"4. The group wishing to honor Chávez was given the understanding by the five Councilmen that after a few meetings to inform other community members of their desire to rename Interstate, Council would approve their request.

5. The Council had no right to make that promise, given the law in the Code setting out the process for street renaming."

I made no such promise, as was confirmed in testimony Thursday at the city council hearing by the proponents of the name change.

Good analysis of the situation, Amanda. This should be required reading for everyone involved. Still want to be elected to the city council and throw yourself in the middle of situations like this? I know you do. Good luck with your campaign.

Thank you for the clarification, Randy. There was a 5-0 vote in September sending the proposal to the community, so I inferred that included the general sense of the Council that the request would be approved despite the process not following the steps in the Code. You're saying that vote was approval of the revised process but not necessarily of the proposal, I think. Point taken.

Our Cultural Diversity Committee in the City's Revenue Bureau --which I co-chair-- sponsored a great video series called "Race - the power of an illusion." I was reminded of it when thinking about what's a Mexican American/Chicano/Latino et all. "Race" isn't a biological construct...it's an illusion. Racism, unfortunately, is very real.

If you're a second generation Mexican-Americn, but your roots go back to Spanish Conquistadors...what "race" are you? My name --Dufay-- is French, but my Grandfather immigrated from Poland as a kid. Turns out his roots go back to deserters from Napolean's retreat from Russia who settled in Poland. So am I a Pole, French...or, on my Grandmother's side, Bohemian? And how many "French" trace THEIR roots back to Algerian, Arabic, or Moorish roots?

What surprises me about the debate around Chavez is how little attention is paid to what he primarily was...a labor organizer. Which, arguably, defines him far more than his "racial" identity. United Farm Workers...just as we need to think of ourselves as united Americans --united Portlanders-- fighting the scourge of racism, and employer exploitation, together. We call our country the United States for a reason (and not that we were all that "united" at our formation out of revolution, but we recognized the need to be so.)

Speaking for no one but myself, and, admittedly, from the perspective of someone arguably benefitting from being part of the dominate "white" culture...I don't see how divisive fighting over a street name is serving anyone's cause. To already see push back from "Chinatown"...I can't believe this fight is what Chavez would want to see as representing his legacy in Portland. Better a Cesar Chavez Portland Farmer's Market...or something people can unite around, not fight over.

While the link to Sean Cruz's blog and the Chicano/Latino Studies Program at PSU provided some clarification, it left me wondering about the difference between Latino and Hispanic. So I googled on Hispanic vs Latino.

At www.hispanicblog.com, I found this description of the two terms:

Hispanic vs. Latino - By Keith D. Ellison
Until the mid-1990's, "Hispanic" was the dominant term for referring to Spanish-speaking people in the U.S., or descendents of Spanish-speaking countries. The term came about in the 1970's as a result of the U.S. Census' attempt to quantify Spanish-speaking people. Today, "Latino" and "Hispanic" are used interchangeably, yet in realty they do not have exact meanings. "Latino" refers to people whose ancestral lineage connects to the central and southern parts of the Western Hemisphere. Mexico and the lands annexed by the U.S. in the 19th century, Puerto Rico, Cuba, the Dominican Republic, and all the Spanish-speaking countries of Central and South America are homes to first, second and third-generation (and higher) people who are considered Latino. "Hispanic," on the other hand, includes all Latinos plus people with a cultural heritage related to Spain. The sub-categories for "Hispanic" listed by the Census are Spanish, Spaniard, Mexican-American, Chicano, Puerto Rican, Cuban, and Other (representing people from other parts of Latin America).

Then, I found an interesting discussion (including survey results) at this site: http://www.hispaniconline.com/magazine/2000/dec/Features/latino.html

Thanks for prodding me into learning more about this issue!

-- Linda

Thank you for the information, Linda, and thoughts, Frank.

Of course it's a power issue.

That's why the process is so important.

After mulling over the "4th for Interstate" solution (which again seems to trample on the process), I agree with the idea of slow down and do it correctly.

I appreciate also the information about labels for people; I grew up in Southern California at a time when "Mexican" was the catch-all phrase for Spanish-speaking people. By the time I got out of high school "Chicano" was the preferred reference and I have a distinct memory of people referring to Chavez as a labor agitator and not by any ethnic terms. I sure wish we had more agitators like him around these days.

Randy2

As of lately, the course of action by City Council members has been to replace truly public processes calling it streamlining and often backing it up with stacked deck rubber stamp committees so preconceived agendas can be easily approved with little public objection. Commissioner Adams does this with his streetcar and bicycle infrastructure agendas even though the appearance is often otherwise. The pit bull on the council Commissioner Leonard did the same when he rammed through his biofuels and spray paint schemes on a similar fast track. By announcing cost swelling green building proposals in Chicago rather than Portland, Commissioner Saltzman is attempting to do the same. It is as if the City Council has become a group of five little dictators not wanting to step on each others toes. However with the Mayor’s proposal to rename Interstate Avenue, the one way process backfired. The apple tree of public opinion was shaken too hard causing the sky to fall. Now the council is between a rock and a hard place with the majority of public opinion squarely against them on just about any street name change, be it Fourth Avenue or another street. The issue that continues to be overlooked is that the public needs to become involved with objective input taken and effectively listened to by council members at the beginning of processes, not simply as window dressing at the tail end and just before the already decided votes are cast. All too often the decision makers only hear what they want to hear and ignore the rest thereby not representing all interests and constituents.

Terry Parker