I caught this on the Weekly Standard website: Traitor Joe's. A story about a group in an inner-northeast Portland neighborhood objecting to a Trader Joes being built on vacant land in the area.
First, the Portland African American Leadership Forum (PAALF) announced its opposition to the [Trader Joe's] development on the grounds that it would raise local rents. Then the NAACP got in on the act; in late January, Dedrick Muhammad, the senior director of economic programs for the NAACP, wrote a piece in the Huffington Post opposing the project on the grounds that it could lead to “the displacement of low and moderate-income long-time residents.”
Here's The Oregonian's take on this rather incredible story. Neighborhoods beg for Trader Joe's to come to their area. And the after hearing that TJ pulled out of the project, neighbors in NE Portland, were devastated. Ideology trumped public wishes and market demand.
Following this in the Oregonian has been interesting. It is clearly a "tyranny of the minority" situation where a few committed individuals claiming to represent the community have stopped something the community wanted. Can the same thing happen in LO? How does the entire community feel about the Wizer Block?
ReplyDeleteI'm glad someone's asking. From my vantage point, the majority of people don't like the development. But that could be a factor of who I know and talk to. Since I've done some face-to-face campaigning recently and have talked to a large number of random people, I feel it is safe to say that the vast majority are shocked and unhappy with the more intense development they see.
DeleteThe opponents and proponents have taken note in their testimonies of the proportion of pro and con letters to the editor in the LO Review as a representation of public sentiment. Unless there is a scientifically valid way to survey a population, the letter-writing is anecdotal only, however if the people with clear conflicts of interest are ruled out, there may be a more interesting debate.
One way to gauge public opinion and to regain more public control over the process of future growth is to abolish urban renewal funds unless approved by a vote of the people. Subsidizing development should be a community decision as it is the community's money. Or ditch urban renewal and go back to the GO bonds. Either way, it requires city leaders to come up with a plan that they could sell to the citizens. That, and getting a set of codes that are understandable to the average person so we could all have input in a meaningful way about what our future will look like.
Trader Joe’s (brought to us by Aldi) isn’t bringing to bear anything other than mediocre groceries with cute branding. Call those opposed to the development a vocal minority, but what isn’t the minority are native Portland residents, in many cases ethnic minorities, who are no longer being able to afford housing in their neighborhoods. Now that TJ’s has dropped out, who knows? Maybe our local favorite New Seasons will setup shop. At least then it will be sustainable and the employees will have respectable benefits.
ReplyDeleteI don't have any particular feelings about where a store is based - TJ is a Swiss Co. - but whether or not it's a good company over all. I believe Trader Joe's fits that bill. What I find concerning but haven't checked out, is if the Portland Development Commission targeted just one company or opened up the selection process to others. What was the criteria for their selection? Did they look at current residents, or the residents they'd like to attract to a more gentrified neighborhood? I find these questions more compelling than the name on the store.
ReplyDelete