By Macy Meinhardt, Voice & Viewpoint Staff Writer

The naming process of San Diego’s Martin Luther King Jr. Way—the western portion of Interstate 5 beginning in downtown San Diego through Spring Valley—was not one that necessarily had the best interests of the Black community at heart. 

In fact, the selection of it as San Diego’s tribute to the adorned civil rights leader was a last resort option to come from the 1986-1989 contentious debate surrounding Black community leaders and white business owners in Downtown San Diego.

Digging through archives, the LA Times journalist Ralph Frammolino at the time named the overpass “a focal point of an ideological and political battle” with “overtones of racism.” Almost forty years later, to some that sentiment still remains true.

The Debate Begins 

The story goes back to December 1985 when Coretta Scott King came to visit San Diego at the Educational Cultural Complex upon an invitation from Michel Anderson, who served as the chair of the Martin Luther King State Holiday Commission. According to Anderson, the turnout signified “an outstanding community response to a national icon.” 

“Anybody who was anybody came out,” said Anderson. Amid the nation celebrating the first Martin Luther King Day as a federal holiday one month later in Jan. 1986, coupled with Coretta’s monumental visit, the two events kicked off the debate on how  “America’s Finest City” would individually honor King.  

First, the then City Manager Slyvester Murray, nominated a five-mile stretch of Euclid Avenue and 54th Street to be named after King, notably because it cut through an area known for diverse income and ethnic groups. Murray attained one of the highest posts of any African American to hold an appointive office in San Diego at the time. However, the proposal was widely rejected, and residents along the route launched an angry protest, including objections to King’s tactics and mission. Under pressure, the council set aside Murray’s recommendation. 

Back to the Drawing Board 

Having to pivot, the City Council voted in April 1986 to rename Market Street– known as the most diverse roadway in San Diego—to Martin Luther King Jr. Way. Extending from the bay and downtown to Encanto, the thoroughfare traversed through the region’s most disadvantaged areas, and, at the time, a census tract that had one of the highest concentrations of Black residents in the city — 41 percent. 

But once again, business owners and residents along Market Street in downtown vehemently opposed, and also argued that they didn’t receive proper notice of the council decision before it was made. Hence, the grassroot “Keep Market Street Initiative” was formulated in an effort to overturn the City Council decision, also known as Proposition F.

The grounds of the initiative according to leaders such as Tod Firotto was to maintain the “history” and “heritage” of Market Street. The street had existed in San Diego since 1915. Other concerns raised were the costs of changing addresses on checks and invoices, as well as confusion in navigation purposes. 

However, Black community leaders branded the initiative as racially motivated and a “slap in the face to King”. Vowing to fight against the measure, a counter campaign was formulated—“Keep MLK Jr. Way.” 

Supporters of “Keep MLK Way”, also known as “Say No to Prop. F”, included the late Reverend George Walker Smith who served as the pastor at Christ United Presbyterian Church. In regards to the initiative, he called it a symbol of the “negative attitude that white folks here have toward King and other things.” 

“There’s no secret a lot of people who are behind this are red-necked racists, and you can quote me,” said Rev. Walker Smith in an interview with the LA Times’ Armando Acuna.

Other leaders, including the late Willie Morrow, former business owner on the eastern end of Market Street, said that “basically, it comes down to a simple matter of Black and white.” 

“They can sugar-coat it any way they want to, but that’s what it is. What they are saying is, ‘Dr. King was a great person who should be honored as long as it’s not in my neighborhood.’ No one on our end of the street is complaining. It’s only the people downtown,” Morrow said.

Yet, proponents on the other side said that the initiative has nothing to do with King nor the Black community. “The initiative was a reaction to the lack of recognition and the loss of heritage” in changing Market Street, said Tod Firotto. 

“Don’t kill somebody else’s heritage for the sake of his (King’s),” Firotto said. “He wouldn’t want that.” 

The Legacy of King in the Hands of Voters 

Thrusting the city into a racially and politically divisive debate, the issue was set onto the November 1987 ballot to be determined by residential voters on whether or not to keep the name change or reverse it back to Market Street. 

According to LA Times archives, Pro-King forces backed by the San Diego Urban League and the Baptist Ministers Union of San Diego sponsored a downtown march, and advertised their “Say No to Prop. F” initiative in minority newspapers, including The San Diego Voice & Viewpoint, as well as a radio commercial featuring singer Harry Belafonte, who urged a “no” vote to avoid a “slap in the face” to the memory of King.

Despite ample efforts however, almost 80,000 signatures were garnered in support of removing MLK’s name tribute from Market Street; ultimately nullifying the City Council’s decision the year prior. Shamefully, the tribute to Dr. King in downtown San Diego only lasted for thirteen months.

“It was very clear that the proposition was going to pass because people disagreed with the process used and they also wanted to protect the tradition of Market Street,” said former Mayor at the time, Maureen O’ Connor. 

Swift replacement was therefore urged by the City Council and community members to find a “bigger” and “better” tribute to Dr. King somewhere in the city. Afterall, at the time, San Diego was the second city in the nation in which voters revoked a memorial to the Nobel Peace Prize winner— a tarnish on the city’s reputation. 

“TO REPUDIATE THE CITY COUNCIL ACTION IS TO REPUDIATE THOSE PRINCIPLES DR. KING WAS DEVOTED TO.” Commentary signed in a press release by the San Diego Imperial Counties Labor Council in 1987. 

“Quite simply, the decision by San Diego voters was shameful. It’s embarrassing to look back on now and frankly the majority of San Diegans should have recognized it was an embarrassment at the time,” wrote Charles T. Clark, in a 2021 UT op-ed. 

Same Story, Different Chapter 

Over the next two years, the city dabbled with finding more suitable options for finding a tribute to honor the legacy of King. From the Black community, the most appropriate and apt alternative to Market Street was to name the convention center, which was being built at the time, after the late civil rights leader. But once again, that was rejected in a 4-3 vote by the Board of Port Commissioners. 

Ultimately, in what some describe as “damage control” since San Diego couldn’t make a decision on a local level, state leaders from Sacramento intervened and proposed a resolution to rename the western portion of California 94 to MLK Jr. Freeway. Even though the freeway alternative wasn’t a widely favored option by San Diego’s Black community, it received approval in September 1989, and the signage and freeway pass have persisted to this day.

The lasting impact of this divisive process serves as a reminder of the challenges faced in honoring the legacy of a civil rights icon. While the freeway option may not have been the favored choice among San Diego’s Black community, its approval in 1989 signifies the complex and often difficult path toward commemorating Martin Luther King Jr.’s contributions in a way that resonates with the diverse perspectives within the city