I’m counting down the hours until tomorrow afternoon’s Interstate “new process” resolution hearing at city hall. I can’t recall too many votes in my time here in Portland where the outcome isn’t known ahead of time.

Commissioner Erik Sten seems to be the swing vote—he’ll vote for more process if he can convince the mayor to buy into the idea. But I really doubt he’ll convince the mayor that more process would be healthy—and potentially healing—since Sten has also made it fairly clear that when the actual rename comes up for a vote in mid-November, he’s a yes. That means the mayor—and the rename committee—probably has three votes. Why would they agree to backtrack and do more process?

(P.S.: Why does Commissioner Sten think it’s a bad thing to force additional process by a 3-2 vote over the mayor’s objection, but doesn’t think it’s all that bad to force a rename by a similar margin over every Interstate neighborhood’s objection?)

Over at the St. Johns Sentinel, they think Commissioner Dan Saltzman is in the swing seat tomorrow, even if Sten’s a no on more process: “He voted for Rosa Parks and is criticized for rushing that process through. So does he dare open himself up to that same criticism again? Hmm. That’s the question. His name is mud in North Portland if he does.”

Meanwhile, the Oregonian today called for the council to vote for the new process.

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.

This is the best way to leave Division behind.

Directions: Turn off North Interstate Avenue and merge — as one city — onto Cesar E. Chavez Boulevard.

Meanwhile, Amanda Fritz disagrees with the Oregonian, arguing that the council should really be apologizing for ignoring the city code that lays out a street rename process, and pledging to follow that process now and in the future.

While I think that’s a good suggestion, it’s not the proposal on the table. The proposal on the table makes sense, if only to fix the damage that this debate has caused. I hope the council votes for it, and I hope the Chávez rename committee accepts that they’ve won a huge victory—a street will be renamed—and take the high road to implementing it.