One year at summer camp we had a commissioner named Bill, a trim college-age guy with closely cropped hair. Bill was the epitome of organization. His uniform looked great. He was always where he was supposed to be when he was supposed to be there. We could always depend on him to do what he was supposed to do.
While friendly, Bill seemed a little too business like to us boys. The commissioner we had had the previous year was a much more easygoing fellow that was easy to joke around with. We had given that commissioner an affectionate nickname that was, uh, less than respectful. He took it all in stride and had great fun with it. We tried to do the same with Bill, but it didn't go over well.
One evening as we sat around the campfire, our scoutmaster, Al Parks talked to us about what it meant to be courteous. It was more than just being nice to people. It was showing genuine respect for others.
Al said that Bill had treated each of us boys with kindness and dignity. He was right about that. Although Bill seemed a little uptight, he also seemed to reflect sincere regard for even the snottiest kid. Bill had a different personality than the previous year's commissioner. To him, our attempts at playfulness seemed hurtful and disrespectful. Bill wondered what he had done to deserve such treatment at our hands.
We were invited to think about how we could more positively interact with Bill. We started joking around about it, but soft spoken Al gently let us know that he was quite serious. So we got serious about how we could have fun with Bill while still showing him the kind of respect he showed us.
It didn't take us long to come up with some plans. The rest of the week went much better. We enjoyed Bill. And by the end of the week, he even learned to enjoy our troop.
Courtesy is the lubricant that makes for pleasant social interactions. Insincere courtesy may help avoid some social scrapes, but it still fails to convey respect. Real courtesy requires actual respect for others—an inward belief in their innate dignity.
My Mom carefully trained her sons in the finer points of courtesy and good manners. We haven't always lived up to Mom's teachings. But we know how to do so. To this day, I open doors for my wife. I do this, not because I think she is weak or incapable, but because I love and respect her.
We live in an age where potty humor is greatly celebrated and marketed to our youth. The broader culture teaches kids from their earliest ages that they can get ahead by 'dissing' others—that they can build themselves up by putting others down.
But that is not the way of the scout. Scouts are (or should be) taught to see the best within each individual and to treat each person in a way that lifts them toward their best potential. It is more than a way of acting; it is a way of thinking.
A scout is courteous.
Tuesday, October 11, 2011
Monday, October 10, 2011
A Scout Is Friendly
I had achieved the rank of Life Scout and had most of the merit badges I needed for the rank of Eagle Scout. But then I stalled out on advancement. I was active in my troop, but I wasn't earning new advancements. My friend Cory was in the same boat. Like me, he had climbed to the Life rank, but had taken a breather.
One day I noticed that Cory was staying after school. I asked him what was up with that. Was he in trouble? He explained that he was staying after to take a merit badge class from one of the English teachers. I had no clue that this man was a merit badge counselor. Cory encouraged me to attend the class with him.
Within a few weeks I had earned several new merit badges and had learned some new skills. I still remember my parents taking me to the teacher's home to pass off the Home Repairs merit badge, among others.
Thanks to Cory's encouragement, I got back on the trail to the Eagle rank. I finished the requirements and attended my board of review in the spring of that year. A few months after my court of honor, I was able to attend the court of honor where Cory was awarded his Eagle rank.
True friends help us become better than we would be without their friendship. So-called friends that lead us down ignoble or stagnating paths are not friends at all.
Throughout my lifetime involved in scouting, I have developed many friendships. Sometimes years—even decades—go by between occurrences of seeing an old scouting friend. Yet I find that these friendships still uplift me.
This past summer I encountered a man that I knew as a youth many years ago. He lives across the country. I have heard about him because one of my sons has worked on camp staff with some of his sons. We enjoyed becoming reacquainted and reminiscing about old times. He was a fine individual back in the day and he is a better individual today. What a great experience it was to see my friend again.
Being friendly is more than just focusing on close acquaintances. It means showing good will to others, regardless of whether we know them or not.
Years ago when I attended a National Order of the Arrow Conference I met a young man named Bob who was from another state. Bob was the epitome of a friendly scout. Bob was great to be around. He seemed to naturally lift those around him toward their better selves. I don't remember Bob's last name or even where he was from. But I remember his friendliness toward me.
Ennobling friendship and friendliness are qualities the Boy Scouts seeks to instill in its members.
A scout is friendly.
One day I noticed that Cory was staying after school. I asked him what was up with that. Was he in trouble? He explained that he was staying after to take a merit badge class from one of the English teachers. I had no clue that this man was a merit badge counselor. Cory encouraged me to attend the class with him.
Within a few weeks I had earned several new merit badges and had learned some new skills. I still remember my parents taking me to the teacher's home to pass off the Home Repairs merit badge, among others.
Thanks to Cory's encouragement, I got back on the trail to the Eagle rank. I finished the requirements and attended my board of review in the spring of that year. A few months after my court of honor, I was able to attend the court of honor where Cory was awarded his Eagle rank.
True friends help us become better than we would be without their friendship. So-called friends that lead us down ignoble or stagnating paths are not friends at all.
Throughout my lifetime involved in scouting, I have developed many friendships. Sometimes years—even decades—go by between occurrences of seeing an old scouting friend. Yet I find that these friendships still uplift me.
This past summer I encountered a man that I knew as a youth many years ago. He lives across the country. I have heard about him because one of my sons has worked on camp staff with some of his sons. We enjoyed becoming reacquainted and reminiscing about old times. He was a fine individual back in the day and he is a better individual today. What a great experience it was to see my friend again.
Being friendly is more than just focusing on close acquaintances. It means showing good will to others, regardless of whether we know them or not.
Years ago when I attended a National Order of the Arrow Conference I met a young man named Bob who was from another state. Bob was the epitome of a friendly scout. Bob was great to be around. He seemed to naturally lift those around him toward their better selves. I don't remember Bob's last name or even where he was from. But I remember his friendliness toward me.
Ennobling friendship and friendliness are qualities the Boy Scouts seeks to instill in its members.
A scout is friendly.
Sunday, October 09, 2011
A Scout Is Helpful
When I was a young Boy Scout, we had among our troop equipment an interesting contraption that allowed us to make rope. It had been constructed by an earlier adult volunteer using old lawn mower gears.
The geared contraption was strapped to a scout using a long leather belt. There was one main larger gear that was set in motion using an inline hand crank that was usually turned by the scout wearing the belt. That main gear turned four small gears, three of which had hooks welded onto them.
We would run two strands of natural fiber twine from each hook to a distant point, to which the strands of twine would be fixed. We would multiply the desired finished length of the rope by three and station the scout with the belt that far away from the fixed point.
At least one other scout was needed to run the 'crow's foot,' which was an iron peg that split at the end so that three prongs could be used to separate the three groupings of twine strands.
As the crank turned, the twine strands twisted tightly together. The scout wearing the belt used his weight and strength to keep the strands taut throughout the process. When the twisted strands started to bind on each other, the scout manning the crow's foot would confine the twisted strands to the part of the rope closest to the crank. He moved away from this point as the rope became tighter.
When the rope was as tight as we could get it, scouts would whip each end to prevent unraveling and then cut the rope loose from the geared hooks and the fixed point. It took some serious work, but only a few minutes for scouts to make a useful rope using twine. Every scout I knew loved to have a piece of rope they had made themselves.
Our new scoutmaster, Al Parks signed the troop up for a rope making booth at the council's Scout-O-Rama. That was a council-wide event that was aimed chiefly at Cub Scouts and leaders, but where Boy Scout troops and leaders could also get ideas from other troops.
One warm Saturday in May, our troop spent the entire day helping Cub Scouts make their own ropes. We quickly discovered that few of these younger boys had sufficient strength to keep the rope taut and turn the crank. We provided lots of assistance for hours.
At the end of the day when the Cub Scouts were gone, we weren't finished. We had to disassemble our booth, load the stuff onto a trailer, haul it to the owner's lot, and unload it. It was late in the day by the time we got home. We were tired and had given up an entire Saturday that could have been spent in other pursuits. But somehow we felt pretty good about the whole thing.
Al explained to us that this good feeling was part of the magic of helping others. We felt good because we were being and doing good.
A scout is helpful.
The geared contraption was strapped to a scout using a long leather belt. There was one main larger gear that was set in motion using an inline hand crank that was usually turned by the scout wearing the belt. That main gear turned four small gears, three of which had hooks welded onto them.
We would run two strands of natural fiber twine from each hook to a distant point, to which the strands of twine would be fixed. We would multiply the desired finished length of the rope by three and station the scout with the belt that far away from the fixed point.
At least one other scout was needed to run the 'crow's foot,' which was an iron peg that split at the end so that three prongs could be used to separate the three groupings of twine strands.
As the crank turned, the twine strands twisted tightly together. The scout wearing the belt used his weight and strength to keep the strands taut throughout the process. When the twisted strands started to bind on each other, the scout manning the crow's foot would confine the twisted strands to the part of the rope closest to the crank. He moved away from this point as the rope became tighter.
When the rope was as tight as we could get it, scouts would whip each end to prevent unraveling and then cut the rope loose from the geared hooks and the fixed point. It took some serious work, but only a few minutes for scouts to make a useful rope using twine. Every scout I knew loved to have a piece of rope they had made themselves.
Our new scoutmaster, Al Parks signed the troop up for a rope making booth at the council's Scout-O-Rama. That was a council-wide event that was aimed chiefly at Cub Scouts and leaders, but where Boy Scout troops and leaders could also get ideas from other troops.
One warm Saturday in May, our troop spent the entire day helping Cub Scouts make their own ropes. We quickly discovered that few of these younger boys had sufficient strength to keep the rope taut and turn the crank. We provided lots of assistance for hours.
At the end of the day when the Cub Scouts were gone, we weren't finished. We had to disassemble our booth, load the stuff onto a trailer, haul it to the owner's lot, and unload it. It was late in the day by the time we got home. We were tired and had given up an entire Saturday that could have been spent in other pursuits. But somehow we felt pretty good about the whole thing.
Al explained to us that this good feeling was part of the magic of helping others. We felt good because we were being and doing good.
A scout is helpful.
Saturday, October 08, 2011
A Scout Is Loyal
I went on my first overnight hike with the Boy Scout troop just a couple of days before I turned 12. Our family had recently acquired a new 'lightweight' pup tent made of nylon. I was incredibly excited as I looked forward to hiking with the troop.
Having never been on an overnight hike, I plied my older brother for help in preparing. He offered generous advice, including a lot of information about preparing for a weeklong hike in the back country. I assiduously put my brother's advice to work, lading my pack with far more stuff than would be needed on an overnight campout.
On Friday afternoon our troop gathered in the driveway of our scoutmaster, Bob Porter. It took a while for the adults that would be helping with transportation to get home from work and get ready to take us. But eventually we were at the trailhead that would lead us to Malan's Basin.
The first stretch of the hike wasn't too bad. There wasn't much of a climb as we hiked up the creek bed in the bottom of Taylor Canyon. But all of that changed when we came to the spot where the switchbacks started. Being somewhat of a couch potato, I was unprepared for the rigors of carrying an overladen backpack up a couple of miles of trail that climbed a couple thousand feet in elevation.
Before long I was at the rear of the pack of hikers. They would stop and rest to wait for the stragglers to catch up. As soon as I would arrive and drop my pack, the main group would head off up the trail, giving me no time for rest.
As the hike wore on, I trudged increasingly slowly up the interminable trail, taking frequent breaks and wondering if I would ever make it to the destination.
Eventually, I was alone. Alone except for my scoutmaster, Bob Porter. Bob hiked along with me at my slow pace, encouraging, cajoling, and keeping me somehow going as the sun set and the trail ahead began to disappear into the dusk. We couldn't hear any of the rest of the troop any more, but Bob stayed with me.
It is true that Bob was responsible for my well being on this trip, but it isn't really possible to go astray on this trail. Once you get going up the Taylor Canyon switchbacks, you will eventually reach Malan's Peak as long as you keep going. Bob could have hiked on ahead and then sent someone back to assist me. Bob could have carried my pack for me. But he didn't. He stayed with me and made sure that I gained the victory of carrying my own pack all the way to the campsite.
That's loyalty: devotion to doing the right thing.
