his ethnic background is gravy for the Hispanic, Latino, Mexican community'. Really though, I would have thought that this would be obvious, so I'm glad I didn't include such a sentence.

    It may very well be true that the majority of the emphasis for renaming Interstate as Chavez had to do with Cesar Chavez ethnicity. Maybe it's just my own personal thinking, but if so, I think this is unwise. MLK blvd wasn't named so from its former designation as Union Ave just because MLK was a black guy.

    Former Union Avenue was renamed in honor of Martin Luther King because he was and continues to be a hugely important figure in american society whose beliefs, efforts and accomplishments reinforce fundamental principles laid out in the U.S. Constitution in a manner that inspires people of all ethnic and class origins. Did the renaming committee understand this as it applies to the work of Cesar Chavez and what that might have meant to the community around Interstate?

    I still also kind of wonder, like Kari Chisholm, why the renaming committee was so fixated on Interstate Ave for the renaming. The most I can recollect from someone'e comment on this blog, was that city hall provided them with a list of names from which to choose, and they focused on the one on the list that happened to be Interstate.

    Had a discussion today with my mother about the renaming idea. Now we're talking old school: "It's a total waste of money...no person is significant enough to justify the costs associated with renaming an existing named street", then on to "Shouldn't be teaching mexican kids in spanish...they should be learning the language if they want to live here", "Shouldn't be allowed to think they can have Mexico here", and on and on and on. I don't think this sort of thing is racism per se, but I think it represents a certain insensitivity that can lead to big problems for a society.

  • Eric Parker (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I vote for re-naming Airport Way for Mr. Chavez. It goes through what was a lot of fields that made produce with lots of immigrant labor.

    I am sure that the city council could work with the Port of Portland on this one.

  • (Show?)

    Amazing how good, how informative a thread can be when the race baters do not post. Have nothing to add other than to say that reading this thread has been a joy today.

    Happy Thanksgiving to all.

    Fred

  • liberalincarnate (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I am continually amazed at the arrogance and stupidity shown in many of these posts. With petty bickering and uneducated people like this we don't deserve to win any elections in 2008.

  • (Show?)

    Kari (and others who have asked in the past),

    I don't speak for the committee and wasn't around when they made the original choice of Interstate but I can take a stab at some of the reasons based on what I have seen and heard.

    Here's what I recall about why it was originally chosen.

    1. Interstate is eligible under the rules in the current code and the commitee was asked to follow those rules. That eliminates more streets than you might think. The majority of the suggestions I've seen or heard from people who think they have a better idea for a different street don't follow the rules. Some of those rules: no street already named after a person, no street belonging wholly or in part to a jurisdiction other than the city, no parts of streets.

    2. North Portland has a significant population of Latinos and one of the committee co-chairs and some other committee members live in North Portland.

    3. Interstate is a significant street--it carries the Yellow Line MAX.

    4. It's symbolically interesting that it would be tied to Rosa Parks Way and Martin Luther King Jr Blvd. and because it runs north/south.

    From the committee's perspective, the appropriate question is "Why not Interstate?" as there is an arbitrary component to any choice. The main objections they heard to renaming Interstate would apply to just about any street they might choose. The argument that "Interstate" is historic applies to just about any Portland street as they have mostly all had their names for decades. All streets have residents and businesses that would have to change their addresses.

    My observation is that what hardened the committee's stance on Interstate was the was the disrespect they got when they went to the community to talk about it. The virulent racism was part of that and the rest of the community's failure to confront or even acknowledge the virulent racism was an even bigger part. More subtle but in many ways the hardest of all to to take was the sense that kept coming from the rest of the community that when we say "us" about our community we don't include our Latino neighbors. Even the committee members who live only a few blocks from Interstate were treated as outsiders trying to usurp what is "ours"--as in the slogan of the organized opposition "Save Our Interstate".

    I think there were several objections to 4th Ave. First, that it was being used to avoid a vote on the Interstate proposal that the committee spent so much blood, sweat and tears over. Second, that 4th Ave doesn't include any part of the city where a significant population of Latinos live. That's not, as some have suggested it should or shouldn't be, about trying to avoid opposition. It's about the hope that the street name would serve as an inspiration--particularly to Latino young people. Finally, I think it was seen as a move that might provoke hard feelings between the Latino and Chinese communities.

  • (Show?)

    Did you guys see this news story?

    Things get even more interesting. Would probably make a good "in the news" piece.

