In some ways, Corvallis has had a more vibrant Jewish community than one may expect in an Oregon town of this size. Biet Am built a new synagogue just seven years ago. The Chabad House serving the campus community opened just two years back.
Still, Corvallis’ Jewish community numbers only in the hundreds. But it has been seen as somewhat primed for growth. Now however, the City Council is considering a resolution that many see as antisemitic and folks in Corvallis’ Jewish community are increasingly recounting incidents of hate.
Many are feeling less safe in our fair burgh, and there are now Jewish families leaving town.
This reversal has not happened in a vacuum. Over many years, this paper has covered local antisemitic hate groups, less than satisfactory prosecutions of them, and poor Holocaust education at our local schools. Recently, we learned that Oregon State University has, after years of promises, continued to schedule student welcoming events during the High Holidays.
The Israeli Divestment resolution now before the City Council can fairly be seen as the straw breaking the camel’s back for many in Corvallis’ local Jewish community. Tensions toward Jewish folks seemed to increase shortly after it was introduced by Ward 2 City Councilor Briae Lewis.
Controversy has brewed for months over Lewis’ Israeli Divestment resolution, and the language it uses. Dozens have testified stridently for and against. But as to the general public’s plurality, the Councilor’s probably don’t really know how their constituencies are leaning.
Not the usual Council business
We think this matter should be referred to the voters, this is what ballot measures are for. There’s an implicit confirmation bias in simply having Councilors share conversations with constituents anecdotally during deliberations.
None of them are getting an accurate read beyond their own thinking. None have changed their minds; the verbiage remains largely the same as to Israel.
There are some new provisions that broaden City investment powers extensively without any explicit statement on transparency or future public review; that’s about it. Today, we published an analysis that includes an examination of these new provisions.
This isn’t zoning and potholes
This decision is too important to the community as a whole for this approach, and the matter should have probably been referred to the ballot from the start.
Think of it like this, one way or the other, Lewis’ ask and the language she uses will absolutely impact the way Jewish people see Corvallis from now on. But it won’t just be Jewish people. Some will see a punitive unkindness in the resolution’s framing. And by most internationally accepted definitions, there is an implicit antisemitism to it.
And then there will be how the larger world views Corvallis. There’s a research university smack-dab in the middle of town. Folks are hoping to attract tech companies into the area. The community offers a largely untapped reserve of prospects for cultural innovation that needs exchange with the outside world.
Our opportunities as a shared community will be impacted by how the outside world perceives us. And this resolution impacts those perceptions.
This isn’t just a zoning variance or a pothole. The language in this resolution will explicitly define Corvallis in many ways. That may not be fair, but it is true. And as this is a defining moment, we believe it should be more than just five of nine councilors making this decision.
Do you have a story for The Advocate? Email editor@corvallisadvocate.com