Not Very Open

Some of Portland's anti-globalization types have provided more evidence that Oregon isn't very business-friendly. It's the work of a few kooks, but it sure doesn't help Oregon attract new jobs.

Build a Starbucks in a part of Portland with aversions to most things corporate, and the coffee shop is bound to draw fierce protests.

But even in the open-minded Hosford-Abernethy neighborhood, people say arson is not an acceptable form of expression.

Just before 11 p.m. Tuesday, someone hurled a Molotov cocktail at the windows of a controversial new store at Southeast 20th Avenue and Division Street.

Vandals broke three windows, and the homemade firebomb was found on the sidewalk, where it flamed out against the stucco exterior, fire officials said.

The coffee shop opened for the first time Wednesday, with plywood covering the damaged windows. During the afternoon, it was filled with customers who were treated to free coffee and pastries for a "friends and family" celebration.

"It was a pretty lame attempt," said Peter Perrin, the building's developer, "Still, it shows this local neighborhood controversy has really run amok."

How can a neighborhood with an aversion to most things corporate be called an open-minded neighborhood? It's actually neighborhood with a fair population of leftists whose minds are just as closed as, for instance, the hard-right religious types they so despise...it's just their prejudices that differ. Well, and the hard right isn't pretentious/hypocritical enough to claim it is more open and inclusive.

Since Perrin proposed adding a Starbucks to a corner development of local businesses, many neighbors have opposed it, saying it represents more than a latte stop displaying the familiar green mermaid signs.

Some see a corporate giant that will steal customers from local shops. Others see Starbucks as a beacon of corporate globalization, ravaging the environment and promoting unfair labor practices.

The Seattle-based coffee giant, in turn, has tried hard to prove it is a socially responsible company. It has talked up its commitment to environmental ethics, health care for its employees and fair treatment of coffee growers.

Starbucks contributed $1,000 toward a community garden in the nearby Ladd's Addition and gave money for the construction of a new playground at Abernethy School.

We want multinationals to be good corporate citizens. So, they show the politically correct social concerns (whether they're just mouthing the words or not) and donate some of their profits to the right causes (whether it's from the heart or just buying favor). Does it really matter why corporations do what we want them to do so long as they do it? Maybe...so we'd better make known our expectations.

Corporations know it's near-impossible to change a zealot's closed mind, but they smartly go ahead and do their public relations work in the local community anyway. A few of the zealots, so desperate to force their will upon the rest of us, go out and do rash acts against the multinationals...who all of a sudden appear reasoned and moderate in comparison. The zealots end up helping the cause of those whom they wish to harm. What idiots.

Michelle Cain, a district manager for Starbucks, said the store has received flowers, food and gifts from the community.

"The community response to our opening has been tremendous," she said, declining to comment on the vandalism.

Despite efforts to work with neighborhoods, Starbucks has become a popular target of Portland activists. So many windows have been smashed around the city, some Starbucks managers said they automatically consider the vandalism more of a political crime than the work of hooligans.

In November, someone filled the door locks at three Starbucks locations with glue during the night, which made them inoperable.

At one point during construction of the Hosford-Abernethy store, which is in a popular area known as the Seven Corners, vandals broke out windows. On Friday, Critical Mass bicyclists joined pickets outside.

People unwilling to work within the system for change should be punished--hard. Sure these acts of vandalism are relatively minor, but they are motivated by the desire to oppress...essentially they are a type of hate crime. As part of their punishment, the activist vandals need to not only reimburse Starbucks, but those dependent upon the local Starbucks for their livelihood. These people have been frightened, their jobs have been endangered, etc. We need to place priority on the victims, not the criminals, no matter what their cause.

Portland's Independent Media Center, a Web site that frequently is used to coordinate protests, urged resistance to Starbucks' arrival in the neighborhood.

"The first day of this parasitic corporate invasion is also the first day of the Starbucks Resistance," the Web site said. "We will stop at nothing but the complete withdrawal of this unjust corporation from our community."