  • (Show?)

    doretta,

    The Latino population is larger in Southeast Portland. If you look at the population growth pattern of that demographic. I think one could make an argument there are several other major streets that should have been considered. Many good opportunities for community out reach and public involvement and to take a notion from "Sean Cruz"....education. I feel if the leaders had respected the people of Portland and not allowed any of their personal racial insecurities or bigotries to distract them. This blog would be filled with discussions about Chaves that I would be sharing with my daughter.

    You know, even though things are pretty screwed up. It is not to late to make this right and have that open process that would look at more than just naming a street, but how will the City of Portland embed the names of the people we feel contributed to the development of Portland. We have a lot of streets, parks, projects and buildings. Lots of opportunities for the community to develop the reflections that identify their values.

    Fred

  • Ross Williams (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I think one could make an argument there are several other major streets that should have been considered.

    I think that same argument could be made for Rosa Parks Boulevard couldn't it? And Naito Boulevard?

    The fact is that a group of Latino's chose a street, asked the city to rename it and was met with oppostiion, including ethnic attacks, from both their black and white neighbors. Is it surprising they would dig in their heels? Shouldn't they? Doesn't it say something about Portland that the bigots won this argument?

    This blog would be filled with discussions about Chaves (sic) that I would be sharing with my daughter.

    Who is this Chaves you keep referring to? Do you think people can't see your consistent misspelling of Cesar Chavez name as being deliberately disrespectful?

  • (Show?)

    Actually Ross,

    Spelling the name "Chaves" could as likely come from having lived or spent time in countries where........that's the way you actually spell "Chavez" which is an English attempt at interperetation.

    Of course that might run counter to your own preconceived notions about all of us ignorant racists in this thread, so don't let facts get in the way.

  • Ross Williams (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Of course that might run counter to your own preconceived notions about all of us ignorant racists in this thread, so don't let facts get in the way.

    No one has called you ignorant. Your own comments call you out as racist.

    Spelling the name "Chaves" could as likely come from having lived or spent time in countries where........that's the way you actually spell "Chavez" which is an English attempt at interperetation.

    Cesar Chavez was born in the United States and spelled his name, in both Spanish and English - Chavez. He enlisted in the United States Navy under the name Chavez. No attempt at "interpretation" required. Why would you intentionally use a foreign spelling of his name?

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "Cesar Estrada Chavez was born March 31, 1927 near Yuma, Arizona." Spectrum Biographies

    Cesar Chavez was an American. Did Chavez himself ever spell his last name with an 's' on the end instead of a 'z'?

    On another subject, from Doretta's comment:

    "My observation is that what hardened the committee's stance on Interstate was the was the disrespect they got when they went to the community to talk about it. The virulent racism was part of that and the rest of the community's failure to confront or even acknowledge the virulent racism was an even bigger part. More subtle but in many ways the hardest of all to to take was the sense that kept coming from the rest of the community that when we say "us" about our community we don't include our Latino neighbors. Even the committee members who live only a few blocks from Interstate were treated as outsiders trying to usurp what is "ours"--as in the slogan of the organized opposition "Save Our Interstate"." Doretta

    I feel like this observation helps to reveal a key point where the renaming committee screwed up. "...the rest of the community's failure to confront or even acknowledge the virulent racism...". Is it clearly established that the rest of the community did not consider the various individual racist outbursts from some of their fellow community members to be racist in nature?

    The community might be faulted for not condemning those community members that indulged their personal racist inclination. Perhaps the renaming committee or some other group or organization should have spent time to work to help the community understand the kind of shadow that passivity in the face of stark racism could cast upon their community. It might be true, but it's kind of hard to believe that the entirety of North Portland is heavily biased against Latino's, hispanics, mexicans, and would happily allow the obnoxious outbursts of a few racist boneheads to represent the entire community.

    Even assuming they understand the appalling effects of racism and are opposed to racism, it doesn't seem necessarily fair that Interstate be named for Chavez simply because North Portland has a significant population of Latinos. The Interstate community, North Portland, or whoever is entitled to have a voice in the renaming of a street in that area, may have perfectly legitimate reasons for objecting to the name change. Those reasons should be considered with the same level of seriousness as the idea of renaming a street after a notable person.

  • (Show?)

    Ross,

    I think a few of us on Blueoregon.com should stop PIMP slapping each other long enough to move the issue of naming the streets after some of our local and national heroes forward. Can we talk about what that would look like?

