Not every community discussion has to be a knockdown, drag-out that concludes — in the immortal words of Johnny Cash — with kickin’ and a’ gougin’ in the mud and the blood and the beer. Civil people can have civil conversations, as Vancouver residents often have proved.
Bitter vapors of Tuesday’s election might still be wafting around us, but we think it’s time to resume an old discussion that ought to be fun and informative, regardless of the outcome. It’s the idea of changing the name of Vancouver to Fort Vancouver.
Why not at least talk about it? Ultimately, if the question appears on a ballot (for the fourth time, but not since 1975), it will be the voters who decide. What’s the harm in that? And no matter what the outcome, if Vancouver residents choose to review their long, proud history, compare their community to another Vancouver in Canada, study the possibility of resolving confusion related to that other Vancouver, examine other “Fort” cities in America, and make a determination about their own identity, well, that seems to us like a totally beneficial exercise.
As Michael Andersen reported in Monday’s Columbian, several people already have resumed this discussion, tying it to a new effort to more effectively “brand” Vancouver. Should a name change be part of that rebranding? We’re not sure yet, but it’s certainly worth discussing. In 1989, residents of Baker, Ore., voted 60-40 to change the town’s name to Baker City, and we’re guessing there was minimal kickin’ and gougin’ during that process. If they can have “the talk,” why can’t we?
