A(nother) Bay Bridge Naming Explainer

Since launching in 2013, we at The Emperor Norton Trust probably have tried a dozen different ways of explaining our proposal that the California state legislature simply add "Emperor Norton Bridge" as an honorary name for the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge — leaving in place all existing names for the bridge and its parts.

But, even many who have been following us for a long time can find it difficult to get their arms around what we mean.

Here's another crack:

The legislature's decision in 2013 to name the western section (San Francisco side) of the Bay Bridge the “Willie L. Brown, Jr., Bridge” has many psyched into thinking that

(1) There are three possible opportunities for getting the Emperor's name on his bridge:

• the bridge as a whole

• the western (SF) section

• the eastern (Oakland) section

But that

(2) There can be only one name for each "venue."

Under this logic, the “whole thing” already is named ("San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge"), and the western section section now is named ("Willie L. Brown, Jr., Bridge") — so, only the eastern section is available for naming.

Some even believe that, now, the western section is the Willie L. Brown, Jr., Bridge; the eastern section is the Bay Bridge; and everything else is off the table.

What often underwrites or accompanies both of these notions is the corollary belief that — legislatively speaking — the only way to get Emperor Norton’s name on the bridge is to take Willie Brown’s name off.

:: :: ::

THIS is not the way it is.

Currently, the whole thing continues to be named the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge, and the western section is named the Willie L. Brown, Jr., Bridge — so, there is overlap in the namings.

But, the three bridge-naming opportunities…

• the bridge as a whole

• western section

• eastern section

…are three independent naming venues, with each venue capable of holding whichever — and however many — names the legislature chooses to give it.

This is not wishful thinking on our part. It's been the actual legislative practice of the state legislature since this body started adding honorary names for state bridges in the early 1960s. (Learn more here.)

For our "Emperor Norton Bridge" naming purposes...

• The name of western section is not relevant — and would not be affected.

• Any future name of the eastern section is not relevant — and would not be affected.

We are looking only at the bridge as a whole — and recognizing that the “whole thing” is capable of taking an honorary name — while leaving the existing name in place

On which point...

Although "San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge" is on the highway signs and is the culturally accepted name that has been in newspapers and on everybody's lips for the 85 years since the bridge opened in 1936, the name has never been legislated.

At the state government level, the name "San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge" is — and always has been — unofficial.

:: :: ::

BELOW is a visual aid that shows what we're proposing. The "Emperor Norton" and "Bay Bridge" names would exist in tandem. We're not aware of any current effort to name the Eastern section of the bridge. But, seeding that possibility could be useful in gaining support from East Bay state lawmakers.

The resulting nomenclature for the tunnel-hinged 2-bridge system that is the San Francisco–Oakland Bay Bridge would be closest to the naming approach that the legislature authorized — in a series of naming resolutions the body passed between 1971 and 1980 — for a 3-bridge system in Eureka, Calif.

The Eureka system as a whole has two names: "Humboldt Bay Bridge" is the unofficial name; the legislated name is "Samoa Bridge." In addition, each of the three constituent bridges has its own legislated name — a total of 5 names for the whole bridge system.

This 3-bridge system in Eureka, Calif., is known as both the Humboldt Bay Bridge (unofficial) and the Samoa Bridge (legislated). In addition to the two names for the bridge as a whole, each of the three constituent bridges has its own legislated name; east to west, they are the Meyer Bistrin Memorial Bridge, the Carl L. Christenson, Jr., Memorial Bridge and the Richard F. Denbo Memorial Bridge. The California state legislature recognizes a total of five names for this bridge and its parts. Source: Google satellite view

In the Bay Area, the legislature in 1955 passed a resolution naming the "Richmond–San Rafael Bridge." Then, in 1981, the legislature passed a second resolution naming the same bridge the "John F. McCarthy Memorial Bridge" — leaving the original name in place.

So, at the level of "double namings" for state bridges, we're not proposing anything novel. The real question is whether we can get the politics to line up. When and if we do, we can get to raising money for a big "Emperor Norton Bridge" sign on either end of the Emperor's bridge.

Hope this helps!

:: :: ::

For an archive of all of the Trust’s blog posts and a complete listing of search tags, please click here.

Search our blog...