    Many of us have kids and feel the time we have left on this planet should be dedicated to making our community as well as our world better. PIMP slapping is rarely a productive activity...LOL Got time to join doretta and I for a pint of Terminal Gravity IPA? If you do, I will include you into the email I will be sending doretta soon.

    Fred

  • (Show?)

    Not sure if I am misspelling Chaves's name. All of my friends that have the surname Chaves use an s and not Z so I guess I am a creature of habit. I have seen it spelled both ways and never really paid attention how the Chaves in question spelled it. If I have made a mistake, blame it on my quality Portland Public School educations....LOL

    I will make sure to inform my friends that according to you, they are disrespecting themselves by not spelling their name the way you feel they should....LOL (That was a JOKE Ross)

    Fred

  • Eric Parker (unverified)
    (Show?)

    This whole issue has nothing to do with racism or ethnic divides. What happened is that Potter, under his own initiative, promised something to a group of people because he thought he had enough clout to bully it through and get it done without any problems.

    The way he is acting now shows he is regretting this promise of appeasement.

  • Ross Williams (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Fred -

    I will have to pass, but thanks for the offer. You are right. This has been worn out.

  • Garlynn -- undergroundscience.blogspot.com (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Why not rename NE Alberta Street to Cesar Chavez Street? At least it used to have a bit of a concentration of Hispanic businesses....

  • (Show?)

    Is it clearly established that the rest of the community did not consider the various individual racist outbursts from some of their fellow community members to be racist in nature?

    It's clearly established that the rest of the community did not effectively step up to stop it or to register any significant objections while it was going on. I don't take that to mean that most of the rest of the community agreed with those overtly racist sentiments--I don't think we do. But our failure to respond more appropriately is real and has consequences.

    More importantly, after those incidents my experience of the rest of the community (much like my experience here on BlueOregon) is that a huge amount of time and energy was put into blaming the victims of the unpleasantness and reassuring outselves that we are not racist (we appear to have a near endless patience and capacity for reassuring ourselves that we are not racist) while very little time or energy was put into attempting to understand what was happening or coming to grips with the fact that there are people with legitimate perspectives that are different from our own.

    In my view, the community's failure here was our apparent incapacity or unwillingness to look even a little bit beyond the ends of our own noses. Had I seen the community carefully weighing the competing interests involved and coming to the conclusion that the side who want to keep the name "Interstate Ave" had a more compelling interest than the side that want to rename it "Cesar Chavez Blvd" I'd have said "c'est la vie" and no big deal.

    What I saw instead is that we in the community (and here on BlueOregon) tend to believe that if something isn't important to us then by definition it can't be important--there's a picture of that attitude in the dictionary next to the definition of "white privilege", I believe. How many times in this discussion have we heard that renaming a street is a meaningless gesture? And yet a couple dozen people spent hundreds of hours of their time and kept coming back in the face of a great deal of unpleasantness for no other reason than that it is important to them. We reconcile that by concluding that the committee is a stupid lot of screwups who probably have hidden agendas and bad intentions. We apparently find that more palatable than risking examining why we feel the way we do and taking the chance that we may come to the conclusion that someone else's needs may indeed be greater than our own.

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    I agree with a lot that you say Doretta, but hope you aren't selling the people in your community short. I like to think that if the rename committee had tried to sell the community on renaming Interstate to Chavez in no small part because he is a grass roots working class hero that happens to be of Hispanic descent, the idea might have eventually took, although not certainly. Aren't people expecting an awful lot in a very short time frame from this community that seems to have been inert for years and years?

    It's not like that neighborhood has been a hotbed of activism and progressive ideas has it? There may be a lot of people in the neighborhood that hate the racist crap, but aren't accustomed to speaking out, especially in public. So the loud mouthed drunken white power idiots show up for kicks at the community meetings and smear the entire neighborhood. It's not the first time that sort of thing has happened.

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Doesn't it say something about Portland that the bigots won this argument?

    There you go again, Ross, labeling all those opposed to the renaming as bigots. Sigh It shouldn't be a mystery as to why this effort failed, if the renaming committee acted like Ross even half the time.

    As to whether or not the North Portland community responded appropriately to the few racists who yelled cowardly remarks from the back of the room, I guess I wonder why we're giving those assholes so much power? How is it that a few inbreds could disrupt the entire process simply by saying hateful words? It appears that those remarks sent the renaming committee into such a rage that it was unwilling to compromise on any aspect of the renaming, which is why they lost my support and, more importantly, Randy Leonard's.