Loyalty can be misplaced. Some have engaged in immoral acts in the name of being loyal to a creed, nation, team, or person, etc. My Dad saw that kind of thing when he grew up in Nazi Germany. This is a counterfeit for the kind of loyalty promoted by the Boy Scouts of America. Gordon B. Hinckley once said, "I think of loyalty in terms of being true to ourselves. ... We must be true to the very best that is in us."
One scouting leader said:
"I once had a boss who said, “Greed makes the world go ‘round”. He was wrong. An ounce of loyalty is worth a pound of cleverness. What makes families and communities and countries work—indeed, what makes the world go ‘round—is loyalty."
My earliest lessons in loyalty came at home among my family. But my first lesson in scouting loyalty that I can remember happened on a lonely mountain trail when my scoutmaster refused to leave my side.
A Scout is loyal.
Friday, October 07, 2011
A Scout Is Trustworthy
I learned to build campfires at age 17. By that time I had been an Eagle Scout for three years, had served in various scouting leadership positions for years, had gone on many campouts, and had sat around many campfires.
My 18th summer found me working on staff at Camp Loll. One day I was assigned along with several others to build the campfires for the evening program that would kick off a week of camping and outdoor events for a couple of hundred scouts and leaders.
I dutifully headed to the campfire bowl with my crew and we began haphazardly throwing together piles of wood in the two fire pits. Fortunately, our camp director, Delose Conner happened to wander onto the scene. (I later realized that he was wisely checking on us.) He looked at our work and asked whether we thought that the fire lays we had built could be started with a single match and whether they would burn nicely for an hour.
Assuming that we'd apply some kind of liquid accelerant to the stack of wood, I replied that the fires would start if they were sufficiently doused in "scout juice." After all, that's the way I had always seen campfires built. Delose explained that at Camp Loll we used only natural elements in our campfires and that the use of accelerants was not permitted. My crew and I quickly understood that what we had built wouldn't work.
Delose then carefully instructed us in the fine art of building a 'council' campfire. He showed us how to build something that looked kind of like a log cabin fire lay, but where every other layer was a fairly solid floor of wood. We started with larger diameter logs and gradually worked our way up to small sticks. Atop our structure we built a tepee of very dry, thin, long sticks. We filled the tepee with masses of very fine, dry tinder.
The fire would start small at the top. As the top layer of sticks burned through, the fire would fall to the next layer. There was enough space between each layer to allow enough air to reach the fuel for the fire to burn well. A properly constructed fire, it was explained, would burn brightly for about 45 minutes and would then diminish to a lovely bed of coals that would provide just the right ambiance as the program wound down.
Our director carefully explained that each campfire needed to be completely dependable. He had to be able to trust that the fire would start with a single match, stay lit, and burn as long as needed. The scouts in attendance had to see that it was possible to start a fully natural fire if the fire lay was properly prepared. In short, he said, the fire had to be trustworthy, just as each scout promised to be trustworthy each time he recited the Scout Law.
Trustworthiness is something that is proven and earned. Not only must it thrive inside the individual, others must be aware of it as well. It is something for which one gains a reputation. Once trust is violated, it is extremely difficult to regain.
My camp director was also the professional scout executive for the district where I lived. He later told me that one of the reasons he hired me to work on camp staff was that I had proven myself to be dependable as a youth Order of the Arrow leader.
Delose reminded me that some months earlier our O.A. chapter had agreed to do a camping promotion presentation for a large troop. Weeks later, Delose looked at his calendar and realized that the event was supposed to start in a few minutes. He had no time to remind chapter members. He hurriedly gathered supplies and rushed to the meeting, only to find me already leading the event.
Trustworthiness means keeping one's promises. It means being where you have promised to be doing what you have promised to do. It means being truthful, even when it might be more convenient or profitable to be otherwise. And it is the first point of the Scout Law.
A Scout is trustworthy.
My 18th summer found me working on staff at Camp Loll. One day I was assigned along with several others to build the campfires for the evening program that would kick off a week of camping and outdoor events for a couple of hundred scouts and leaders.
I dutifully headed to the campfire bowl with my crew and we began haphazardly throwing together piles of wood in the two fire pits. Fortunately, our camp director, Delose Conner happened to wander onto the scene. (I later realized that he was wisely checking on us.) He looked at our work and asked whether we thought that the fire lays we had built could be started with a single match and whether they would burn nicely for an hour.
Assuming that we'd apply some kind of liquid accelerant to the stack of wood, I replied that the fires would start if they were sufficiently doused in "scout juice." After all, that's the way I had always seen campfires built. Delose explained that at Camp Loll we used only natural elements in our campfires and that the use of accelerants was not permitted. My crew and I quickly understood that what we had built wouldn't work.
Delose then carefully instructed us in the fine art of building a 'council' campfire. He showed us how to build something that looked kind of like a log cabin fire lay, but where every other layer was a fairly solid floor of wood. We started with larger diameter logs and gradually worked our way up to small sticks. Atop our structure we built a tepee of very dry, thin, long sticks. We filled the tepee with masses of very fine, dry tinder.
The fire would start small at the top. As the top layer of sticks burned through, the fire would fall to the next layer. There was enough space between each layer to allow enough air to reach the fuel for the fire to burn well. A properly constructed fire, it was explained, would burn brightly for about 45 minutes and would then diminish to a lovely bed of coals that would provide just the right ambiance as the program wound down.
Our director carefully explained that each campfire needed to be completely dependable. He had to be able to trust that the fire would start with a single match, stay lit, and burn as long as needed. The scouts in attendance had to see that it was possible to start a fully natural fire if the fire lay was properly prepared. In short, he said, the fire had to be trustworthy, just as each scout promised to be trustworthy each time he recited the Scout Law.
Trustworthiness is something that is proven and earned. Not only must it thrive inside the individual, others must be aware of it as well. It is something for which one gains a reputation. Once trust is violated, it is extremely difficult to regain.
My camp director was also the professional scout executive for the district where I lived. He later told me that one of the reasons he hired me to work on camp staff was that I had proven myself to be dependable as a youth Order of the Arrow leader.
Delose reminded me that some months earlier our O.A. chapter had agreed to do a camping promotion presentation for a large troop. Weeks later, Delose looked at his calendar and realized that the event was supposed to start in a few minutes. He had no time to remind chapter members. He hurriedly gathered supplies and rushed to the meeting, only to find me already leading the event.
Trustworthiness means keeping one's promises. It means being where you have promised to be doing what you have promised to do. It means being truthful, even when it might be more convenient or profitable to be otherwise. And it is the first point of the Scout Law.
A Scout is trustworthy.
Saturday, October 01, 2011
Wet Camping Not for the Wimpy
Our scouting district held a Camporee two weekends ago for Boy Scout units. We now have about 70 such units in our district.
I did not expect a huge turnout to the event. We have traditionally gotten much lower turnouts at fall Camporee events than at winter Klondike events. I suspect that there are many reasons for this. The school year has just begun and families are busy.
But another reason that I expected a lower turnout was that the new district camping chairman had to go out of town for an extended period for his job. While the camping chairman had done quite a bit of groundwork in setting up the event, his absence in the critical few weeks prior to the event left the program chairman scrambling.
Throughout the Friday of the campout the skies were overcast. The forecast called for rain. But the temperature was relatively mild. We have no problem getting troops to come out to camp in the snow, but rain is another story. The threat of a little rain seems to deplete turnout by as much as half. Heavy rain will cut that number in half again.
I tell people around here all of the time that if they refuse to camp in rainy conditions, their boys will never learn how to successfully deal with outdoor events in wet weather. I also tell them that if they lived in the Northwest and refused to camp in the rain, they would never go camping at all.
It's not the boys that cancel campouts in the face of precipitation; it's the adults. I have to admit that it's a lot of work to dry out wet tents and gear. But I also can't help but wonder if adult scouters have always been this wimpy. I seem to remember camping in wet weather quite a bit when I was a youth.
When we held flag ceremony at sundown, we had 17 Scout troops in attendance. 17 out of 70 is rather pathetic. We had somewhere around 150 attendees (youth and adults).
While there had been a bit of misty rain earlier in the evening, the weather turned off quite beautiful for our campfire program. It still felt quite nice when we bedded down for the night. But along about midnight it started to rain in earnest. The first troop that couldn't hack it pulled out around 1 am. Over the next couple of hours, a few more pulled up stakes and headed home.
Around 5 am we experienced a spectacularly bright and noisy thunderstorm. More troops left then, citing their hazardous weather training. Many of us that have been through (and taught) the same training judged it sufficiently safe to remain.
By the time we held flag ceremony at 8 am, only seven troops remained. Scout games were planned for 9 am. By that time, only one troop remained. True, it rained off and on and all the camping gear was wet. It is also true that many boys were quite wet by then. But the one troop that stayed had a great time anyway. After all, they reasoned that they would soon be home and able to get dry. Why not have fun?
Listening to conversations as troops packed up and headed home, I think that most of the boys would have stayed if only the adults had let them. I wonder what the boys learned from this.
Our Order of the Arrow chapter members were the last to leave after cleaning up. The Camporee had been damp and poorly attended. But dampness need not ruin a campout if campers are properly prepared. Those that learn lessons from getting wet during an outdoor event can learn to have fun in wet weather anyway.
Youth safety is very important and should not be compromised. But teaching Scouts to be wimps won't instill the kind of values in them that the Boy Scouts of America seeks to uphold.
I did not expect a huge turnout to the event. We have traditionally gotten much lower turnouts at fall Camporee events than at winter Klondike events. I suspect that there are many reasons for this. The school year has just begun and families are busy.
But another reason that I expected a lower turnout was that the new district camping chairman had to go out of town for an extended period for his job. While the camping chairman had done quite a bit of groundwork in setting up the event, his absence in the critical few weeks prior to the event left the program chairman scrambling.
Throughout the Friday of the campout the skies were overcast. The forecast called for rain. But the temperature was relatively mild. We have no problem getting troops to come out to camp in the snow, but rain is another story. The threat of a little rain seems to deplete turnout by as much as half. Heavy rain will cut that number in half again.
I tell people around here all of the time that if they refuse to camp in rainy conditions, their boys will never learn how to successfully deal with outdoor events in wet weather. I also tell them that if they lived in the Northwest and refused to camp in the rain, they would never go camping at all.
It's not the boys that cancel campouts in the face of precipitation; it's the adults. I have to admit that it's a lot of work to dry out wet tents and gear. But I also can't help but wonder if adult scouters have always been this wimpy. I seem to remember camping in wet weather quite a bit when I was a youth.
When we held flag ceremony at sundown, we had 17 Scout troops in attendance. 17 out of 70 is rather pathetic. We had somewhere around 150 attendees (youth and adults).
While there had been a bit of misty rain earlier in the evening, the weather turned off quite beautiful for our campfire program. It still felt quite nice when we bedded down for the night. But along about midnight it started to rain in earnest. The first troop that couldn't hack it pulled out around 1 am. Over the next couple of hours, a few more pulled up stakes and headed home.
Around 5 am we experienced a spectacularly bright and noisy thunderstorm. More troops left then, citing their hazardous weather training. Many of us that have been through (and taught) the same training judged it sufficiently safe to remain.
By the time we held flag ceremony at 8 am, only seven troops remained. Scout games were planned for 9 am. By that time, only one troop remained. True, it rained off and on and all the camping gear was wet. It is also true that many boys were quite wet by then. But the one troop that stayed had a great time anyway. After all, they reasoned that they would soon be home and able to get dry. Why not have fun?
Listening to conversations as troops packed up and headed home, I think that most of the boys would have stayed if only the adults had let them. I wonder what the boys learned from this.
Our Order of the Arrow chapter members were the last to leave after cleaning up. The Camporee had been damp and poorly attended. But dampness need not ruin a campout if campers are properly prepared. Those that learn lessons from getting wet during an outdoor event can learn to have fun in wet weather anyway.
Youth safety is very important and should not be compromised. But teaching Scouts to be wimps won't instill the kind of values in them that the Boy Scouts of America seeks to uphold.
Wednesday, September 14, 2011
North Ogden Voters to City Council Incumbents: Get Lost!
A few weeks ago I wrote about the kerfuffle in North Ogden over city leadership's handling of the public works facility issue. I noted that about 3,000 of North Ogden residents had signed a petition demanding that the $10 million bond for the proposed facility be put to a general vote. The city responded by filing a lawsuit against two of the sponsors of the petition.
