OUT & ON

More documents

Recommendations

Info

OPINION 237 NE Broadway #101 equity group FUN IN A BOX: FOOD CART CHEESE & CRACK BRINGS CHARCUTERIE TO THE PEOPLE By Nick Mattos PQ Monthly “I love surprises,” explains William Frederick Steuernagel V, owner of Cheese & Crack. Currently in its fourth month of operation, the acclaimed food cart succeeds in providing a tactile, sensory dining experience that is as high in surprise as it is on fun. Photos by William Steuernagel Cheese & Crack serves up a sophisticated take on Lunchables. “I used to cater back in college,” Steuernagel, a native of Oklahoma, explains of his inspiration for the cart. “Making a good cheese spread was one of my favorite things — a plethora of different cheeses and meats, the accoutrements, the sweet things and the spice. The whole flavor spectrum.” Upon moving to Oregon, he was impressed by Portland’s food cart culture, but didn’t see it as a sustainable business model. “People go into business and then immediately go out,” Steuernagel says. However, after revisiting his childhood-favorite Lunchables — and discovering just how ghastly their modern iteration is — he was inspired to create a food cart based on individual boxed portions of meats, cheeses, crackers, spreads, and sides that Steuernagel likens to “a deconstructed sandwich.” After gathering a small business loan and drumming up $4,300 with a Kickstarter campaign, Cheese & Crack was born. While Cheese & Crack is currently located in a quaint and quiet alley space off SE Hawthorne Blvd. at 33rd Ave., nestled between cafés and vintage clothing stores, Steuernagel views this location as both “sketchy” and temporary. “This [location] is my ‘training wheels’,” he explains, “although I love that I’m in a sketchy alleyway. Where else do you expect to find cheese and crack?” He is currently on the waiting list for a space in a cart pod near Powell’s in downtown Portland, where he hopes that his “adult Lunchables” can bring some fun to office workers’ meal breaks. “Fun” is a good summation of what Steuernagel endeavors to bring to Portland’s palates with Cheese & Crack — a niche he sees underrepresented in our gastronomic culture. “Food can be taken so seriously in Portland,” he explains, “and especially on the higher end of things can result in a very serious, non-playful plate — a sliver of carrot and a sliver of rutabaga topped with one grain of salt. I need a handful of salt, and I need some cheese with it!” To accomplish this, Steuernagel focuses on providing the highest-quality components for his customers, allowing diners to organize them into a meal any way they see fit. “The menu is based on extremes,” he says, “really salty options, really sweet jams, really sour fruits — unexpected things. It’s a full range of flavor within a box. “About half of my menu is locally-made products, and the other half is purchased from local importer Classic Foods.” As part of his commitment to the Portland sensibility, the cart provides its customers with compostable flatware and boxes, keeping landfill waste to a minimum. To accommodate seasonality and variety, each day’s boxes vary; however, the offerings consistently include exotic cured meats, housemade savory cookies, and unique home-cured pickles — a sort of high-end ploughman’s lunch. In addition to the charcuterie boxes, Cheese & Crack also offers a full sodaand-bitters bar, allowing customers to compliment their meal with such refreshing and exotic flavors as rhubarb and cherry. “The flavors are meant to quench thirst and compliment the cheese,” Steuernagel says, “but it’s also fun to see how each person customizes their drink experience.” On Cheese & Crack’s refrigerator hangs a postcard with the admonishment, “Stay Hungry, Stay Foolish.” While Steurnagel’s endeavor certainly engages with hunger in many ways, the cart succeeds in being one of the most fun, refreshing, and innovative dining options in a diverse and challenging gastronomic scene — so, perhaps the only foolish part is that nobody beat the young entrepreneur to the punch. Cheese & Crack is located in the alley of SE Hawthorne and 33rd Ave. in Portland. For more information, call 918- 798-5605 or check out cheeseandcrack.com. PQ Monthly is published the 3rd Thursday of every month. Please contact us for advertising opportunities. 503.228.3139 •PQMONTHLY.COM 14 • October/November 2012 Dog & Planet’s Best Friend All-Natural Pet Foods Earth-Friendly Pet Supplies Local, Hand-Crafted Goods 2148 N Killingsworth St. 503-477-8381 pqmonthly.com
LGBTQ LEGAL OUTLOOK OPINION THE SUPREME COURT’S SLOW SHIFT ON CIVIL RIGHTS By Mark Johnson Roberts PQ Monthly The United States Supreme Court has not historically been a sympathetic forum for LGBTQ concerns. Whether in matters of immigration, government employment, national security, or the criminal law, the court was no great friend of the gays for many, many years. Only in recent years has this pattern begun to change. In 1995, in Romer v. Evans, the court overturned Amendment 2, Colorado’s “no special rights” constitutional amendment that sought to prohibit gays and lesbians from petitioning the government for civil rights protections. And most famously, in Lawrence v. Texas, the court in 2003 invalidated all remaining sodomy laws in the United States. Except for an obscure 1972 decision issued without an opinion, however, the issue of marriage rights for same-sex couples has never occupied the court’s attention. That situation is about