  • Jack (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Agreed Miles. With race baiters like Ross and Doretta slinging accusations left and right, it's no wonder why some whites got defensive. Way to poison the atmosphere. Graduates of the Tom Potter School of Politics, no doubt.

    And isn't it nice how how they excoriate residents of Overlook and other neighborhoods around Interstate for not speaking out forcefully enough against a handful of loud mouths in the back of the room, yet completely ignore the open bigotry displayed by members of the renaming committee and their supporters? I guess what's good for the goose ain't so good for the gander....

    As far as I'm concerned, the bigotry and contempt for the democratic process that the renaming committee and their supporters displayed has thoroughly poisoned this well. It will be years before we can revisit the subject.

  • Terry Parker (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The real issue in Portland is that City government is failing in the processes that it should be using to engage a cross section of citizens from different backgrounds that encompasses all classes of people, those both for and against the issue at hand. The decision making process is broken, has lost its democratic roots and become that of a socialist agenda managed by those in charge who are often influenced by affluent developers and property owners. Whether it is renaming a street, adding streetcars, bicycle infrastructure and safety, ethanol in gasoline, locking up spray paint, replacing or refurbishing the Sellwood Bridge, green building, sustainability, etc, it is all the same. An idea is born, a stacked deck advisory committee often with the usual suspects of those who serve on just about every other citizen advisory group in town is formed to tweak the details and rubber stamp the preconceived agenda, sometimes the public is offered a survey with only the questions and option choices that can be manipulated to render support for the preconceived agenda, and only then is the public asked for input at public meetings and/or council hearings In the case of the renaming process, the masquerade backfired when the manipulation of the citizenry hit the fan attempting to change what has become a historical brand name for the livelihood of the people who live and work on or near Interstate Avenue. The Mayor and the group supporting the name change attempted to play the race card, but all that did was fan the flames of those against the idea. The bottom line is; the public needs to become involved at the beginning of processes, not as window dressing at the tail end, and that includes more than just renaming streets.

  • (Show?)

    Locking up spray paint is part of a "socialist agenda"? Huh?

  • Karin (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Doretta, I must say again, you are right on mark. I hope people read your last comment (doretta | Nov 23, 2007 7:40:58 PM) with open eyes, minds, and hearts.

    The mayor gets what you have said, and that is why he held his position without wavering--the rest of the council, eh, not so much.

  • (Show?)

    I agree Doretta. Your consistency in labeling "privileged" (read "all") "Whites" as the only group capable of racism has been remarkable. As has your manifest lack of curiosity about, and contempt for POVs other than those who march in lockstep with you.

    So it goes with all people who have reached a point in their thinking where they know that there is no need for further introspection.

    Like the fundamentalist Chrstian who knows that gay is just another word for child molester, you are comfortable where you are.

  • (Show?)

    Pat,

    You'd be doing us all, including yourself, a favor if you would speak to the issues rather than continuing your long string of substance-free ad hominem attacks. I explicitly said that I don't subscribe to the notion that only white people can be, or are, racist--right here, more than once. It's possible the discussion could get interesting if you would talk to me (and others) rather than merely emoting at the person you imagine me (us) to be.

    I'd venture to say that I've spent more time listening to various of my neighbors who disagree with me on this issue than everyone else who has posted on this topic here on BlueOregon put together.

  • (Show?)
    What I saw instead is that we in the community (and here on BlueOregon) tend to believe that if something isn't important to us then by definition it can't be important--there's a picture of that attitude in the dictionary next to the definition of "white privilege", I believe.

    Seems like a racially bigoted point of view.

    The reality is that tending to believe that if something isn't important to us then it's not important at all is part and parcel of the human condition. No skin color grouping has a lock on that failing. We all do it from time to time because we're all human.

    More to the point... it seems to me that your own role here fits your own complaint. I know that you've dismissed what I've had to say because you don't see it as important and thus it's not important from your perspective.

    The irony is that I attempted to explicitly avoid taking sides on this issue. I just wanted to introduce a different point of view on where we go to find our "heros." What I got for the effort was being called a racist by you and Kija. And even when your ass-u-mptions were shown to be flawed you both continued on trying to pin the same bogus label on me. Is it not self-evident to everyone that you were dismissing what I had to say because my suggested approach wasn't/isn't important to you?