Frankly, the mayor and most members of the city council members have demonstrated a disgracefully dismissive attitude toward residents that have concerns about the project, its costs, and the way it has been handled. It's not that their position is without merit; it's that they have treated a fair number of those they supposedly represent with disdain.
The city attorney and some of the city's employees haven't helped matters much. Someone should have instructed these people to keep their mouths shut. Instead they made a number of public statements that smacked of an elitist attitude. They seemed to quite forget that they work for the taxpayers of North Ogden, not vice versa.
By the time the primary election rolled around yesterday, the cake had been baked. Four years ago when 10 candidates ran for three city council seats, only 866 of the city's 9,532 registered voters went to the polls (as noted in this post). I thought that was pathetic, but not unexpected.
In yesterday's election where 11 candidates vied for the same three council seats, 1,558 of the city's 9,715 registered voters cast ballots. Hmmm.... That's still pretty pathetic; although, the passion behind the current issue nearly doubled voter turnout. But this time around incumbents fared poorly. (See election results.)
The purpose of the election was to winnow the 11 candidates down to six, three of whom will be selected for city council in the final vote on November 8. That meant that five of the candidates had to be eliminated in yesterday's primary election. The three incumbents came in in the sixth, seventh, and eight position. So only one of the incumbents will be on the final ballot.
However, it should be noted that the three incumbents together garnered only 18.29% of the vote. Had there been fewer opposition candidates, the opposition vote would have been less diluted and none of the incumbents would have made it to the final ballot. Those that voted in the primary election were pretty ticked off at the incumbents.
As I expected, the two candidates against whom the city filed suit came out on top in yesterday's election. The lawsuit was probably the most effective campaign tool for these candidates.
In past city council elections, those that came out on top in the primary election have almost always won the general election. I suspect it will be the same this time around, although, something unexpected could alter that outcome.
I doubt that the one incumbent that survived the primary election will have much hope of winning the general election. Given turnout in past elections, I doubt we will see more than 600 additional voters show up at the general election. Even if every last one of the additional ballots were cast for the lone incumbent, it is doubtful that she would win a seat.
The two council members that lost their bid last night are actually better off than the lone survivor. She now has to go through the motions of campaigning for nearly two months knowing that she will likely lose.
In January, the mayor and the city employees will be dealing with a very different city council than they have dealt with in the past. One of the sitting council members is already a strong supporter of limited government. The other guy does not seem to be the type to put up much opposition against a crew that is determined to reign in the city government.
If the mayor's seat had been on the ballot yesterday, the incumbent would have lost. Yesterday's vote was as much a referendum on his handling of his job as anything else. But much could happen over the next two years. It will be interesting to see if the mayor decides to run for re-election and what the public sentiment will be if he chooses to do so.
In the meantime, one thing is abundantly clear. A very vocal and involved group of concerned citizens isn't happy about being treated as if their concerns are of no importance. City officials need to take a different approach to dealing with these people.
Frankly, the mayor and most members of the city council members have demonstrated a disgracefully dismissive attitude toward residents that have concerns about the project, its costs, and the way it has been handled. It's not that their position is without merit; it's that they have treated a fair number of those they supposedly represent with disdain.
The city attorney and some of the city's employees haven't helped matters much. Someone should have instructed these people to keep their mouths shut. Instead they made a number of public statements that smacked of an elitist attitude. They seemed to quite forget that they work for the taxpayers of North Ogden, not vice versa.
By the time the primary election rolled around yesterday, the cake had been baked. Four years ago when 10 candidates ran for three city council seats, only 866 of the city's 9,532 registered voters went to the polls (as noted in this post). I thought that was pathetic, but not unexpected.
In yesterday's election where 11 candidates vied for the same three council seats, 1,558 of the city's 9,715 registered voters cast ballots. Hmmm.... That's still pretty pathetic; although, the passion behind the current issue nearly doubled voter turnout. But this time around incumbents fared poorly. (See election results.)
The purpose of the election was to winnow the 11 candidates down to six, three of whom will be selected for city council in the final vote on November 8. That meant that five of the candidates had to be eliminated in yesterday's primary election. The three incumbents came in in the sixth, seventh, and eight position. So only one of the incumbents will be on the final ballot.
However, it should be noted that the three incumbents together garnered only 18.29% of the vote. Had there been fewer opposition candidates, the opposition vote would have been less diluted and none of the incumbents would have made it to the final ballot. Those that voted in the primary election were pretty ticked off at the incumbents.
As I expected, the two candidates against whom the city filed suit came out on top in yesterday's election. The lawsuit was probably the most effective campaign tool for these candidates.
In past city council elections, those that came out on top in the primary election have almost always won the general election. I suspect it will be the same this time around, although, something unexpected could alter that outcome.
I doubt that the one incumbent that survived the primary election will have much hope of winning the general election. Given turnout in past elections, I doubt we will see more than 600 additional voters show up at the general election. Even if every last one of the additional ballots were cast for the lone incumbent, it is doubtful that she would win a seat.
The two council members that lost their bid last night are actually better off than the lone survivor. She now has to go through the motions of campaigning for nearly two months knowing that she will likely lose.
In January, the mayor and the city employees will be dealing with a very different city council than they have dealt with in the past. One of the sitting council members is already a strong supporter of limited government. The other guy does not seem to be the type to put up much opposition against a crew that is determined to reign in the city government.
If the mayor's seat had been on the ballot yesterday, the incumbent would have lost. Yesterday's vote was as much a referendum on his handling of his job as anything else. But much could happen over the next two years. It will be interesting to see if the mayor decides to run for re-election and what the public sentiment will be if he chooses to do so.
In the meantime, one thing is abundantly clear. A very vocal and involved group of concerned citizens isn't happy about being treated as if their concerns are of no importance. City officials need to take a different approach to dealing with these people.
Sunday, September 11, 2011
And Help You to to You Impart
Today in church one of the congregational hymns was Improve the Shining Moments. The lyrics of the final verse conclude with the phrase, "And God will love and bless you And help to you impart." Every time our congregation sings this song, many sing, "And help you to impart" rather than, "And help to you impart."
I suspect that the word "impart" is mainly to blame for the mix up. If you ask the average American youth what the word impart means, you will likely either get a blank stare or a guess that turns out to be incorrect. Many adults have some kind of foggy idea of the word's definition, but few are sufficiently familiar with its usage to know what they are singing regardless of whether they sing "you to" or "to you."
If you know what the word means, I guess that either way presents a good message. If you sing the hymn's actual lyrics, you are testifying that God will give those that rely on him help when they need it. If you switch the words and sing, "And help you to impart," you are testifying that those that rely on God will be helped to help others in their times of need. Either way, it's a good Christian message.
About a year and a half ago, I wrote a post about hymns. There are hymns that I dearly love, hymns that are OK with me, some that I prefer to sing rarely, and a few that I would prefer to completely avoid. I noted, for example, that there is a whole section of absolutely dreary hymns in the current LDS hymnal. Personally, I find no comfort or peace from these depressing odes.
One challenge with any words that get recorded is that the record stays in its original format while the language of the culture continues to evolve. Without anyone really designing or being in control of language, words and phrases come into being, develop new meanings, and drop from common usage on an ongoing basis.
We have all experienced generational differences in understanding of language. Our kids start throwing around terms or usages with which we are unfamiliar. A couple of years ago I heard a teenager say, "Man, that is sick!" From the tone of his voice I could tell that he was expressing approval. When my friends and I uttered the precise same phrase at that age, we meant that something was depraved or highly distasteful.
It happens the other way too. Older people use terms that the younger generation doesn't understand. They also user terms that are dated. Although the younger generation understands the term, they don't use it. Usually this means that the term will die out within a generation.
Nowhere is the example of time-framed linguistic alienation more clear than in scripture. The LDS Church uses the King James Version of the Bible. This version is noted for its beautiful prose and linguistic quality. It is felt by many that the KJV Bible preserves the original scripture in English better than other versions.
But the fact that the translation is more than 400 years old presents a difficulty for modern readers of the scripture. There are many cases where the phraseology differs so drastically from current language usage that it is very difficult to understand without special training. Some words have changed meaning so that some passages read by moderns can even appear to mean the exact opposite of their original intent.
A similar condition exists for hymn lyrics. As the language evolves, the phrases and words used in some hymns become unfamiliar to those singing the hymns nowadays. The problem can be compounded by the fact that hymn phrasing may vary from accepted sentence structure in order to achieve the lyrical qualities that make words work with music.
But hymns differ from scripture. While both hymns and scripture are meant for spiritual and moral edification, scripture is canonized while hymns are not (except for Psalms). Thus, it is far more acceptable to change the wording of hymns to meet currently common understanding than it is to alter scripture for the same reason. It is completely acceptable to write new hymns and stop using hymns, whereas, this isn't general the case with scripture.
Still, it isn't a simple thing for a church with thousands of congregations to switch hymnals. As I noted in last year's hymn post, the current LDS hymnal was published 26 years ago in 1985. The previous edition was published some 35 years earlier. It takes time and resources to change out millions of hymn books.
I opined to my son that it may not be many years before this will become a moot point. Given the rate of technological evolution, I can imagine a time not too distant when few new books are published in hard copy format. The ability to publish a new edition of a hymnal to thousands of meeting houses and millions of homes could be as simple as changing a file on a server.
Perhaps I'm too optimistic about the rate of technological adoption, if not about the rate of technological advance.
At any rate, I suspect that we're probably a decade away from a new edition of the LDS hymnal. I also suspect that when such a publication is released it will still include many hymns that I consider too archaic to be of much use. I'm also guessing that there will still be a smattering of numbers that are odd enough by modern standards that they end up never being seen or heard by the vast majority of church members.
Even when a new hymnal is released, I will continue to find solace, edification, and spiritual enlightenment through the hymns in the book. Sacred music will continue to speak to my soul in ways unmatched by other music.
I suspect that the word "impart" is mainly to blame for the mix up. If you ask the average American youth what the word impart means, you will likely either get a blank stare or a guess that turns out to be incorrect. Many adults have some kind of foggy idea of the word's definition, but few are sufficiently familiar with its usage to know what they are singing regardless of whether they sing "you to" or "to you."
If you know what the word means, I guess that either way presents a good message. If you sing the hymn's actual lyrics, you are testifying that God will give those that rely on him help when they need it. If you switch the words and sing, "And help you to impart," you are testifying that those that rely on God will be helped to help others in their times of need. Either way, it's a good Christian message.
About a year and a half ago, I wrote a post about hymns. There are hymns that I dearly love, hymns that are OK with me, some that I prefer to sing rarely, and a few that I would prefer to completely avoid. I noted, for example, that there is a whole section of absolutely dreary hymns in the current LDS hymnal. Personally, I find no comfort or peace from these depressing odes.
One challenge with any words that get recorded is that the record stays in its original format while the language of the culture continues to evolve. Without anyone really designing or being in control of language, words and phrases come into being, develop new meanings, and drop from common usage on an ongoing basis.
We have all experienced generational differences in understanding of language. Our kids start throwing around terms or usages with which we are unfamiliar. A couple of years ago I heard a teenager say, "Man, that is sick!" From the tone of his voice I could tell that he was expressing approval. When my friends and I uttered the precise same phrase at that age, we meant that something was depraved or highly distasteful.
It happens the other way too. Older people use terms that the younger generation doesn't understand. They also user terms that are dated. Although the younger generation understands the term, they don't use it. Usually this means that the term will die out within a generation.
Nowhere is the example of time-framed linguistic alienation more clear than in scripture. The LDS Church uses the King James Version of the Bible. This version is noted for its beautiful prose and linguistic quality. It is felt by many that the KJV Bible preserves the original scripture in English better than other versions.
But the fact that the translation is more than 400 years old presents a difficulty for modern readers of the scripture. There are many cases where the phraseology differs so drastically from current language usage that it is very difficult to understand without special training. Some words have changed meaning so that some passages read by moderns can even appear to mean the exact opposite of their original intent.
A similar condition exists for hymn lyrics. As the language evolves, the phrases and words used in some hymns become unfamiliar to those singing the hymns nowadays. The problem can be compounded by the fact that hymn phrasing may vary from accepted sentence structure in order to achieve the lyrical qualities that make words work with music.