The Web site urged people to protest outside the coffee shop from 2 to 6 p.m. Wednesday. But by midafternoon, there was one protester holding a cardboard sign, and a group of black-clad young people, some with kerchiefs covering their faces, sitting at tables in front, sipping coffee.

Steve Hanrahan owns Mirador, a kitchen-and-supplies store across from the coffee shop. He said a petition has been circulated to show that the new coffee shop has little support.

"I haven't had a single person come in here talking about the Starbucks and say they're glad," he said. "Most of the people want a locally owned business in the neighborhood."

I find it puzzling how folks who advocate breaking the law can openly congregate on the web, yet the authorities can't seem to catch the perpetrators of the crimes they promote or find cause to charge the organizers. The U.S.'s most active terrorist group, the Earth Liberation Front (ELF), has a website, publishes a magazine, etc., and the terrorists are rarely caught. ELF held a retreat near the remains of the nearby Biscuit Fire last year, advertising the retreat (date, time, location, directions) on the web. A terrorist retreat...and no one arrested anybody. One keeps hoping that the authorities have used such opportunities to infiltrate the group for some eventual big arrests...but it's sure been quiet on that front.

Freedom of speech doesn't, or at least shouldn't include the freedom to incite and organize violence. Protest is fine, as long as it's within the law and doesn't infringe upon the rights of others. I'm glad I don't pay the higher taxes in Multnomah County, which are used in part to manage and clean up after a bunch of anarchists and bigoted leftists...whatever they're protesting against.

Lt. Allen Oswalt, a Portland Fire Bureau spokesman, said investigators hope footage from a digital security camera outside the Starbucks store will lead to an arrest.

"Depending on what they see from the camera, we might need some help from the public," he said. "We might need to release the video posthaste."

Perrin said the neighborhood association hasn't done enough to check emotions and shares much of the blame for the vandalism. "They've stirred it up to the point that people are creating criminal acts," he said.

Chris Eykamp, neighborhood association president, said the association hasn't taken a position on the Starbucks. He had the same opinion of Perrin's comments and the firebombing: "Things have gone too far."

Aaron Winer was driving by the store Wednesday afternoon with a co-worker and stopped in for coffee after seeing the plywood covering windows in the storefront. The vandalism, he said, is "inappropriate," and if neighbors don't want the Starbucks, they should stay away from the store.

"They would probably close if they don't have the business," he said. "There's other coffee shops."

Sally Noble is a regular customer at the Red and Black Coffee Collective across the street, a popular hangout for anarchists and the liberal-minded. The neighborhood is tight-knit, she said, and most people would like to maintain a local flavor. Still, she opposed the vandalism and said it gives activists a bad name.

"I hope there's not a war that's created," she said. "It's just coffee."

If that neighborhood is really as tight-knit as it claims, there are plenty of people covering up for the vandals. The neighborhood is supposedly open and accepting and loves it's local flavor, but is terrified folks will readily abandon that local flavor when an unwelcome Starbucks sets up shop. Such a great neighborhood...it's not live and let live, but conform or be cast out.

I'd much rather live here in Rural Oregon, where it not just the spaces that are more open.

Comments

[pril]

we rubes in Coos County have no Starbucks! Anywhere! I'm pretty sure the closest one is in Eugene. For some reason, that makes me laugh really hard. The metros look down their noses at us and here we have no Starbucks! Oh, what they miss... tee hee.

[RoguePundit]

We rubes in Josephine County don't have a Starbucks either. It is a shorter drive to get to the nearest one in Medford...and it shares a building with Barnes and Noble. Eeek, another multinational...that we lack.

[kd]

It's bizarre to see this kind of behavior, as if all corporations are evil -- that sentiment right there tells you this is more about extremism, than any real set of defensible core values.

The Red and Black doesn't provide their employees with healthcare insurance. Starbucks does, for all employees who work a minimum of 20 hours per week. That's right, 20 hours. And they offer financial assistance to employees who want to adopt! They pay a decent wage, for someone who's going to school with a flexible schedule, and provide extensive training if someone wants to work up into management. And you don't need a college education to work into management!