to change radically in the coming term. This year, at least six marriage-related cases will be before the Supreme Court. They fall into two sets: those that challenge the federal Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA), and the one that raises the marriage issue explicitly. The Defense of Marriage Act, which Congress enacted and President Clinton signed in 1996, bars federal benefits for marriages between same-sex partners contracted under state law. For the last several years, all courts considering DOMA have held it to be unconstitutional, on a variety of theories. Last year, the Obama administration announced that the constitutionality of the law could no longer in good faith be defended and that it would no longer do so. The Supreme Court, however, has yet to speak. The lead cases are from Massachusetts. Gill v. Office of Personnel Management (now called BLAG v. Gill, for the Bipartisan Legal Advisory Group that Congress formed to defend the law) and Massachusetts v. US Department of Health and Human Services each challenge DOMA’s definition of “marriage” as unconstitutional. Each was favorably decided in the Massachusetts federal trial court. The United States Court of Appeals for the First Circuit affirmed in both cases that DOMA was unconstitutional. BLAG sought review by the Supreme Court. Occasionally, the Supreme Court will take a case away from a lower court and rule on it itself, because of the importance of the case or for other reasons. The Department of Justice has asked the court to take a case away from the Ninth Circuit — Golinski v. Office of Personnel Management — and decide it together with the Massachusetts cases. Similarly, the citizen litigants in Pederson v. Office of Personnel Management and Windsor v. United States have asked that those cases be taken away from the Second Circuit and decided by the Supreme Court this term. Of particular note here is Edith Windsor, whose wife died in 2009 and who was forced to pay over $350,000 in federal estate taxes that she would not have owed but for DOMA. She is elderly and in frail health and the concern is that she might not live to see her case decided if the court does not act quickly. Lastly, there is the actual marriage case, Hollingsworth v. Brown. (This case was formerly called Perry v. Schwarzenegger and, later, Perry v. Brown.) In this case from the Ninth Circuit, plaintiffs in California challenged in federal court the voters’ adoption in 2008 of Proposition 8, a constitutional ballot measure that overturned that state’s court decision legalizing marriage between samesex partners. While the trial judge decided it on sweeping grounds — holding Proposition 8 unconstitutional — the Ninth Circuit affirmed on a basis so narrow that it currently applies only to the state of California. What the court will do with all of this is a matter of rampant speculation. The lawyers in Perry obviously think they have the votes on the Court — five are required — to overturn Proposition 8; otherwise, presumably, they would not have brought the case. Other court watchers note that the court tends to favor an incremental approach, suggesting that the DOMA cases may receive its attention this term and marriage itself at some future time. At a minimum, though, the court will have to decide the Hollingsworth petition, meaning, if it is denied, that marriage between same-sex partners would become legal in California once again. The court’s first conference, at which votes could be taken and actions on petitions announced, has already passed. It is likely to be late October at least before any more is known. If the court is watching the polls, same-sex marriage is on the ballot in four states this year, and the decision on the petitions may not come until after the election in November. Knowing the court’s action on the petitions, of course, will tell us only what cases the court plans to hear this year. Hard news of how the court views the foremost civil rights issue of our time likely will not be known until near the end of the court’s term in June. Until then, advocates and opponents will continue to handicap the outcome and to wait with growing anticipation. • • • Portland attorney Mark Johnson Roberts practices family law at the Gevurtz Menashe law firm with a particular focus on LGBT family law issues. He can be reached at markj@gevurtzmenashe.com. pqmonthly.com October/November 2012 • 15
Page 1 and 2: MONTHLY FREE PQMONTHLY.COM VOL 1 No
Page 3 and 4: PQ TEAM MONTHLY Melanie Davis Owner
Page 5 and 6: EQUITY FOUNDATION GETS BENT TO SUPP
Page 7 and 8: PRESENTED BY Restaurant & Lounge TM
Page 9 and 10: FEATURES DIFFERENCE-MAKER TERRY BEA
Page 11 and 12: pqmonthly.com October/November 2012
Page 13: FEATURES ‘AS MY FATHER MADE ME’
Page 17 and 18: FEATURES MR. KAPLAN GOES TO WASHING
Page 19 and 20: PERSPECTIVES pqmonthly.com October/
Page 21 and 22: YOUR HALLOWEEN TO-BOO LIST We all k
Page 23 and 24: FEATURES BECOMING DARCELLE Walter C
Page 25 and 26: THE LADY CHRONICLES THANKS FOR THE
Page 27 and 28: PERSPECTIVES ID CHECK EVERYTHING’
Page 29 and 30: HUNTER VALENTINE AND KISS KILL SERV
Page 31 and 32: TRAVEL & OUTDOORS Protecting Your R
Page 33 and 34: Portland Gay Men’s Chorus present
Page 35 and 36: THE GOOD LIFE Cultivating Life By L
Page 37 and 38: Business Directory PQ Monthly is pu
Page 39 and 40: THE FUN STUFF ASTROSCOPES WITH MISS

OUT & ON

You also want an ePaper? Increase the reach of your titles

Delete template?

Save as template?