But hymns differ from scripture. While both hymns and scripture are meant for spiritual and moral edification, scripture is canonized while hymns are not (except for Psalms). Thus, it is far more acceptable to change the wording of hymns to meet currently common understanding than it is to alter scripture for the same reason. It is completely acceptable to write new hymns and stop using hymns, whereas, this isn't general the case with scripture.
Still, it isn't a simple thing for a church with thousands of congregations to switch hymnals. As I noted in last year's hymn post, the current LDS hymnal was published 26 years ago in 1985. The previous edition was published some 35 years earlier. It takes time and resources to change out millions of hymn books.
I opined to my son that it may not be many years before this will become a moot point. Given the rate of technological evolution, I can imagine a time not too distant when few new books are published in hard copy format. The ability to publish a new edition of a hymnal to thousands of meeting houses and millions of homes could be as simple as changing a file on a server.
Perhaps I'm too optimistic about the rate of technological adoption, if not about the rate of technological advance.
At any rate, I suspect that we're probably a decade away from a new edition of the LDS hymnal. I also suspect that when such a publication is released it will still include many hymns that I consider too archaic to be of much use. I'm also guessing that there will still be a smattering of numbers that are odd enough by modern standards that they end up never being seen or heard by the vast majority of church members.
Even when a new hymnal is released, I will continue to find solace, edification, and spiritual enlightenment through the hymns in the book. Sacred music will continue to speak to my soul in ways unmatched by other music.
Saturday, September 10, 2011
I Dropped My Total Cholesterol Nearly 300 mg By Diet Alone
Our medical system has morphed into a huge one-size-fits-all top-down system where frontline care providers are rewarded for pushing drugs. Doctors are increasingly herded into large conglomerates where treatments are guided by orthodoxies developed by an oligarchy and where punishment is meted out for operating outside of ‘guidelines’ that have become inviolable rules.
Physicians are not permitted to think outside the box. Is it any wonder that the alternative medicine industry in the U.S. continues to expand and flourish? What this tells us is that many feel ill served by the mainstream medical system.
A year and a half ago, I decided that I needed to do something different with my diet. Although I had eaten a challengingly healthy diet for years, I found my girth expanding. I had added nearly three inches around my waistline in as many years.
After being introduced to the low-carb lifestyle by a family member, I decided to give it a try. I described my efforts in four posts last summer (part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4). I had read horror stories about low-carb diets, but I found that the plan described in these posts allowed me to cut visceral fat rapidly. Not only that, after the first two weeks the plan was tasty and satisfying. Frankly, I can’t say that about my previous healthy dietary approaches.
All went well for about a year until I went in for my annual checkup. My cholesterol level had always been in the healthy range. I expected that total cholesterol might have risen 20-30 mg, since I had read that low-carb diets can increase the size of the LDL particles (without actually increasing their number). Large LDL particles don’t seem to cause much in the way of negative heart outcomes. Small LDL particles do.
Imagine my surprise when my total cholesterol came back at a whopping 446, with LDL at 383! My doctor couldn’t believe the results. He said that he didn’t think it was humanly possible for total cholesterol to jump 300 mg in one year. So he had me redo the test. The result was the same.
While low-carb proponents suggest that a rise in blood serum cholesterol is not dangerous, none of them are talking about a 300 mg rise. At most, they are talking about one-tenth of that. I’ve done a fair amount of study on cholesterol. By itself, it isn’t that strong of an indicator of imminent heart problems. But I figured that an outlandishly high reading can’t be good and I decided to do something about it.
I wasn’t about to go on cholesterol lowering drugs. I figured that my cholesterol had gone through the roof via diet alone, so it stood to reason that it could be lowered through diet alone. So I started doing some research.
Harkening back to the first paragraph in this post, I note that most frontline physicians don’t know squat about diet. The oligarchy has fed them the official line about what is healthy and what isn’t. They are required to promote that line. But few of them really have much clue about health management via diet.
I think part of the reason for this is that it is extraordinarily difficult to isolate diet as a factor in medical outcomes. A few very broad statements can somewhat safely be made, but diet simply isn’t a one-size-fits-all affair. We respond genetically differently to the same thing and diet is deeply intertwined with psychological and emotional responses that vary by person. The average low-carb dieter doesn’t experience a 300 mg increase in total cholesterol. But that obviously matters little to me because I did.
After some research, I found several diet variants that promised to lower cholesterol with a high fat diet. It would still be a low carb diet. Most of the fat would come from olives, olive oil, and tree nuts such as almonds, walnuts, and pecans. The nuts had to be mostly raw, although, some dry roasted nuts were acceptable. Most of the carbs would come from the nuts too, but one could also eat green leafy vegetables in abundance. Chicken breast, salmon, and tuna were among the staples as far as protein goes.
So I once again overhauled my diet. I didn’t give up on eggs. I usually had two boiled eggs daily. But the diet was overall much less satisfying than my previous diet. Basically, eating became somewhat of a utilitarian thing for me over the next two months. Frankly, there were a few times that I skipped meals because I preferred hunger to eating what was on my diet plan.
After two months of very strict eating, my weight stayed about the same but I added about an inch in waist girth. I was able to lift more weight in my regular weightlifting exercises in pretty much every muscle group, but I added no measurable bulk to my muscles. Finally the day arrived to do the fasting lipid panel once again. When the lab results came back, my total cholesterol was 164. My HDL, LDL, VLDL, and triglycerides were all in the optimum range.
Most doctors will tell you that the results I achieved are simply not possible without drug supplementation. Let me put this as succinctly as possible. THEY ARE WRONG! I have proven that one can drastically cut blood serum cholesterol in a relatively short period of time with diet alone. But it comes at a cost.
Thus, I am still left wondering what to do about my diet. I certainly don’t want to add any waist girth. I was more slender when I was eating tastier but higher cholesterol foods. I was also more psychologically and physically satisfied. But I’m not about to return to a 400+ total cholesterol reading.
Maybe I am stuck with the unpleasant fact that Mark Twain was right when he quipped, “The only way to keep your health is to eat what you don't want, drink what you don't like, and do what you'd rather not.”
It’s stuff like this that makes the eternal world look increasingly appealing.
Physicians are not permitted to think outside the box. Is it any wonder that the alternative medicine industry in the U.S. continues to expand and flourish? What this tells us is that many feel ill served by the mainstream medical system.
A year and a half ago, I decided that I needed to do something different with my diet. Although I had eaten a challengingly healthy diet for years, I found my girth expanding. I had added nearly three inches around my waistline in as many years.
After being introduced to the low-carb lifestyle by a family member, I decided to give it a try. I described my efforts in four posts last summer (part 1, part 2, part 3, part 4). I had read horror stories about low-carb diets, but I found that the plan described in these posts allowed me to cut visceral fat rapidly. Not only that, after the first two weeks the plan was tasty and satisfying. Frankly, I can’t say that about my previous healthy dietary approaches.
All went well for about a year until I went in for my annual checkup. My cholesterol level had always been in the healthy range. I expected that total cholesterol might have risen 20-30 mg, since I had read that low-carb diets can increase the size of the LDL particles (without actually increasing their number). Large LDL particles don’t seem to cause much in the way of negative heart outcomes. Small LDL particles do.
Imagine my surprise when my total cholesterol came back at a whopping 446, with LDL at 383! My doctor couldn’t believe the results. He said that he didn’t think it was humanly possible for total cholesterol to jump 300 mg in one year. So he had me redo the test. The result was the same.
While low-carb proponents suggest that a rise in blood serum cholesterol is not dangerous, none of them are talking about a 300 mg rise. At most, they are talking about one-tenth of that. I’ve done a fair amount of study on cholesterol. By itself, it isn’t that strong of an indicator of imminent heart problems. But I figured that an outlandishly high reading can’t be good and I decided to do something about it.
I wasn’t about to go on cholesterol lowering drugs. I figured that my cholesterol had gone through the roof via diet alone, so it stood to reason that it could be lowered through diet alone. So I started doing some research.
Harkening back to the first paragraph in this post, I note that most frontline physicians don’t know squat about diet. The oligarchy has fed them the official line about what is healthy and what isn’t. They are required to promote that line. But few of them really have much clue about health management via diet.
I think part of the reason for this is that it is extraordinarily difficult to isolate diet as a factor in medical outcomes. A few very broad statements can somewhat safely be made, but diet simply isn’t a one-size-fits-all affair. We respond genetically differently to the same thing and diet is deeply intertwined with psychological and emotional responses that vary by person. The average low-carb dieter doesn’t experience a 300 mg increase in total cholesterol. But that obviously matters little to me because I did.
After some research, I found several diet variants that promised to lower cholesterol with a high fat diet. It would still be a low carb diet. Most of the fat would come from olives, olive oil, and tree nuts such as almonds, walnuts, and pecans. The nuts had to be mostly raw, although, some dry roasted nuts were acceptable. Most of the carbs would come from the nuts too, but one could also eat green leafy vegetables in abundance. Chicken breast, salmon, and tuna were among the staples as far as protein goes.
So I once again overhauled my diet. I didn’t give up on eggs. I usually had two boiled eggs daily. But the diet was overall much less satisfying than my previous diet. Basically, eating became somewhat of a utilitarian thing for me over the next two months. Frankly, there were a few times that I skipped meals because I preferred hunger to eating what was on my diet plan.
After two months of very strict eating, my weight stayed about the same but I added about an inch in waist girth. I was able to lift more weight in my regular weightlifting exercises in pretty much every muscle group, but I added no measurable bulk to my muscles. Finally the day arrived to do the fasting lipid panel once again. When the lab results came back, my total cholesterol was 164. My HDL, LDL, VLDL, and triglycerides were all in the optimum range.
Most doctors will tell you that the results I achieved are simply not possible without drug supplementation. Let me put this as succinctly as possible. THEY ARE WRONG! I have proven that one can drastically cut blood serum cholesterol in a relatively short period of time with diet alone. But it comes at a cost.
Thus, I am still left wondering what to do about my diet. I certainly don’t want to add any waist girth. I was more slender when I was eating tastier but higher cholesterol foods. I was also more psychologically and physically satisfied. But I’m not about to return to a 400+ total cholesterol reading.
Maybe I am stuck with the unpleasant fact that Mark Twain was right when he quipped, “The only way to keep your health is to eat what you don't want, drink what you don't like, and do what you'd rather not.”
It’s stuff like this that makes the eternal world look increasingly appealing.
Sunday, September 04, 2011
Moving a Parent Out of Their Home of 50 Years
Mom had difficulty sleeping the night after first meeting with the realtor. She had known for years that she needed to get out of her home due to ongoing yard and home maintenance issues that now exceed her capacities (and interests). But contemplating the sheer amount of work involved in the project coupled with the emotional impact of leaving her home of five decades left Mom feeling overwhelmed.
A couple of days later we began the process of boxing up stuff and moving furniture to a storage unit. The realtor had explained that selling a home in a declining real estate market requires some different strategies than selling in an appreciating market — which is roughly the kind of market we had for two decades straight before it crashed.
First, we were told to remove all wall hangings and any non-fixed items that give the home personality, including religious icons and family photos. Next we were to take all furniture out of the house that Mom could live without for 90 days. We could leave essentials along with a few pieces that went against walls without taking much floor space.
The concept behind these measures is that the average homebuyer in a declining market is seeking to move up from something smaller, perhaps an apartment. Taking things out of the home makes it look larger. Removing things that give the home personality allows prospective buyers to ‘paint themselves into a somewhat empty canvas.’
The third element was to price the home just right. Realtors got used to overpricing homes when the market was appreciating. If you didn’t sell a home right away, you’d sell it a few months later when the market caught up to the asking price.
In a declining market it becomes difficult to reach the going market rate if you price the property too high at the outset. The longer the home remains on the market, the greater the disparity between the asking price and the market value. As the home fails to sell, the owner often drops the price every couple of months without ever catching up to the market.
For this reason, the realtor explained that it’s best to sell a home rapidly when the market is declining. He had done his homework. He laid out his case for pricing the home. But he also explained that if they didn’t see serious buyer interest within 10 days, it was a clear sign that we were asking too much.
After the initial work party, we continued to make trips to the storage unit with additional boxes and items. So the home looked fairly open by the time the first customers came to look.
