The upbeat mood continued the following day, when volunteers planted nearly a hundred trees along the street, marking the symbolic rebirth of an artery that runs, in part, through the Mission District, home of many of Chavez' followers.
But not everyone who lives and works on the street or in the adjoining neighborhoods joined the celebration. Many rejected the switch, noting the expense (altering addresses on forms and documents was costly, they argued, to say nothing of changing street signs), as well as the way the name change came about (the supervisors gave opponents' arguments little heed, they claimed, bowing instead to pressure from special interests).
Harry J. Aleo was among the disgruntled. Watching city workers replace the old signs, the Noe Valley businessman felt "mad as hell." The board had acted with stunning speed, he surmised, railroading through an act of "political demagoguery." Indignant at what he considered cavalier treatment of longtime residents, Aleo joined several like-minded individuals and created San Franciscans to Save Army Street. Their goal is simple: collect enough signatures to qualify for a ballot initiative and let voters decide in November whether to keep the name the street has had for the last 140 years.
Aleo, Save Army Street's co-chairman (with Winchell T. Hayward, a retired electrical engineer and 42-year city resident), operates the grass-roots, all-volunteer initiative drive from his heart-of-Noe office on 24th Street, which he has occupied since 1947. Twin Peaks Properties' time-warp storefront is a curiosity, even in the bordering-on-arch quaintness of the area. The windows are a monument to long-gone Noe Valley (a poster advertises a seven-room home for $35,000, circa 1950), as well as old sports heroes and patriotic bric-a-brac.
When he's not engaged in real estate transactions (or talking about race horses), Aleo stops to explain the initiative to people wandering in, answering questions and offering opinions. "There should be no place in San Francisco for their sort of political arrogance," he is fond of saying about the supervisors. "Sign the petition, and don't forget to vote in November."
Aleo, a dapper, gray-haired man in his 70s, can't help wondering what has become of the city he was born and raised in. "I've lived in Noe Valley since I was 2. I was born in the Mission, where my parents had a grocery store. My mother, who's 95, still lives up on 24th Street," he declares, nodding toward Twin Peaks.
The way Aleo sees it, San Francisco is under attack by change-obsessed newcomers who too easily discount the city's heritage. "I have a deep concern for the tradition and history of the city," he explains, noting that Army Street has a special connotation for those who've ever been in the armed forces; he himself served during World War II "in General Patton's Third Army. I was in the Battle of the Bulge." Predictably, a number of veterans' groups have fallen in on the Save Army Street side.
Although the street theater has mostly avoided name-calling (not counting Supervisor Ammiano's allusions to apartheid when someone suggested renaming only half of the avenue), the issue of saving Army Street vs. honoring Chavez skirts sensitive topics like race, community pride, and how San Francisco honors heroes. Aleo concurs that it's a touchy matter, but that still doesn't sway him. "I'd be against it even if they renamed Army after my hero, Joe DiMaggio," Aleo says, pointing to a picture of the baseball great hanging in his office.
Aleo and his group wish that those who wanted to honor Chavez had given more serious consideration to the new library or Dolores Park as alternatives. Though Frank Martn del Campo, one of the organizers of the pro-Chavez Street coalition, agrees that those suggestions were made, he says they were "merely suggestions, a kind of NIMBY response." He notes his group pushed for renaming Army Street precisely because of its highway exit signs and prominence in a neighborhood in need of role models: "We look at what it costs to incarcerate two youths for one year -- $60,000 -- and we feel that the name change is justified if it helps give those kids something they can be proud of."
Eva Royale, another in the pro-Chavez group, notes that though some opponents "have a problem with the name Cesar Chavez, it's not necessarily all race-related." Many people, she acknowledges, worry about the effect on their property values; others "just don't like the idea of change."
Beyond the issues of how best to honor Chavez and nostalgia about historic place names lies a deep-seated mistrust of the current Board of Supervisors. Claiming they "railroaded the renaming through, kowtowing to a group of special interests," Aleo recounts how he organized opposition last fall to renaming 24th Street (put forth by then-Supervisor Bill Maher, who boasted of his ties to the late Chavez). "That proposal died in committee," Aleo explains -- underscoring the dismay he felt when, in mid-November, residents and businesses along Army received notice in the mail of a public hearing Dec. 15 to reconsider renaming their street.
Though reactions to the proposed change at the December hearing ran "at least 5-to-1 against," Aleo says, he and others present -- including Army Street residents Mitchell Friedman and DiAnne Withelder -- sensed a done deal in the making. They claim their requests to meet with individual supervisors were ignored. The speed with which things happened left them all feeling as though the supervisors were, accorR>ding to Friedman, "disposed to the proponents for the name change."
That inkling was confirmed Jan. 9, when, after hearing only an hour of arguments (during which Aleo did not get his turn at the mike -- a slight this past president of the Noe Valley Merchants' Association would not easily overlook), the supervisors suspended debate and voted unanimously for Cesar Chavez Street.
"It was a political deal, done behind the scenes by organized labor and special-interest groups," Friedman now maintains.
"The Board of Supervisors is abusing its authority," Withelder opines.
"It's unneeded, unwanted, and unjustified," Aleo crackles.
The months that followed the supervisors' vote were punctuated with reports that the name change would cost nearly $1 million for signs alone. That figure was revised to less than $100,000, at the intercession of one of the sponsoring supervisors, Susan Leal, who pleaded with CalTrans (the state agency responsible for altering the highway signs) and the city's Department of Public Works to keep costs down.
Though signage costs appear to have been contained (the city's tab, according to the Department of Parking and Traffic, is about $2,200), co-chairman Winchell maintains that the total costs have gone carelessly uncalculated by the city -- things like conversion of city records, Muni placards, and resetting the street name in the concrete sidewalks. "The thought that this could be done with any street in the city appalls me," Winchell notes of the supervisors' decision.
After the Chronicle ran a pro-initiative editorial April 23 ("Save Army Street -- Sign the Petition," it exhorted with uncharacteristic advocacy), interest in the ballot initiative accelerated. By mid-June, San Franciscans to Save Army Street had conducted a survey showing 93 percent of Army Street businesses were opposed to the name change. Moreover, they have amassed thousands of signatures of registered voters supporting the initiative; they need some 9,700 signatures by late JulR>y in order to qualify. Aleo expects to exceed the goal by several thousand, enough for a comfortable cushion should a large number be disqualified. Then, it's up to the voters in November to decide.
Though Friedman is cautious ("It's going to be close," he says of the prospective vote), Aleo is much more optimistic. "We're going to win this thing overwhelmingly," he trumpets. "We'll win it because it's a just cause." According to the man who would have Army Street stay just the way it is, the city has suffered enough changes for the time being.
"What about historic value?" Aleo muses. "Tradition means a lot to me. We have to maintain some of that tradition for future generations." As for members of the present generation who want the name changed, he borrows a line from a time-honored argument when he asserts: "I was here first.