    Don't you think it's just a wee bit cheeky to set yourself up as some sort of Godess wherein you are the final arbitor of what is or is not important and then blaming that very mindset on others of one particular skin color?

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "What I saw instead is that we in the community (and here on BlueOregon) tend to believe that if something isn't important to us then by definition it can't be important--there's a picture of that attitude in the dictionary next to the definition of "white privilege", I believe." Doretta, Nov 23, 2007 7:40:58 PM

    I don't even see how you could make that generalization in reference to comments as a whole made on this thread, and on related others here on blueoregon in regards to the renaming issue. Certainly, amongst all comments made on those threads, without searching through and counting them, some of the people commenting seemed to express bias and unfairness, but to me, the majority seemed very thoughtful and balanced in their remarks.

    That they are balanced and reasonable even when not always in favor seems reasonable, because though obviously there are those individuals that would like a prompt resolution to their immediate concerns, as it turns out, this is a very complex issue.

    The act of naming a city street after a significant Latino hero may be important, but just how important is that specific act and how does one gauge it? A poll of some sort? When compared to other issues related to Latino, hisanic, mexican progress in Portland, how important is the renaming of a street for a significant Latino person?

    I'd imagine quite a number of blueoregon's audience and participants likely recognize mexicans importance to Portland as well as Oregon as a whole. It logically follows that they would likely recognize at least some of the significance to hispanics that renaming of a prominent Portland street for a noted hispanic person would mean to this group. In the overall scheme of things though, I believe a lot of reasonably minded people amongst them recognized that the timing was not right, rather than having concluded that the possible renaming of Interstate to Chavez was not important to Hispanics.

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Doretta, you wrote this earlier today: It's possible the discussion could get interesting if you would talk to me (and others) rather than merely emoting at the person you imagine me (us) to be.

    Yet two days ago you wrote: . . . a couple dozen people spent hundreds of hours of their time and kept coming back in the face of a great deal of unpleasantness for no other reason than that it is important to them. We reconcile that by concluding that the committee is a stupid lot of screwups who probably have hidden agendas and bad intentions.

    By asserting that we must think the committee has hidden agendas and bad intentions, aren't you "emoting at the person you imagine us to be" rather than actually listening to what we are saying?

    I think the renaming committee screwed up by becoming obstinate and arrogant and refusing compromise of any kind. I don't believe they have hidden agendas or bad intentions. The reality is that had they been willing to compromise on process rather than making a power play, it's very likely that Interstate would have been successfully renamed in honor of Chavez. As it turns out, we're left with nothing. And that really is too bad.

    Karin: The fact that your husband "held his position without wavering" in the face of public outcry against the process that he set up does not show leadership or loyalty, it shows arrogance in the face of failure. He led the renaming committee to defeat, and it is not something that he should be proud of.

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Karin (comment at Nov 25, 2007 10:21:09 AM) is the mayor's wife? Oh. Nice. This is just too weird. Karin, or Mrs Potter, please share with us exactly what it is that Doretta said that Mayor Potter gets. Many people have been scratching their heads pondering the question of how it is that he could make such a mess of the renaming effort if he gets it. Does Mayor Potter really think that the whole issue of renaming Interstate Ave to Cesar Chavez would have smoothed out if city council had simply approved the name change? Please at least tell us that he was concerned it would smooth out.

    "The mayor gets what you (Doretta) have said, and that is why he held his position without wavering--the rest of the council, eh, not so much." Karin

  • (Show?)

    The reality is that tending to believe that if something isn't important to us then it's not important at all is part and parcel of the human condition. No skin color grouping has a lock on that failing. We all do it from time to time because we're all human.

    I completely agree, Kevin. The point of the concept of "white privilege" is not that white people are especially bigoted. It's that as white people in this country, we get to continue to believe that only the things that are important to us are important. People of color tend to learn otherwise early and often.

    I did not dismiss the things you said because I didn't think they were important. I debated with you in good faith. It simply isn't true that I have no understanding or empathy with many of the people who were against the renaming. That's just not what I thought was missing here.

    As I said, had I seen my community weighing the importance of the issue to the committee and the Latinos who turned out to support them I would have felt very differently about what I saw and heard.

    After all the discussing we've done, you still think I "called you a racist"?

  • (Show?)
    After all the discussing we've done, you still think I "called you a racist"?</blockquote?>I'd say that "white-boy clueless" is both racial and dismissive. You also went out of your way to defend Kija who was calling me a racist.