Mom had a serious offer seven days after the realtor’s sign went up in front of the home. The prospective buyer was pre-qualified for the loan. That meant that everything could go pretty quickly.
We had a couple of weeks to consider options. During that time, Mom looked at a series of homes. She had considered moving to a location that was more centrally located to her various children. She found a lovely home in that area. But after much thought, she felt that it would ultimately be best to live closer to the area with which she is already familiar.
We then looked at every home in the target area that had a chance of meeting Mom’s criteria. Alas, none of them was quite right for Mom. As the date for moving out neared, Mom decided to temporarily stay with a family friend so that she could look for a new home at a more relaxed pace.
We had the final moving out party scheduled for last Saturday. Unfortunately, Mom’s older sister passed away earlier that week and the funeral was scheduled for Saturday. So we moved stuff on Friday. Some family members took time off work for that event.
During the week, several friends and family members had spent days working at Mom’s house boxing things up. In the evenings after work, I would go over and haul the boxes to the storage unit. This made the final moving event a little easier, as we were mainly left with appliances and larger pieces of furniture.
As it happened, that Friday was one of the hottest days of the year. We worked like the dickens to move stuff to the storage unit. One of the big jobs was clearing out the shed. We had concentrated on getting stuff out of the house over the previous month, but we had left the outside shed until the last moment.
Still, within seven hours, the home was cleared out. Everyone relinquished their keys to the place. We placed the keys on the kitchen counter, locked the door for the last time, and left the home where I had grown up.
I had expected to feel some kind of separation anxiety myself as we drove away from the home. Oddly, that didn’t happen. I guess I had already gone through that during the process of moving Mom out over the space of a month. I felt only the relief of a hard task finally being finished.
Mom hasn’t gone looking for homes for the past week. She wanted to give that a rest for a while. She will get back to house hunting soon.
On the plus side, this is a buyer’s market. On the downside, the home that meets all of Mom’s criteria doesn’t exist in the real world. Nor could it be built, since some of Mom’s desires conflict with each other. Mom will have to compromise with herself before she can settle on a new residence.
Frankly, I do not look forward to moving Mom into a new place. I look at the stuff in the storage unit and think to myself that there is no rational reason that a single person of Mom’s age should have even a third of that stuff. But it will all have to be moved out and handled.
Some of the stuff (probably a lot more than should) will go to Mom’s new place. Some will be sold. Some will be given away. And some will be thrown out. That is going to be a big project. The emotional attachment to things will make it harder than necessary. But perhaps having lived without some of these things for a while will allow Mom to realize which items she really needs and which she can live without.
A couple of days later we began the process of boxing up stuff and moving furniture to a storage unit. The realtor had explained that selling a home in a declining real estate market requires some different strategies than selling in an appreciating market — which is roughly the kind of market we had for two decades straight before it crashed.
First, we were told to remove all wall hangings and any non-fixed items that give the home personality, including religious icons and family photos. Next we were to take all furniture out of the house that Mom could live without for 90 days. We could leave essentials along with a few pieces that went against walls without taking much floor space.
The concept behind these measures is that the average homebuyer in a declining market is seeking to move up from something smaller, perhaps an apartment. Taking things out of the home makes it look larger. Removing things that give the home personality allows prospective buyers to ‘paint themselves into a somewhat empty canvas.’
The third element was to price the home just right. Realtors got used to overpricing homes when the market was appreciating. If you didn’t sell a home right away, you’d sell it a few months later when the market caught up to the asking price.
In a declining market it becomes difficult to reach the going market rate if you price the property too high at the outset. The longer the home remains on the market, the greater the disparity between the asking price and the market value. As the home fails to sell, the owner often drops the price every couple of months without ever catching up to the market.
For this reason, the realtor explained that it’s best to sell a home rapidly when the market is declining. He had done his homework. He laid out his case for pricing the home. But he also explained that if they didn’t see serious buyer interest within 10 days, it was a clear sign that we were asking too much.
After the initial work party, we continued to make trips to the storage unit with additional boxes and items. So the home looked fairly open by the time the first customers came to look.
Mom had a serious offer seven days after the realtor’s sign went up in front of the home. The prospective buyer was pre-qualified for the loan. That meant that everything could go pretty quickly.
We had a couple of weeks to consider options. During that time, Mom looked at a series of homes. She had considered moving to a location that was more centrally located to her various children. She found a lovely home in that area. But after much thought, she felt that it would ultimately be best to live closer to the area with which she is already familiar.
We then looked at every home in the target area that had a chance of meeting Mom’s criteria. Alas, none of them was quite right for Mom. As the date for moving out neared, Mom decided to temporarily stay with a family friend so that she could look for a new home at a more relaxed pace.
We had the final moving out party scheduled for last Saturday. Unfortunately, Mom’s older sister passed away earlier that week and the funeral was scheduled for Saturday. So we moved stuff on Friday. Some family members took time off work for that event.
During the week, several friends and family members had spent days working at Mom’s house boxing things up. In the evenings after work, I would go over and haul the boxes to the storage unit. This made the final moving event a little easier, as we were mainly left with appliances and larger pieces of furniture.
As it happened, that Friday was one of the hottest days of the year. We worked like the dickens to move stuff to the storage unit. One of the big jobs was clearing out the shed. We had concentrated on getting stuff out of the house over the previous month, but we had left the outside shed until the last moment.
Still, within seven hours, the home was cleared out. Everyone relinquished their keys to the place. We placed the keys on the kitchen counter, locked the door for the last time, and left the home where I had grown up.
I had expected to feel some kind of separation anxiety myself as we drove away from the home. Oddly, that didn’t happen. I guess I had already gone through that during the process of moving Mom out over the space of a month. I felt only the relief of a hard task finally being finished.
Mom hasn’t gone looking for homes for the past week. She wanted to give that a rest for a while. She will get back to house hunting soon.
On the plus side, this is a buyer’s market. On the downside, the home that meets all of Mom’s criteria doesn’t exist in the real world. Nor could it be built, since some of Mom’s desires conflict with each other. Mom will have to compromise with herself before she can settle on a new residence.
Frankly, I do not look forward to moving Mom into a new place. I look at the stuff in the storage unit and think to myself that there is no rational reason that a single person of Mom’s age should have even a third of that stuff. But it will all have to be moved out and handled.
Some of the stuff (probably a lot more than should) will go to Mom’s new place. Some will be sold. Some will be given away. And some will be thrown out. That is going to be a big project. The emotional attachment to things will make it harder than necessary. But perhaps having lived without some of these things for a while will allow Mom to realize which items she really needs and which she can live without.
Friday, August 19, 2011
Sending a Child Away to School
He stood there by himself looking kind of forlorn. I took one last glance over my shoulder at my incredibly smart, gifted, and talented son standing by a lamp post near the dorm that will be his home for the next nine months. The summer day was sunny and warm.
Despite the numbers of fellow university students and family members wandering around, my normally confident son looked lonely and unsure. Part of the problem is that none of his close friends (of which he has many) will be attending the same university. He had options to attend the universities where most of his friends are going, but none of those schools offered the kind of program in which my son is (at present) interested.
I had various mixed emotions as my wife and I walked to our vehicle. Despite my son's uncertainty, I was completely certain that he would be just fine. It never takes him long to find friends in new situations. I was pretty sure that he would start some great friendships before the evening was out.
For my part, I was in a hurry to get on the road. I knew that we'd be battling rush hour traffic part of the way and I had a commitment to keep at home. Besides, it's not as if my son is stuck on a remote campus. He's planning to come home over Labor Day weekend. Our regular course of activities will bring us close enough to see him at school from time to time as well.
Thinking of a similar situation from my younger days, I started to remember how I felt. I was a little homesick for the first few days. But I was soon so engulfed in my new duties that much of the uncertainty quickly faded. Sure, there were new and different things to deal with. But like almost everyone else, I quickly learned to cope. I am quite confident that my son's experience will be similar; perhaps even better.
Moving away from home into a university dormitory is a huge step in my son's young life. Moving a child out of our home was somewhat of a step for me too, but I was more focused on the tasks to which I need to attend over the next few days. Getting my son to the university and getting back home was one of the tasks, but hardly the only one that is significant.
I wrote a few weeks ago about my Mom putting her home of half a century on the market. We followed the realtor's advice. Mom got a credible offer on the home a week after the sign went in the front yard. That's a very rapid turn over in the current real estate market. The realtor obviously knows what he is doing.
Ever since getting the offer, Mom has been looking intensely at homes. She keeps changing her mind about what kind of home she should get. She actually made an offer on a beautiful home. I was thinking that she and Dad should have moved into a home like that eight years ago when they returned from their mission. Mom is still in pretty good shape for her age, but the home is likely too much for her to care for at present. Mom sensed this too. She ended up withdrawing her offer.
But we still have to get Mom moved out of her current home by the end of the month. We have moved a bit of stuff at a time to a storage unit. But there is still a fair amount of stuff that has to go. Since Mom hasn't decided on a new residence, we are making arrangements for her to live temporarily with family. That means sorting out what can go into storage and what Mom absolutely must take with her. Then when Mom decides where to live we will have to move everything again.
The situation with Mom is only one of the things that is keeping us hopping at present. There are so many end-of-summer and start-of-school events going on that we barely have time to breathe. Getting my son moved to the university turned into just another current in this huge stream of events.
I must say, however, that I am very proud of my son. He has worked hard in school. He starts at the university with a year and a half of college credit already under his belt. The entire floor of his dormitory is reserved for students that have been accepted into the university's honors program. Despite his academic focus, my son managed to enjoy social life in high school. I'm certain that this pattern will continue in his university life.
Despite the numbers of fellow university students and family members wandering around, my normally confident son looked lonely and unsure. Part of the problem is that none of his close friends (of which he has many) will be attending the same university. He had options to attend the universities where most of his friends are going, but none of those schools offered the kind of program in which my son is (at present) interested.
I had various mixed emotions as my wife and I walked to our vehicle. Despite my son's uncertainty, I was completely certain that he would be just fine. It never takes him long to find friends in new situations. I was pretty sure that he would start some great friendships before the evening was out.
For my part, I was in a hurry to get on the road. I knew that we'd be battling rush hour traffic part of the way and I had a commitment to keep at home. Besides, it's not as if my son is stuck on a remote campus. He's planning to come home over Labor Day weekend. Our regular course of activities will bring us close enough to see him at school from time to time as well.
Thinking of a similar situation from my younger days, I started to remember how I felt. I was a little homesick for the first few days. But I was soon so engulfed in my new duties that much of the uncertainty quickly faded. Sure, there were new and different things to deal with. But like almost everyone else, I quickly learned to cope. I am quite confident that my son's experience will be similar; perhaps even better.
Moving away from home into a university dormitory is a huge step in my son's young life. Moving a child out of our home was somewhat of a step for me too, but I was more focused on the tasks to which I need to attend over the next few days. Getting my son to the university and getting back home was one of the tasks, but hardly the only one that is significant.
I wrote a few weeks ago about my Mom putting her home of half a century on the market. We followed the realtor's advice. Mom got a credible offer on the home a week after the sign went in the front yard. That's a very rapid turn over in the current real estate market. The realtor obviously knows what he is doing.
Ever since getting the offer, Mom has been looking intensely at homes. She keeps changing her mind about what kind of home she should get. She actually made an offer on a beautiful home. I was thinking that she and Dad should have moved into a home like that eight years ago when they returned from their mission. Mom is still in pretty good shape for her age, but the home is likely too much for her to care for at present. Mom sensed this too. She ended up withdrawing her offer.
But we still have to get Mom moved out of her current home by the end of the month. We have moved a bit of stuff at a time to a storage unit. But there is still a fair amount of stuff that has to go. Since Mom hasn't decided on a new residence, we are making arrangements for her to live temporarily with family. That means sorting out what can go into storage and what Mom absolutely must take with her. Then when Mom decides where to live we will have to move everything again.
The situation with Mom is only one of the things that is keeping us hopping at present. There are so many end-of-summer and start-of-school events going on that we barely have time to breathe. Getting my son moved to the university turned into just another current in this huge stream of events.
I must say, however, that I am very proud of my son. He has worked hard in school. He starts at the university with a year and a half of college credit already under his belt. The entire floor of his dormitory is reserved for students that have been accepted into the university's honors program. Despite his academic focus, my son managed to enjoy social life in high school. I'm certain that this pattern will continue in his university life.
