Actually, not what should have happened

The Oregonian today weighs in with an editorial on the proposed renaming of Interstate Avenue, saying (emphasis mine):

“On Thursday, following Leonard’s cue, the Portland City Council will consider appointing a commission to home in on five finalist streets and hold public hearings on which one to rename for Chavez. It’s a smart and sensitive approach, assuring a Portland street will be renamed — by next July, at the latest — and that it will be the best possible street.”

“This is what should have happened to begin with, but it’s not too late for it to happen now. Mayor Tom Potter should embrace Leonard’s proposal, as should the other council members and the Chavez name-change group itself.”

To me, this process is neither a good approach giving the best possible answer, nor “what should have happened to begin with”. It may be a face-saving out given the mess the Council has made of the process so far. But it still doesn’t follow the rules prescribed in City law for renaming city streets. And in fact is likely to rile up five sets of neighbors with its top-down approach, instead of the one area upset so far.

I wonder why the Councilmen aren’t saying tomorrow, “We messed up. There is a process in the Code for how city streets are to be renamed. We realize we should abide by the law. We’re going to.”

And then maybe adding, “Here are some state/federal highways we could help the group get renamed, and/or some other important things that are within our power and purview to name/rename. Sorry about the street thing – we’ve learned our lesson and from now on will follow the Code.”

Nah. That would be too much to ask, apparently, that rules would apply to everyone.