    More to the point, you pejoratively characterized my repeated rebuttals to Kija's misrepresentation of what I'd said as "scrambling." Seems pretty clear to me that you filtered it through what YOU see as important and were dismissive of what I see as important.

  • andy (unverified)
    (Show?)

    The process was started by racists which is why it became bogged down in racial overtones. Just think about what would happen if some white power folks went to Potter and asked for a street named after an important white power leader. He would kick them out of his office. But when some Latino activist demand a street name for one of "their" leaders, he caves. Hey, double standards all around! And then idiot Potter starts to use the racist label for anyone who dares question him. He starts the discussion as race based and then throws the race card! Too funny. Potter proved that he is a complete moron with this gaff. His support from the other council members evaporated as soon as he pulled the terrible two tantrum and walked off the stage. That was classic stuff right out of a 6th grade student council meeting!

  • Eric Parker (unverified)
    (Show?)

    It wasn't started by racists, Andy. It was started by Potter who wrongfully thought that he could appease and promise a group with something he really could not deliver on and try to bully it through the council without any problems. The racism was after the fact because, to some people, "if your against us, you are automatically a racist". To some people, gray areas do not exist and that is why we have problems.

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Just think about what would happen if some white power folks went to Potter and asked for a street named after an important white power leader. He would kick them out of his office. But when some Latino activist demand a street name for one of "their" leaders, he caves.

    Um, Andy, if you don't understand the difference between Cesar Chavez and a white supremacist, you should go back to your cave. Chavez achieved positive change through political activism and non-violence. White supremacists try to achieve negative change through anarchy and violence.

    Any effort to honor a white supremacist should be summarily dismissed. That's not a double standard, it's knowing the difference between right and wrong and acting accordingly.

  • (Show?)

    Kevin,

    Saying that one particular statement comes across as "white-boy clueless" is the same thing as calling you a racist?

    Calling your subsequent statements "scrambling" is the same thing as calling you a racist?

    Taking you up on your question about how anything you said might reflect some racist assumptions of our society is the same thing as calling you a racist?

    You might want to rethink who isn't taking what seriously.

  • (Show?)

    "white boy clueless" seems to speak to a certain type of cluelessness unique to "white boys".

    Is there an affliction that is similarly specific to "black girls", "gay hockey players", or "skinny bicycle riders"?

  • (Show?)

    Pat gets it.

    Calling your subsequent statements "scrambling" is the same thing as calling you a racist?

    Read it again, Doretta.

    Hint: that part was in a separate paragraph for a reason.

  • (Show?)

    Is there an affliction that is similarly specific to "black girls", "gay hockey players", or "skinny bicycle riders"?

    Do you all truly think there is no significant difference in people's experience of the world based on race/ethnicity/gender?

    If so, put that under the definition of "white-boy clueless".

    If not, please quit speaking as though you do.

    Acknowledging the realities of our racist/sexist society is not racist. White people and males in our society are at a disadvantage when it comes to understanding how racism and sexism work because they don't get their noses rubbed in it regularly. White males are have an exponential disadvantage. That's just a fact of life. We all have the power to choose to allow the experience of others to overcome that disadvantage or to choose to vigorously defend our comfortable assumptions.

  • Miles (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Acknowledging the realities of our racist/sexist society is not racist.

    Actually it is when you use that reality to make sweeping generalizations about any group based solely on stereotypes that you associate with their race or gender. In the paragraph above, you make bigoted, racist assumptions about ALL white males. Would you ever, EVER, write such a sentence about people of color? Of course not, you would be much more nuanced and exact. So why is it that you'll make sweeping generalizations about white people, and why are those statements any less racist than sweeping generalizations about people of color?

    I agree with you that many white people do not face discrimination. But some do, and others seek to understand discrimination. I won't agree with where you seem to be going, that the opinions of white people (and particularly males) on issues of race should be devalued because they "can't understand" the difficulties of discrimination. That kind of identity-based politics is not only wrong, it's dangerous. Every person needs to be listened to based on what they are actually saying, not viewed through the prism of their skin color or gender.

    So to bring this back on-topic, it's racist to discount the opinions of white males on the Chavez street-renaming simply because they're white males. And your continuing attempts to do so are no better than the anti-Latino slurs yelled by racists at the community meetings.