Wednesday, August 17, 2011
Impeachment Is for Serious Government Criminals
I cringed when I read a post by a local citizen suggesting that the mayor of our city should be impeached for his administration's response to the current public works facility controversy. The citizen had discovered that local officials in North Ogden can neither be impeached nor subjected to a recall election. They can, however, be removed through a judicial process if they have committed crimes.
The citizen's writings reminded me once again that many do not understand the purpose or process of impeachment. Moreover, few seem to grasp the gravity of the matter and the long-term damage it wreaks on the political system.
In short, impeachment is for actual criminals. For that matter, it is for those that commit relatively serious crimes — crimes that most citizens think should disqualify the person from holing office. Impeachment is not a tool to be used at a whim to attack one's political opponents.
Impeachment is only the first step in a process. Impeachment is similar to a grand jury indicting a suspected criminal. It is like pressing formal charges in a case. No legal consequences apply unless the impeached individual is convicted. And then the only consequence that can apply is removal from office and disqualification from holding office. (Although criminal and civil suits may also be brought through regular legal channels.)
At the federal level, a sitting U.S. official must be impeached by the House of Representatives. Members of the house vote on each point in a resolution. Only those points that receive a majority of votes are included in the impeachment.
The process next moves to the U.S. Senate, where members from the House of Representatives act as the prosecution. The impeached official is allowed to have legal defenders. Conviction is achieved only when at least a two-thirds majority votes to sustain at least one of the charges brought by the House of Representatives.
The Founders obviously intended it to be very difficult to achieve conviction because of the serious nature of the matter. Impeachment is so serious that at the federal level, only 19 U.S. officials have ever been impeached. Only eight of those were ultimately removed from office, although, three others resigned. The others were acquitted. (The only two U.S. Presidents to be impeached, Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, were among the acquitted number.)
The citizen that liked the idea of impeaching our mayor could not say that the mayor had committed any crime whatsoever. As noted in my previous post, it seems an awful lot like the mayor is thumbing his nose at a significant number of his constituents. This may be unwise political behavior, but it is hardly illegal.
When an official holding a significant political office is impeached, it generates a high level of public ill will. It discredits our system in the minds of many citizens. Of course, if the individual has committed notable and widely condemned crimes, it is certainly in the best interest of the people for impeachment to go forward.
But short of this standard, the ballot box is the best place for ousting political officials that we feel should not hold an office. Even after acrimonious campaigns, the regular pattern is for power to be transferred in an orderly and peaceable manner when an incumbent loses. Although some may harbor ill will toward and refuse to support the winner, most quickly recognize the winner's legitimacy.
Impeachment, especially of chief executives of governmental entities, tends to cause negative ripples throughout the system that impact the public psyche for entire generations. That is one reason that impeachment should be rare enough to be reserved for fairly serious crimes.
Some of my city's residents are understandably upset about the mayor's handling of the public works facility issue. Given that Mayor Harris' term expires on 1/1/2014, the citizens will have to put up with him for at least 28+ months. Two years from now public passion on this matter may have dropped enough to allow the mayor to cruise to an easy re-election. Thus, it is also understandable that the mayor's opponents would like to see him ousted sooner rather than trying to beat him at the ballot box later.
But even if impeachment were an option in our city, nothing that we know of that the mayor has done rises even to the minimum standards required for impeachment, let alone the higher de facto standards that have evolved over the years. Unless the mayor's opponents know something I don't know, the mayor is at no risk of being removed through a judicial proceeding.
The mayor's opponents should give up on trying to find a way to remove him from office before the end of his term. They should focus instead on the upcoming election where they have a chance of ousting three council members that support the mayor's actions. Then they should cultivate a candidate that has a chance of beating the mayor in 2013. They have two years to get that campaign put together.
In other words, the mayor's opponents should take the long view and focus their efforts on activities that have a plausible chance of succeeding instead of angrily lashing out in ways that will produce no positive political results.
The citizen's writings reminded me once again that many do not understand the purpose or process of impeachment. Moreover, few seem to grasp the gravity of the matter and the long-term damage it wreaks on the political system.
In short, impeachment is for actual criminals. For that matter, it is for those that commit relatively serious crimes — crimes that most citizens think should disqualify the person from holing office. Impeachment is not a tool to be used at a whim to attack one's political opponents.
Impeachment is only the first step in a process. Impeachment is similar to a grand jury indicting a suspected criminal. It is like pressing formal charges in a case. No legal consequences apply unless the impeached individual is convicted. And then the only consequence that can apply is removal from office and disqualification from holding office. (Although criminal and civil suits may also be brought through regular legal channels.)
At the federal level, a sitting U.S. official must be impeached by the House of Representatives. Members of the house vote on each point in a resolution. Only those points that receive a majority of votes are included in the impeachment.
The process next moves to the U.S. Senate, where members from the House of Representatives act as the prosecution. The impeached official is allowed to have legal defenders. Conviction is achieved only when at least a two-thirds majority votes to sustain at least one of the charges brought by the House of Representatives.
The Founders obviously intended it to be very difficult to achieve conviction because of the serious nature of the matter. Impeachment is so serious that at the federal level, only 19 U.S. officials have ever been impeached. Only eight of those were ultimately removed from office, although, three others resigned. The others were acquitted. (The only two U.S. Presidents to be impeached, Andrew Johnson and Bill Clinton, were among the acquitted number.)
The citizen that liked the idea of impeaching our mayor could not say that the mayor had committed any crime whatsoever. As noted in my previous post, it seems an awful lot like the mayor is thumbing his nose at a significant number of his constituents. This may be unwise political behavior, but it is hardly illegal.
When an official holding a significant political office is impeached, it generates a high level of public ill will. It discredits our system in the minds of many citizens. Of course, if the individual has committed notable and widely condemned crimes, it is certainly in the best interest of the people for impeachment to go forward.
But short of this standard, the ballot box is the best place for ousting political officials that we feel should not hold an office. Even after acrimonious campaigns, the regular pattern is for power to be transferred in an orderly and peaceable manner when an incumbent loses. Although some may harbor ill will toward and refuse to support the winner, most quickly recognize the winner's legitimacy.
Impeachment, especially of chief executives of governmental entities, tends to cause negative ripples throughout the system that impact the public psyche for entire generations. That is one reason that impeachment should be rare enough to be reserved for fairly serious crimes.
Some of my city's residents are understandably upset about the mayor's handling of the public works facility issue. Given that Mayor Harris' term expires on 1/1/2014, the citizens will have to put up with him for at least 28+ months. Two years from now public passion on this matter may have dropped enough to allow the mayor to cruise to an easy re-election. Thus, it is also understandable that the mayor's opponents would like to see him ousted sooner rather than trying to beat him at the ballot box later.
But even if impeachment were an option in our city, nothing that we know of that the mayor has done rises even to the minimum standards required for impeachment, let alone the higher de facto standards that have evolved over the years. Unless the mayor's opponents know something I don't know, the mayor is at no risk of being removed through a judicial proceeding.
The mayor's opponents should give up on trying to find a way to remove him from office before the end of his term. They should focus instead on the upcoming election where they have a chance of ousting three council members that support the mayor's actions. Then they should cultivate a candidate that has a chance of beating the mayor in 2013. They have two years to get that campaign put together.
In other words, the mayor's opponents should take the long view and focus their efforts on activities that have a plausible chance of succeeding instead of angrily lashing out in ways that will produce no positive political results.
Tuesday, August 16, 2011
North Ogden City to Citizen Taxpayers: Shut Up and Pay Up!
North Ogden City leadership has been angling for a new public works facility for several years now. It seems, however, that anything they do in this vein ends up being unpopular enough to draw citizen ire. The current situation seems like another cycle in that pattern.
The current public works facility is getting rundown. The two-acre lot where it has sat for decades is too small for current and future needs. Much of the equipment is exposed to the elements year round. Due to covered space limitations, employees often work on equipment out in the weather throughout the year. I believe that most city residents agree that something needs to be done about the situation.
A couple of years ago the city named a site for a new public works facility on property already owned by the city. But it was hard against a residential area and far from the city's business/industry areas. Opposition to the site caused the city to eventually back down.
Then a few months ago it was announced that the city would locate the facility on another piece of property owned by the city. It seems that city leaders were unaware that the property had been sold to the city at a greatly reduced price by a local family under the premise that it would only be used as a public park. Some city leaders tried to push the city's case, noting that the city was not technically legally obligated to honor the 12-year-old agreement. In the end, the city backed down once again.
Some residents were unhappy about the process. It appeared to them that city leadership had deliberately worked out the details under the public radar in an effort to prevent public input.
Many citizens were surprised when city leaders recently voted to bond for $10 million to construct a new public works facility. Opponents have noted that adequate facilities for cities of a similar size have recently been built for less than $2 million. When city leaders got wind of opposition being raised to the bond effort, they pushed up the vote on the matter. It passed the city council 4-1.
However, the city did hold a public hearing on the matter after the fact. This hearing was attended by over 300 people, most of whom were opposed to the size of the bond. While governments throughout the U.S. are struggling to reduce debt and expenditures, it is as if North Ogden's leadership is thinking, "What an awesome time to increase debt and taxes!" (Disguising the taxes as utility payments does not alter their basic nature.)
City leaders became aware at the meeting that some residents had started a petition drive to get the bond measure put on November's ballot. Last Friday, sponsoring citizens presented the petition to the city. It had about 3,000 signatures, which represents one-sixth of all residents and about a third of registered voters. I should note that two of the petition drive sponsors have filed to run for city council this fall. Yesterday the city filed a lawsuit against the petitioners specifically naming the two sponsoring city council candidates as defendants.
The city attorney says that the city finds at least 10 legal defects with the petition and the petition process (see Standard.net article). Of the statute about public petitions the attorney says, "The law is quite technical." That's code for saying that the law is designed to prevent citizen input. The lawyer basically says that the citizens have no recourse at this point and that the city can move ahead with the bond even if a significant number of citizens are opposed to it.
One of the candidate defendants in the lawsuit makes it clear that this is not about technicalities surrounding the petition. It is about city leaders paying attention to the citizens they supposedly represent.
I have stayed somewhat aloof from all of the wrangling surrounding the public works facility. I did not sign the petition, nor have I offered support to any candidate for a city leadership position. The U.S., its states, and local governments operate under a republican form of government. The Founders intended this to prevent or at least ameliorate the worst government abuses.
The founders recognized the folly in democratic forms of government, which tend to lead to tyranny of the majority. In general, it seems to me that creating public policy by popular vote of the citizenry tends to produce far worse policy than political deal making among elected politicians.
But I also believe that citizens have a right to petition their government for redress of grievances. They have a right to be heard by those elected to represent them. In a republic, elected officials are the servants of the people, not vice versa.
In this particular case, the petitioners are simply asking that those that will have to pay increased taxes for the $10 million bond be allowed to vote up or down on the matter. The petitioners are in no way assured of what the outcome of such a vote would be. They just want the taxpayers to have a more direct say in the matter.
Any lawyer worth his salt should be able to find technical fault with any public petition. That's really not the issue here. The issue is whether one-third of the city's voters should be ignored. Any city leader that demonstrates such an attitude deserves to be booted out of office.
Frankly, the city's actions smack of abuse of power. Whether the elected officials and city employees involved see it this way or not, they should recognize how it looks to the public at large.
Three city council seats are up for election this fall. The primary is less than a month away. It will be interesting to see how the incumbents fare. They have just handed a motivated opposition an issue that will be fire in the belly for the opposition's supporters. They have elevated two challenging candidates to celebrity status.
I note that four years ago when the city held a primary election for these same three council seats, only 918 voters bothered to show up. If the petition sponsors can leverage a goodly portion of the 3,000 voters that signed the petition, they should have no problem ousting the incumbent council members.
Since city leaders are treating the petitioners like their opinions are unimportant, the best avenue left to them is at the ballot box. Ousting council incumbents would send a strong message to the remaining city leadership. It may be the only message they can understand at this point.
I may be miscalculating the level of ire among voters. In fact, the most likely scenario would be for the primary election to draw only marginally more voters than did the primary election of four years ago. It is also likely that the broad field of challengers will dilute the opposition vote enough to allow the incumbents to prevail. Much will come down to how well the challengers leverage this situation to their benefit.