Employees of Starbucks actually follow a core set of values that demand respect for everyone in the workplace.

People lose the argument, when they say 'all' about anything. Some corporations are evil, and so are some small businesses. I've never been to the Red and Black, and I never would. It's not the kind of place I'd like to hang out. They will lose some business, and they will gain some business. But they should support a diverse neighborhood, that makes room for everyone.

Starbucks in the neighborhood has brought new jobs, healthcare, and a dignified place to work. It's amazing, that people can really find fault with that.

[Morgan Miller]

Well, for being open minded rural folks, you certainly seem to believe alot about things you read about in the liberal press.

As one of the owners of the Red and Black Cafe, a life long Oregonian, with family in Klamath Falls, Salem, the Coast and even a cousin in Baker City, who's a (ohmygawd!) Cattle Rancher, I find it amousing to read the meanderings of folks who actually believe what they read in the papers.

For the record don't put me on your politically correct- "poltically correct" lists. My Granddads both worked in timber mills, my dad pulled the green chain at Kinuza mills in Fossel back in the 1940s, my now ex-father in law worked as a Timber faller. I've been in and on almost every Oregon city, town and highway in my 46 years. My Daddy's family was all Oswald/Hatfield/McColl Republicans, my Mom's wobblies and FDR Democrats. Hurray! I encompass Oregon's history.

In short I think I know rural Oregon, love its citizens and respect its needs. I'm not some California refugee trying to impose a different culture on Oregon.

But, I feel disrespected by you in regards to the 7 corners issue. Property Rights issues in rural areas have a different impact as they do in an urban area. While you can snipe at the Red and Black and the desires of a neighborhood their are many thing that the Oregonian didn't tell you! Shock!

First, the issue was never Starbucks, per se, but that the developer lied to the neighborhood about what he was planning for the site. You DON'T understand it is at a dangerous intersection (there are litterally 7 corners and its very dangerous even for long time residents like me- in the neighborhood almost all my life, and the traffic effects KIDS walking to school. I've witnessed at least 4 auto accidents at the corner in the last 6 months. Safety is the issue, what kind of business, neighborhood oriented or traffic oriented is the issue, not where the bleeding coffee comes from.

I was interviewed a number of times for the Oregonian, and never did they articulate our issues, in fact they obscured them. Our issue was never Starbucks as a competitor, as the Oregonian, Willamette Week and others portraied it. Starbucks won't take our customer base. The issue is the impact a transit based shop would have on the neighborhood and more important, that the process for working out those issues when the process was voided by the developers lies about how they are going to use the land. In the city, traffic issues, location issues, etc, matters, like life and death matters. One of my customers, in fact the Sally Noble interviewed by the Oregonian, almost got run down at the intersection 2 days ago.

So why is it that some blog from the Rogue Valley slags my business off for not having health insurance? Not even Starbucks had insurance after 3 years. As a neighbor I've loterally run down a burgler, called the police in regards to break-ins and made the neighborhood I grew up in a better place.

In short, the Red and Black didn't ask to be placed in the middle of this bruhaha. I can tell you that most everyone I talk to hates Peter Perrin's (the developer) guts but went down to the grand opening of the Starbucks to show support against the action of perhaps 1 or 2 people. My landlady (who also grew up in the 'hood) was at the Starbucks Grand Opening even though she told me she would never pay for coffee at there.

As for me, I put in a 10 hour day on Tuesday because of record sales. Hurray, we had more customers than Starbucks. Tell you something?

[Ron]

I thought the rogue made the point that the privately owned local coffee shop was a victim of the so-called anti-capitalists. That is, on the discussion of the merits of the opposition.

Those who seek violence are just fleeting opportunists seeking out any reasoned disagreement to convert it to their own larger wacko agenda. They ought to go live in the woods of West Virginia and eat out of dumpsters just like some other famous wacko. (Maybe it was one of the Carolina’s?)