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    "Acknowledging the realities of our racist/sexist society..." "white-boy clueless" Doretta

    Those phrases are simple-minded intimidation strategy. Easy for some people to throw that crap around when things don't go their way. Just like Mayor Potter having a snitfit and walking out on council chambers. Is it supposed to be hip or something to spout that kind of MTV stuff?

    Someday, after Hispanics have been in and involved with the Interstate neighborhoods long enough to clearly have been established as a part of those neighborhoods, the idea of a street within that neighborhood named or even re-named from an existing named street, after a notable hispanic person may happen on its own accord with the support of the entire neighborhood. In the meantime, the failed force-fed strategy to rename and the follow-up miscategorization attempts on the part of bitter ranaming committee members is just poison in the well.

  • (Show?)

    Read to the end of my post, Miles. You have completely misrepresented my position.

    I said:

    We all have the power to choose to allow the experience of others to overcome that disadvantage or to choose to vigorously defend our comfortable assumptions.

    I don't devalue the opinions of white males because they "can't understand". I know some white males who understand pretty well. They understand because they have worked at understanding. They understand because they have put defensiveness aside and listened.

    You know what they say about opinions--they're like assholes, eveyone's got one. I judge people's arguments based on the logic with which they are presented and the insight they display. If they are full of defensiveness and straw men and personal attacks, I don't value them much no matter what the color or the gender of the person presenting them.

    Yes, "People of color tend to encounter more discrimination than white people in our society" is a generalization about people of color and a generalization about white people. It is not true for every person of color vis a vis every white person. That does not make it either racist or incorrect.

  • (Show?)
    I said: We all have the power to choose to allow the experience of others to overcome that disadvantage or to choose to vigorously defend our comfortable assumptions.

    What you are missing is that you've set up an illogical one-way street.

    Several of us have tried to point out your own comfortable assumptions to you but have been consistently rebuffed with pejorative terms by you.

    Assuming that "Doretta" isn't a nom d'plume masking your real gender, you're in no better (or worse) a position to judge what it's like to be a male in this culture or how/why a male thinks the way he does than I am to judge what it's like to be a female or how/why she thinks the way she does. It works both ways and is no different between different ethnic groups.

    It seems clear that you believe that you have arrived at some enlightened place from which you feel confident in judging everyone who don't appear in your eyes to measure up. In short, you've set yourself up as perfect. Oh sure, you'll admit the odd failing but readily sweep that aside in favor of dogmatically adhering to your own yardstick as the only relevant one.

    As long as you continue to set yourself up as the final arbitor of what is important or relevant than you will continue to be that which you strive to oppose. But then isn't that too a most typical failing? We seem to fight the hardest against those in whom we see some distasteful measure of ourselves reflected.

  • (Show?)

    Miles,

    I leave it up to our fellow BlueOregonians to decide for themselves who has been consistently using perjorative terms, attempted emotional intimidation and ad hominem attacks in lieu of substantive debate.

    Failure to be persuaded by an argument is not the same thing as failure to listen to it. Your failure to persuade me that you understand all this and Kija doesn't isn't because I'm not persuadable.

    Ironically enough, I've rather drastically changed my view of how the world works because of this debate. Watching this issue play out in my community and, to a lessesr extent, here on BlueOregon has been an eye opener for me and has resulted in my leaving a whole host of my own comfortable assumptions by the wayside.

    I have learned some things the hard way and I do value that education but I have to say I would have found it a great relief if you all had been more persuasive in the ways you intended to be persuasive rather than the opposite.

    For me the whole point of being here is to be persuaded. I do accept the responsibility to be the final arbiter of what is important and relevant to me. I think that my judgment is improved when I try to coherently share what I think and listen to what other people think in return.

    I won't bother to protest that I don't at all think that I'm perfect as you have already explained that you will only assume I'm being insincere if I do.

    I think I've gotten about as much as there is to get out of these exchanges so I will bow out now. As we used to say in my youth: it's been real.

  • ws (unverified)
    (Show?)

    Persuade, persuaded, persuadable, persuasive....whew!! All those usages of a word that indicate someone with an entrenched viewpoint they will not relinquish even when bare reality countering their viewpoint stares them right in the face. Why not put a little more energy into trying to understand other peoples' situation before attempting to arbitrarily impose a change upon them that is not particularly relative to their experience or in their best interest?

    <h2>There are too many people in this world that want to flex their muscles and bully their way around the world.</h2>
in the news 2007

connect with blueoregon