Despite the fact that I count two of the incumbent council members as personal friends, I have to say that I would like to see all three incumbents lose in the primary election. It seems to me that our city leadership needs to be taught a lesson that cannot be ignored.
The current public works facility is getting rundown. The two-acre lot where it has sat for decades is too small for current and future needs. Much of the equipment is exposed to the elements year round. Due to covered space limitations, employees often work on equipment out in the weather throughout the year. I believe that most city residents agree that something needs to be done about the situation.
A couple of years ago the city named a site for a new public works facility on property already owned by the city. But it was hard against a residential area and far from the city's business/industry areas. Opposition to the site caused the city to eventually back down.
Then a few months ago it was announced that the city would locate the facility on another piece of property owned by the city. It seems that city leaders were unaware that the property had been sold to the city at a greatly reduced price by a local family under the premise that it would only be used as a public park. Some city leaders tried to push the city's case, noting that the city was not technically legally obligated to honor the 12-year-old agreement. In the end, the city backed down once again.
Some residents were unhappy about the process. It appeared to them that city leadership had deliberately worked out the details under the public radar in an effort to prevent public input.
Many citizens were surprised when city leaders recently voted to bond for $10 million to construct a new public works facility. Opponents have noted that adequate facilities for cities of a similar size have recently been built for less than $2 million. When city leaders got wind of opposition being raised to the bond effort, they pushed up the vote on the matter. It passed the city council 4-1.
However, the city did hold a public hearing on the matter after the fact. This hearing was attended by over 300 people, most of whom were opposed to the size of the bond. While governments throughout the U.S. are struggling to reduce debt and expenditures, it is as if North Ogden's leadership is thinking, "What an awesome time to increase debt and taxes!" (Disguising the taxes as utility payments does not alter their basic nature.)
City leaders became aware at the meeting that some residents had started a petition drive to get the bond measure put on November's ballot. Last Friday, sponsoring citizens presented the petition to the city. It had about 3,000 signatures, which represents one-sixth of all residents and about a third of registered voters. I should note that two of the petition drive sponsors have filed to run for city council this fall. Yesterday the city filed a lawsuit against the petitioners specifically naming the two sponsoring city council candidates as defendants.
The city attorney says that the city finds at least 10 legal defects with the petition and the petition process (see Standard.net article). Of the statute about public petitions the attorney says, "The law is quite technical." That's code for saying that the law is designed to prevent citizen input. The lawyer basically says that the citizens have no recourse at this point and that the city can move ahead with the bond even if a significant number of citizens are opposed to it.
One of the candidate defendants in the lawsuit makes it clear that this is not about technicalities surrounding the petition. It is about city leaders paying attention to the citizens they supposedly represent.
I have stayed somewhat aloof from all of the wrangling surrounding the public works facility. I did not sign the petition, nor have I offered support to any candidate for a city leadership position. The U.S., its states, and local governments operate under a republican form of government. The Founders intended this to prevent or at least ameliorate the worst government abuses.
The founders recognized the folly in democratic forms of government, which tend to lead to tyranny of the majority. In general, it seems to me that creating public policy by popular vote of the citizenry tends to produce far worse policy than political deal making among elected politicians.
But I also believe that citizens have a right to petition their government for redress of grievances. They have a right to be heard by those elected to represent them. In a republic, elected officials are the servants of the people, not vice versa.
In this particular case, the petitioners are simply asking that those that will have to pay increased taxes for the $10 million bond be allowed to vote up or down on the matter. The petitioners are in no way assured of what the outcome of such a vote would be. They just want the taxpayers to have a more direct say in the matter.
Any lawyer worth his salt should be able to find technical fault with any public petition. That's really not the issue here. The issue is whether one-third of the city's voters should be ignored. Any city leader that demonstrates such an attitude deserves to be booted out of office.
Frankly, the city's actions smack of abuse of power. Whether the elected officials and city employees involved see it this way or not, they should recognize how it looks to the public at large.
Three city council seats are up for election this fall. The primary is less than a month away. It will be interesting to see how the incumbents fare. They have just handed a motivated opposition an issue that will be fire in the belly for the opposition's supporters. They have elevated two challenging candidates to celebrity status.
I note that four years ago when the city held a primary election for these same three council seats, only 918 voters bothered to show up. If the petition sponsors can leverage a goodly portion of the 3,000 voters that signed the petition, they should have no problem ousting the incumbent council members.
Since city leaders are treating the petitioners like their opinions are unimportant, the best avenue left to them is at the ballot box. Ousting council incumbents would send a strong message to the remaining city leadership. It may be the only message they can understand at this point.
I may be miscalculating the level of ire among voters. In fact, the most likely scenario would be for the primary election to draw only marginally more voters than did the primary election of four years ago. It is also likely that the broad field of challengers will dilute the opposition vote enough to allow the incumbents to prevail. Much will come down to how well the challengers leverage this situation to their benefit.
Despite the fact that I count two of the incumbent council members as personal friends, I have to say that I would like to see all three incumbents lose in the primary election. It seems to me that our city leadership needs to be taught a lesson that cannot be ignored.
Saturday, July 30, 2011
Humans Judging God's Performance
I'm not quite sure what to make of the poll reported in this KSL article that attempts to assess the respondents' opinions of God's performance. The Democratic polling firm Public Policy Polling reports that 52% of respondents approve, 9% disapprove, and 40% aren't sure.
I haven't looked into the sampling methods, so I'm not sure exactly how PPP derived its results. But it seems to me that the entire premise of the question denotes a profound misunderstanding of the nature of God.
Let me qualify that. I'm speaking mainly of monotheism. I have too little experience with polytheism to address the nature of the human-divine relationship under that philosophy. But since the vast majority of Americans adhere to some form of monotheism, it seems safe to assume that most of the poll's respondents do so as well.
Most monotheistic philosophies portray Deity as omniscient and omnipotent. In other words, God comprehends all that can be known in the universe and is simultaneously all powerful.
Given this, how is it that humans — who by nature are severely limited in their grasp of knowledge and ability to control themselves, let alone the universe — can even assume that it is appropriate to judge God?
Most monotheistic philosophies teach that our mortal lives are but a tiny fragment of our eternal existence. Let's bring this down to a more understandable level. If all you knew about a movie director was 15 seconds of one of the films he directed, how appropriate would it be to judge him and the entire body of his life's work?
The question is not whether we approve of God's performance; it is whether we accept God. Having accepted God, the question becomes whether God approves of us — whether we are striving to adhere to the commandments he gives us because of his love for us, with our everlasting joy being the object.
Every poll has some kind of agenda behind it. It's not clear to me what PPP's agenda is with this particular poll. Maybe they're just goading people. But it seems clear that many of the respondents are confused about the basic nature of their relationship to God.
I haven't looked into the sampling methods, so I'm not sure exactly how PPP derived its results. But it seems to me that the entire premise of the question denotes a profound misunderstanding of the nature of God.
Let me qualify that. I'm speaking mainly of monotheism. I have too little experience with polytheism to address the nature of the human-divine relationship under that philosophy. But since the vast majority of Americans adhere to some form of monotheism, it seems safe to assume that most of the poll's respondents do so as well.
Most monotheistic philosophies portray Deity as omniscient and omnipotent. In other words, God comprehends all that can be known in the universe and is simultaneously all powerful.
Given this, how is it that humans — who by nature are severely limited in their grasp of knowledge and ability to control themselves, let alone the universe — can even assume that it is appropriate to judge God?
Most monotheistic philosophies teach that our mortal lives are but a tiny fragment of our eternal existence. Let's bring this down to a more understandable level. If all you knew about a movie director was 15 seconds of one of the films he directed, how appropriate would it be to judge him and the entire body of his life's work?
The question is not whether we approve of God's performance; it is whether we accept God. Having accepted God, the question becomes whether God approves of us — whether we are striving to adhere to the commandments he gives us because of his love for us, with our everlasting joy being the object.
Every poll has some kind of agenda behind it. It's not clear to me what PPP's agenda is with this particular poll. Maybe they're just goading people. But it seems clear that many of the respondents are confused about the basic nature of their relationship to God.
Thursday, July 28, 2011
Stuff Addiction
A week and a half ago our family embarked on an adventure that has been difficult and challenging for all involved: getting ready to sell my Mom's home.
After living in apartments for the first few years of their marriage, Mom and Dad arranged to have a starter home built. The idea was to live in the home for about a decade before moving into something nicer. That was nearly five decades ago.
Every time my parents thought about moving out of the home, something came up. At the 10 year mark, some of Dad's family came from Germany and spent the summer with us. My parents felt it necessary to take them to many tourist destinations in the region. They also felt it necessary to install a central A/C unit because my German relatives wouldn't be used to the arid Utah summer climate. All of that ate up the money my folks had hoped to use toward a new home.
Within a few years after that came a number of missions, weddings, and helping young adults get started in life. That consumed excess funds that might have helped buy a new house.
Eventually my parents served a mission. Although they didn't want to live in the same house when they returned, there were so many things to do to get ready for the mission that they couldn't bear to even think about trying to sell the home at that time. Besides, they let one of my siblings live in it rent free for the time they were gone.
By the time Mom and Dad could think about getting into a new home, their dwelling needs had changed significantly. They looked at homes, but they had difficulty achieving a unified vision of what kind of home they needed. When Dad's health went downhill, any thought of moving was out of the question.
Dad made me promise on his deathbed that I would get Mom out of that house and get her into something more suitable. In the three years since then, Mom has halfheartedly looked at new homes. She has repeated over and over that she can't keep up with the current home's maintenance needs. But she has never gotten serious about the matter.
Something has changed this summer. Dad was very handy. He did many upgrades to the home over the years. For its age and type it looks nice and is in pretty good condition. But Dad also enjoyed creating features that ostensibly would require maintenance within a few years. I think Dad enjoyed having to re-work these features after a while.
But Dad's not here anymore. I did not inherit Dad's handyman gene. One of my brothers did, but he lives half an hour away and has his own property to care for. Mom has been reluctant to hire out the work. The upshot is that nothing gets done and Mom feels oppressed by the ever increasing load of projects crying for attention.
A few weeks ago Mom started talking about selling the home once again. I admit that I was shocked when she actually called a real estate profession and asked to meet with him. I attended the meeting at Mom's request.
It is no secret that the northern Utah home market is in the tank. There are lots of properties on the market right now and prices are in a declining trend. Many homes remain on the market for months and even years without selling. But this fellow has demonstrated his ability to sell homes of all kinds even in a poor market. It all comes down to pricing and aggressive marketing work.
The starting price the realtor suggested seemed pretty low. But he had done his homework. He carefully laid out the case for his suggestion, backing it up with ample research. He even said that it may be necessary to go even lower than this price to sell in a reasonable amount of time.
Selling homes in a declining market requires a different approach, the realtor explained. He said that we needed to move absolutely everything out of the house that Mom didn't need within the next 90 days. We were also told to de-personalize the home so that prospective buyers wouldn't be influenced by my folks' decor choices. Prospective buyers need a relatively blank canvas onto which they can paint themselves. This meant taking down nearly all wall hangings.
We were also instructed to get most of the furniture out of the house. Any furniture that remained was to take as little floor space as possible.
Dutifully, we began boxing up stuff and moving it to a storage unit last Thursday. We did a lot more work on Friday. I brought a moving van on Saturday and many family members spent many hours hauling the larger items to the storage unit. I was grateful for the Sunday break, but we were back at it on Monday. We ended up getting a second storage unit and moving some of the stuff from the first unit in there, while adding more stuff.
It turns out that 50 years of living in one place can result in significant stuff buildup.
As we have moved things into the storage units I have thought about how many of these things will never go to Mom's new home, regardless of what it ends up looking like or how big it is. I see five classes of stuff:
We have continued the project throughout this week, but at a slower pace. I think the home is finally ready to show. But it has been a heck of a lot of work. (And there will still be a whole lot more work to do to clear out the home when it finally sells.)
But the work has only been a portion of the challenge. The emotional toll on Mom has been significant. Mom says that she realizes that this is necessary. She has worked very hard this past week. But the emotional turmoil of thinking about moving out of her home and neighborhood (a place she loves among people she loves) has been difficult. All in all, I think Mom has handled the situation quite admirably.