If Starbucks (at least the franchiser) is owned predominantly by public employees, who argue for tax backed guarantees for any investment loss, then they can fully afford to offer their employees full health care benefits because they are derived through tax dollars and NOT from profits. This is not a capitalist enterprise but a communist enterprise (as in public ownership and control) but with the rewards divided up mostly among only an advantaged upper class set of political functionaries. Yes, the confused anti-capitalists are really confused anti-communists. This is the really humorous part of the whole episode – and gives new meaning to the word dimwit. (Social investing is politically correct code for ______________; you go figure it out.)

(I’m just a dumb farm boy, so you figure out whether that either enhances or diminishes my credibility. I find the Starbucks crowd too politically anti-septic for my taste. A coffee house could serve coffee that has aged to perfection and still have customers if the people came to debate one another on anything other than to idly rave about how good the coffee is and have nothing else to talk about.)

[RoguePundit]

Morgan, interesting perspective.

My relatives in Portland died off a few years ago, so I just occasionally pass through now. Thus, I haven't been to the seven corners area recently enough to have an opinion on the physical safety issues...and I didn't venture one. I do know from the bit of traffic engineering I've studied that any intersection more complicated that a right-angled crossroads is less safe, and the more roads the more dangerous. It's hard to fix city planning errors.

Portland is smaller than a couple of the cities I've lived in, so please don't figure that I'm unfamiliar with city planning issues. Anyway, it sounds like with the Starbucks that money talks...a rather common affliction in towns of any size.

You'll notice I offered no opinion on your health insurance either.

I'm certainly not a believer of everything The Oregonian prints, or doesn't, as regular readers of my blog know. Glad to hear your perspective and get more info on the subject. Starbucks has a track record of locating next to what it feels is its competition, so it's little surprise with your success that they'd be attracted to the location. A company doesn't get as big as Starbucks without knowing how to play hardball. In most instances though, they don't drive their supposed competition under, as there are plenty of styles and demographics that Starbucks doesn't appeal to (which is why local coffee houses are thriving in Medford and Ashland right near multiple Starbucks)

Sadly with Portland's radical fringe (larger than the average city's radical fringe), it's also of little surprise that some folks would choose to express their feelings outside the law. That's one of the key points in my post. Portland has not done a good job of getting those folks to operate within the law, or of catching them when they act outside the law. That affects the business climate in the whole state, because as both the major economic and media center of Oregon, Portland is where the majority of folks elsewhere get the predominance of their impressions of Oregon. What they too often see is radical protesters--intolerant folks seeemingly tolerated in Portland. The impression given (whether correct or not) is "Oregon, the state with all those anarchists," as opposed to thoughts of things like the environment, livability, whatever. Anarchists and positive business climates don't go together well.

I wish more folks had taken your (and some of your customers') approach and had tried to work within the system to make things safe, welcomed the Starbucks once it was indeed inbound--whether you wanted it there or not, and made a choice to frequent the shop or not. Instead because of a few kooks, Oregon now has national coverage of folks terrorizing Starbucks (various ones on multiple occasions) without being caught. That makes all of us look bad, whether urban, rural, whatever. And since we rural types have to endure the drumbeat of Portland-centric media coverage of how inclusive and open and progressive Portland is, we can justifiably tweak the city about problems it's having that we're not...at least yet...or regards multinationals we're not big enough to have, etc.

[Morgan]

Hi Rogue,

Thanks for the comment, I appreciate the downstate distaste for Portland-centric news, or what I call 'ews.

I misread the heading of kd's comment and took it for yours (you had posted above it so Rogue Pundit was headed above the comment and I took it for your comment. Apologies.

Regarding the vandalism, it only takes one person. Everyone else, except for the property owner, worked within the system.

A last poke at what passes for media accuracy: the Oregonian call my cafe a hangout for "Anarchists and liberally mided people," whatever the hell that means. Anyhow, when I first read the article the cafe had as customers:

1) a disabled Submarine vet (Republican)
2) A substitute Teacher (Democrat)
3) An intel engineer (Libertarian)

We all had a good laugh about which of us was what label.