Funny that the protesters are leaving downtown to get away from the bums; what do you think people in the Pearl did?

Also, the sign says hours are from 5 a.m. to midnight. How many blind eyes do you expect the city to turn?

Regarding your characterization, "the gentrified Pearl District", can you clarify what you meant by that?

For example, how many units of affordable housing were there prior to the transformations that began in the late 1990s, and how many are there now? How many people with below-median incomes were living there before, and how many now? How many locally-owned businesses were there before, and how many now?

Clearly, the Pearl District is somewhere that has a high level of public and private investment, and no shortage of expensive properties and high incomes. But the term "gentrification", as commonly applied, is difficult to apply to the pearl because, as far as I understand, more people in all categories live and work there now than did before.

AT WHAT POINT WAS THE PEARL NOT GENTRIFIED? IT WAS CREATED FROM THE GROUND UP IN THE MANNER IN WHICH IT CURRENTLY EXSITS.

@BOB R: LULZ!!! I SHOULD HAVE HIT SUBMIT A FEW SECONDS QUICKER!!!

Graham and Bob R beat me to it.
Denis, how long have you lived here anyway?

The Pre-Gentrified Pearl District:
http://vintageportland.files.wordpress.com…

Another photo, this one just a year or two prior to rapid gentrification:
http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/comm…

Oh, Christ. I clearly should have gone with my first instinct and said, instead, "the de-industrialized and redeveloped Pearl District (except for the parts of the Pearl way north of Burnside that technically, maybe, aren't redeveloped but are (semi-)newly developed)." D'OH!

Or you could have just skipped the misleading adjective altogether and it would have been fine.

The presence of rich people = gentrification.

Well, Denis, I suppose 'gentrified' works better for most of your readership though.

This is just stupid.

1) It's primarily a residential area, meaning a) it's going to make them less visible for protest purposes than they would be downtown, b) they're going to piss off people who just want to be able to sleep, get their kids to school, and go grocery shopping.

2) The businesses that are there aren't exactly doing well. Fenouil failed. Hiroshi failed. I know that some of the other businesses north of Glisan are suffering. They may be putting some of the 99% out of jobs if they scare off the slow stream of winter customers that get down that far. (Unless someone wants to show that the Occupy Portland folks have been purchasing from and increasing the revenues of businesses around their camps.)

3) It's entirely removed from anything they're protesting. They should be in front of government buildings, bank headquarters, and the like. But underwater condos and struggling businesses?

I live in the Pearl in a Public Housing Project and I think it will be very interesting to see how the people in the Pearl react to this group arriving. I do agree that they should stay strong in front of the Government buildings, and Bank headquarters downtown, but any place they decide to show what they are about is still "attention". I can't believe how much it reminds me of the movie "Network", yes, we are all "Mad as Hell and Not Going to Take It Anymore", I know I feel this way and many others do too. Why can't people realize how simple it is to move their money (those that have any!) to the Credit Unions, that's the easiest statement to make and it will "affect" the Banks. Yay to Occupy Wall Street, I'll be there in support for sure!

Occupy whatever you want. Splinter groups. Occupy it all.

what happened to "occupy wall street," you know the people who messed up the economy? "occupy portland" is bull s it, it has nothing to do with wall street and the 1%. occupy portland is about privatizing public spaces into private communes for anarchist sc um and drug and feces riddled deranged homeless bums. the police need to move in with force