And nearly a 50% return for a postcard survey is high. Clearly most of those who live on these routes are ticked off.

the planning commission's recommendation is expected soon.

observe carefully, citizens: here's another opportunity to see whether or not you actually have a voice in your own community.

let's see:

(1) residents and businesses oppose renaming 10 to 1

(2) Chavez himself would've found the street naming ludicrous and inappropriate

(3) renaming is being forcibly and repeatedly pushed by people who are not part of the community and have publicly called large portions of the community "racist" and "ignorant of history"

(4) even members of the "Latino community" have opposed naming a street after Chavez

yet after all this and much more, and having been through the process *once already*, it's being forced again--by City Council and private interest groups who both act as if opposing naming a street after a farm rights worker is tantamount to racism and hatred of all things Hispanic.

even when living in a much larger eastern city I rarely saw such sad nonsense and misplaced arrogance all around.

This is great! I plan on speaking at Monday night's city council meeting to voice my outrage on this whole stupid issue.

Beside the fact that it is ridiculous to even contemplate the city and those affected business owners spending one cent for street renaming, what good does this code do?

Will our children somehow become culturally enriched by riding in a car on a street named after a civil rights leader?

I encourage all of you to read about the renaming process here: http://www.portlandonline.com/index.cfm?&c=49756l. The fact that we even have to go through the process is crazy. The code should be abolished and the council should have the discretion to say "we're not even going to look at this issue right now."

UGH!

Get ready for Randy and Co. to conclude that everyone who did not return a postcard (more than 50%, as it turns out) supports re-naming. This is in the bag, folks.

Any not name the new max/ped bridge to OMSI after Chavez and leave the road names the same.

Does anyone know whether the name of the Broadway Bridge will also be changed if changing the street name Broadway is approved?

No, your children will somehow become culturally enriched by riding in a STREET car on a street named after a civil rights leader...

I rent commercial space to a Mexican immigrant who runs a hair salon. I asked her if Cesar Chavez was a person of historical significance to her. At first she didn't know who he was. Then she remembered him as a famous boxer.

Maybe we can just compromise on renaming the fiberboard complex down the street: Chavezamook.

"Chavez himself would've found the street naming ludicrous and inappropriate."

No kidding! Renaming a street is a superficial, token effort. Chavez would have seen right through this. It's as if city counicl is telling the Latino community that they are so stupid that their concerns can be addressed by renaming a street after Chavez. It's a slap in the face to the Latino community.

At first she didn't know who he was. Then she remembered him as a famous boxer.

monolithic racial communities are one of the great myths used for political decision making.

How about renaming the street for me! I suspect there are more people in PDX who know me. On second thought I don't think I'd want to draw the attention even if I were dead.

At first she didn't know who he was. Then she remembered him as a famous boxer.

She was thinking of Julio Cesar Chavez.

By the way, I would not place too much emphasis on one person's knowledge (or lack thereof) about a man who is presumed to have some significance for her. How many Americans moght have trouble identifying George Washington or Thomas Jefferson?

I'd like to see a poll showing how many Portlanders thing the City Council should be spending any time on this issue.

IMO there should be a moratorium on street renaming and it should have happened a long time ago when the economy began to go south. There are lest costly alternatives that people repeatedly suggest and which the council and the renaming people repeatedly ignore: choose a park or a new structure like the pedestrian bridge.

The woman who has been spearheading the Chavez street renaming doesn't even live in Portland, let alone on 39th, Broadway or Grand. She has nothing to lose.

I dunno, but the notion that Marta Guembes & Co. represent anyone but themselves and their need for self-aggrandizement is nonsense on its face. Their agenda has NOTHING to do with what Chavez believed.

It's a power trip - well, that, and a power trip.

Who needs a bunch of sanctimonious, faux-aggrieved bullies with a hijacked icon calling anyone who dares to disagree with them racist.

Who, especially Chavez, would consider forcing this name change on people who don't want it, as an honor. It's actually an insult - one that echoes the tactics of the growers and good ol' boys he fought.

Nice to see the irony there.

Too bad the mayor (no caps for you!) and the council jesters can't distinguish their elbows from their...

...oops, can't go there.

Can I bring some sand to the council meeting so I can kick it in Randy's face?
The council should be facing up to the overwhelming economic issues. But what are they all chooing to do? Spend money! instead of trying to find ways to face up to the economic realities of the times and trying to solve those problems.

When told the City Council had chosen 4th Avenue, not Interstate, she said this:

“It is a slap on our face. It was white men choosing what they think is best for the Latino community.”

which is interesting, because it implies that (a)the City Council, being white males, have a racial trait of making decisions a certain way, and (b)that the renaming of a street is "for the Latino community".

which makes me confused, because

(a) is racism, and

(b) is cognitively dissonant because--isn't the renaming of the street for ALL people? if it isn't, then why bother even asking anybody how they feel about it who is not in the "Latino community"?

anybody else see the weird, twisted, dissonant logic of this?

There's plenty of solid research to prove that everybody would be happier with a street named Chlapowski.

Obviously there is a quid pro quo here. Someone has plunked down a bunch of payola under the table to make it happen and one of the corrupt goons (Leonard or Adams) is getting enriched in secret. One more reason for a thoruogh FBI investigation of Portland City Hall.

The Chavez supporters have an excellent chance at having the new bridge across the Willamette named for him -perhaps the only compromise big enough to avoid another debacle like the first effort.

My bet is that they will go for the "in your face" win and bully through a street name change, winning the battle but losing the war.

And Chavez will become a verb to describe a fixed political "process"

Dude, you were Chavezed by City Hall.

We could "fix" the political process that is the election of the City Council by attaching a precinct to each City Council seat.

Thus forth, with each city councilor being elected by a precinct, then their actions will be directly accountable to those in that precinct instead of this abstract "greater public" nonsense that is used more to rationalize in the aftermath of an unpopular decision than as it is ideally intended to act in accordance with the wishes of the majority of the public.

How about adding any City Council member's name who votes "Yes" for this nonsense added to the upcoming Sam Adams recall?

I would prefer Chlapowski get his own sewer main or sink hole: we should save the street renaming for people like Beaulita and Hugo Chavez who really change society.

@ Moonbat: Yes, districts have always worked to ensure good government and accountability in Congress, and in Salem, so clearly they would have the same salubrious benefit in Portland.

You're in good company, Moonbat. DC Ward 8 Councilman Marion Barry favors election by district as well.

(sarcastically) I guess that means that 90% of the people who live in those neighborhoods are racists.

The Oregonian sez, re. the proposed bridge: "The committee chosen a design that is a hybrid mix of a cable-stay and suspension bridge. It was designed by Miguel Rosales, an architect retained by TriMet for the bridge design phase of the project. Rosales came up with the compromise in part to reduce the tower height required for traditional cable-stay bridges.

I want to expand on what I said earlier. I propose a change to Portland, OR City Council. I propose that the City Council add 3 more seats and reorganize all City Council seats by precinct (none of this elected city-wide crapola). There will be no residency requirement. Let me explain (Bound = Boundary) :

1. NE Precinct (N. Bound = NE Lombard; S. Bound = I-84; E. Bound = NE 82nd; W. Bound. = Willamette River)

2. SE Precinct (N. Bound = I-84; S. Bound = City of Milwaukie; E. Bound = SE 82nd; W. Bound = Willamette River)

3. North Portland Precinct (N. Bound = Columbia River; S. Bound = NE Lombard; E. Bound = NE 82nd; W. Bound = Willamette River)

4. NW Precinct (N. Bound = NW St. Helens Rd.; S. Bound = W. Burnside; E. Bound = Willamette River; W. Bound. = Western Multnomah County line)

5. SW Precinct (N. Bound = W. Burnside; S. Bound = City of Lake Oswego; E. Bound = Willamette River; W. Bound = City of Beaverton)

6. Far NE Precinct (N. Bound = Columbia River; S. Bound = SE Stark ; E. Bound = City of Gresham; W. Bound = NE 82nd)

7. Far SE Precinct (N. Bound = SE Stark ; S. Bound = City of Happy Valley; E. Bound = City of Gresham; W. Bound = SE 82nd)

This is a tentative approach. Opinions on my boundaries will vary wildly. 7 precincts are perfect because there is a tie breaker without resorting to the Mayor or another method.

I like the precincts being fairly large in order to keep the City Council representative of the largest possible number of views and voters within the City of Portland. In contrast, what we have know is a "Progressivelitista" (Progressive + Elitism) where the viewpoints of educated, progressive upper middle class interests are the norm, while all other viewpoints are regarded as wing nut, redneck, backward and so on. Having each City Councilor elected by precinct would present a true "diversity of opinion" where all voters in the City of Portland have a chance to get their interests aired via their City Councilor.

Anyways, what do you think? Am I dead wrong on the boundaries? Should there be a residency requirement? What do you propose?

Moonbat -

"one man, one vote".

You need to equalize the population within each "district" to pass constitutional muster under both the fed and Or constitutions.

Your broad brush geographical lines probably don't do that.

I think PDX has long needed council by district representation, with councilors required to reside in the district which they represent.

An odd number of council districts is a no brainer only if the Mayor doesn't have a vote on the council and instead is a sort of glorified city manager elected citywide, analogous to a governor or president and having a veto power if not having a vote.

If the mayor gets a vote on the council, then there need to be an even number of councilors from districts, and no mayoral veto power.=

And councilors need to be legislators setting broad policy. None of this "manage a city bureau" stuff.

I remember the standing room only meetings and the passionate protests against renaming in 2007.

I wish we could harness that much outrage about the soccer boondoogle, or the OCC hotel or the nines bailout. Which we will be paying for long after people forget what Chavez Blvd used to be named.

hmmm.

There's a mysterious silence surrounding the soccer deal. Nothing in the news . . .

It feels like "out of sight, out of mind" until the deal is done.

Am I the only one who thinks the editors at the O would've made this front page news if the polling results had been favorable? Since the news didn't align with their bias they buried the poll data deep into the paper.