As we have worked to move stuff out of Mom's place, I have heard family member after family member remark that they have to go home and start de-junking. We all said it many times. But we likely won't do it. Life is busy. De-junking isn't fun. We tend to put off that kind of thing until we're forced into it.
Right now my wife and I envision a day when we become empty-nesters (or nearly empty-nesters). I have a fantasy about leisurely taking weeks and months to de-junk our home at that distant future date, and then putting the home up for sale after months of careful preparation. We would then move into something more suitable for empty-nesters with a whole lot less stuff than we have now. I doubt it will work out like that in real life.
During this moving project I have reflected on why people in our culture tend to accumulate so much stuff. Do we acquire and hold onto stuff in some kind of vain attempt to validate our existence? You know, "I have substance, so I am substantial. I have stuff to prove that I exist—to prove that I matter."
Why did I put my old electric shaver on the shelf instead of throwing it away when I got a new one last month? True, it isn't completely dead. But it's pretty shot. Why didn't I throw it away? If I don't do so soon, it will be among the myriad things I look at when we eventually move from our current home and wonder why I kept it around all those years.
Years ago I came to the conclusion that everything I own owns a piece of me. Not only does it take up space, it takes my time. It takes energy just to think about it and to categorize it. (I am remembering an old toilet seat that I replaced years ago but that is still in the crawl space under the stairs.) Even that owns a little piece of me.
The idea, I guess, is to keep only stuff that comes out good on the cost-benefit scale, and to get rid of everything else. Since the factors in such an analysis change as our lives change, it takes energy to undertake that process as well. I guess it's the cost of de-junking that keeps me from doing it.
Maybe I will live to regret that.
After living in apartments for the first few years of their marriage, Mom and Dad arranged to have a starter home built. The idea was to live in the home for about a decade before moving into something nicer. That was nearly five decades ago.
Every time my parents thought about moving out of the home, something came up. At the 10 year mark, some of Dad's family came from Germany and spent the summer with us. My parents felt it necessary to take them to many tourist destinations in the region. They also felt it necessary to install a central A/C unit because my German relatives wouldn't be used to the arid Utah summer climate. All of that ate up the money my folks had hoped to use toward a new home.
Within a few years after that came a number of missions, weddings, and helping young adults get started in life. That consumed excess funds that might have helped buy a new house.
Eventually my parents served a mission. Although they didn't want to live in the same house when they returned, there were so many things to do to get ready for the mission that they couldn't bear to even think about trying to sell the home at that time. Besides, they let one of my siblings live in it rent free for the time they were gone.
By the time Mom and Dad could think about getting into a new home, their dwelling needs had changed significantly. They looked at homes, but they had difficulty achieving a unified vision of what kind of home they needed. When Dad's health went downhill, any thought of moving was out of the question.
Dad made me promise on his deathbed that I would get Mom out of that house and get her into something more suitable. In the three years since then, Mom has halfheartedly looked at new homes. She has repeated over and over that she can't keep up with the current home's maintenance needs. But she has never gotten serious about the matter.
Something has changed this summer. Dad was very handy. He did many upgrades to the home over the years. For its age and type it looks nice and is in pretty good condition. But Dad also enjoyed creating features that ostensibly would require maintenance within a few years. I think Dad enjoyed having to re-work these features after a while.
But Dad's not here anymore. I did not inherit Dad's handyman gene. One of my brothers did, but he lives half an hour away and has his own property to care for. Mom has been reluctant to hire out the work. The upshot is that nothing gets done and Mom feels oppressed by the ever increasing load of projects crying for attention.
A few weeks ago Mom started talking about selling the home once again. I admit that I was shocked when she actually called a real estate profession and asked to meet with him. I attended the meeting at Mom's request.
It is no secret that the northern Utah home market is in the tank. There are lots of properties on the market right now and prices are in a declining trend. Many homes remain on the market for months and even years without selling. But this fellow has demonstrated his ability to sell homes of all kinds even in a poor market. It all comes down to pricing and aggressive marketing work.
The starting price the realtor suggested seemed pretty low. But he had done his homework. He carefully laid out the case for his suggestion, backing it up with ample research. He even said that it may be necessary to go even lower than this price to sell in a reasonable amount of time.
Selling homes in a declining market requires a different approach, the realtor explained. He said that we needed to move absolutely everything out of the house that Mom didn't need within the next 90 days. We were also told to de-personalize the home so that prospective buyers wouldn't be influenced by my folks' decor choices. Prospective buyers need a relatively blank canvas onto which they can paint themselves. This meant taking down nearly all wall hangings.
We were also instructed to get most of the furniture out of the house. Any furniture that remained was to take as little floor space as possible.
Dutifully, we began boxing up stuff and moving it to a storage unit last Thursday. We did a lot more work on Friday. I brought a moving van on Saturday and many family members spent many hours hauling the larger items to the storage unit. I was grateful for the Sunday break, but we were back at it on Monday. We ended up getting a second storage unit and moving some of the stuff from the first unit in there, while adding more stuff.
It turns out that 50 years of living in one place can result in significant stuff buildup.
As we have moved things into the storage units I have thought about how many of these things will never go to Mom's new home, regardless of what it ends up looking like or how big it is. I see five classes of stuff:
- Stuff that should be thrown away.
- Stuff that is of marginal quality and utility.
- Stuff that is nice but that Mom will never use again.
- Stuff that Mom actually needs.
- Stuff that Mom will keep for mainly sentimental reasons.
We have continued the project throughout this week, but at a slower pace. I think the home is finally ready to show. But it has been a heck of a lot of work. (And there will still be a whole lot more work to do to clear out the home when it finally sells.)
But the work has only been a portion of the challenge. The emotional toll on Mom has been significant. Mom says that she realizes that this is necessary. She has worked very hard this past week. But the emotional turmoil of thinking about moving out of her home and neighborhood (a place she loves among people she loves) has been difficult. All in all, I think Mom has handled the situation quite admirably.
As we have worked to move stuff out of Mom's place, I have heard family member after family member remark that they have to go home and start de-junking. We all said it many times. But we likely won't do it. Life is busy. De-junking isn't fun. We tend to put off that kind of thing until we're forced into it.
Right now my wife and I envision a day when we become empty-nesters (or nearly empty-nesters). I have a fantasy about leisurely taking weeks and months to de-junk our home at that distant future date, and then putting the home up for sale after months of careful preparation. We would then move into something more suitable for empty-nesters with a whole lot less stuff than we have now. I doubt it will work out like that in real life.
During this moving project I have reflected on why people in our culture tend to accumulate so much stuff. Do we acquire and hold onto stuff in some kind of vain attempt to validate our existence? You know, "I have substance, so I am substantial. I have stuff to prove that I exist—to prove that I matter."
Why did I put my old electric shaver on the shelf instead of throwing it away when I got a new one last month? True, it isn't completely dead. But it's pretty shot. Why didn't I throw it away? If I don't do so soon, it will be among the myriad things I look at when we eventually move from our current home and wonder why I kept it around all those years.
Years ago I came to the conclusion that everything I own owns a piece of me. Not only does it take up space, it takes my time. It takes energy just to think about it and to categorize it. (I am remembering an old toilet seat that I replaced years ago but that is still in the crawl space under the stairs.) Even that owns a little piece of me.
The idea, I guess, is to keep only stuff that comes out good on the cost-benefit scale, and to get rid of everything else. Since the factors in such an analysis change as our lives change, it takes energy to undertake that process as well. I guess it's the cost of de-junking that keeps me from doing it.
Maybe I will live to regret that.
Friday, July 08, 2011
Laid Off!
Three months ago I was laid off from the job I had worked at for more than 11 years. It wasn’t a huge surprise that there was to be another round of layoffs, given the company’s finances. I had survived many layoffs, but not this time.
In yet another cost-cutting measure, the company decided to get rid of almost all of its software developers. The two youngest were retained, but one of those soon left for another job. This sounds cruel to the more experienced workers, but it was likely for the best. Longer term workers had built up more leave and severance pay. Had the less seasoned guys been laid off, they could well have been out of money before they had new jobs.
Moreover, I had been blessed to work for an employer that offered a fairly generous severance plan. Along with getting my leave cashed out, I had enough money to last for a couple of months.
I was one of the very few fortunate ones. Even as I sat in my manager’s office, I was offered a temporary four-to-six month position at another of the company’s offices doing exactly what I had been doing. Maybe the position would eventually become permanent; maybe not. But at least I could search for a new job while still being employed.
While this was a tremendous blessing, it was also a bit of a challenge. The moment I arrived home, I initiated my job search. My job searching activities became a second job to which I applied myself with great energy. Some of my former co-workers had been pro-active enough to already have job interviews lined up.
I soon discovered that it wasn’t terribly difficult to get a job interview. The information technology sector is one of the few parts of the economy that has picked up. Many companies are looking to technology to help them cut costs and reduce the need for other types of workers. I had my first interview just two days after being laid off.
But I quickly found that actually getting to the point of receiving a job offer can be quite challenging, especially for a developer with my level of seniority. Many employers are looking for junior level developers, which are much cheaper and often more flexible. The employers that are looking for experienced developers tend to want very specific skills. They tend to want highly skilled, narrowly focused gurus rather than broad-based steady workers.
Prospective employers are also not very keen on hiring into a more junior position someone that has been used to working at a senior level, even if you are willing to work for less pay. They suspect that you will be gone the moment a better paying job comes along.
The whole hiring process is very similar to dating and courting. Interviews are like dates. Both the employer and the applicant are testing the relationship to see if it is something that feels like a good fit.
I walked out of some interviews feeling that it had gone badly. I walked out of others expecting a callback that never came. I walked out of some hoping that they weren’t interested in me because I certainly wasn’t interested in them. Some interviews went well, but ended with the realization that it was not a good fit. Frankly the whole process was challenging and frustrating.
As far as I.T. workers go, I discovered too late that it is likely better to pursue job offers through recruiters. Recruiters make money from successfully placing applicants in jobs. They develop relationships with hiring managers, so they have contacts that are difficult for applicants to develop on their own. They are able to finesse situations and present a better picture of the applicant, even if the applicant isn’t particularly adept at interviewing.
But recruiters are essentially sales people. Some can tend to paint too optimistic of a picture. Many are just looking to bolster their next paycheck. If they can’t immediately place you, they drop you like a hot potato. Some, on the other hand, are very good at what they do.
I found that it can be a mistake to just start applying willy-nilly on positions announced on job websites. Many of those go into some ethereal file that no one cares to ever look at. Another problem is that recruiters usually can’t represent you to a potential employer if you have already applied there on your own.
A good approach would be to develop relationships with several recruiters and to continue to look for jobs on your own. If you find something you’re interested in, you could shop it to your recruiter pool to see if any already have a contact at the firm.
On the other hand, some employers refuse to work with recruiters. By chatting with recruiters you can find out which companies those are, so that you can apply there on your own. Recruiters often know enough about a company to give you a feel for the company’s culture. You can get an idea of how well you might fit into the organization.
A very important avenue that should not be overlooked is to ask everyone you personally know for help in finding a job. You never know when a friend, family member, or acquaintance might have a contact that could lead to a job. Most jobs come through networking with people. In fact, you should pursue your job search from every possible angle, because you never know where your next job might come from.
Following advice of a job coach, I created an email ‘newsletter’ to all of my personal contacts. I then spammed them with an email message that had my resume attached. A few responded: some with opportunities and some with encouragement. I later found that others had prayed for me. Interestingly, this little newsletter eventually led to my new job, although, the process took a while.
Along the way, I worked with a professional job coach that helped me bring my resume into the 21st Century. I found that it is good for someone with multiple skills to keep various resume versions that highlight specific skills. Employers looking for narrow skills often care little about the other skills you have developed. In some cases, having those skills on your resume can hurt you, because it looks like you are not specialized enough for the position they have open.
A couple of months before being laid off, I had obtained a smartphone. Up until then, I had been just fine with a “feature phone” (aka “dumb phone”). But I found that the smartphone offered many features that proved extremely helpful during my job search, including immediate email and Internet connectivity.
After nearly a dozen interviews, I interviewed with a firm that seemed like a natural fit for me. Moreover, the opportunity had come through an old Scouting buddy, who worked in the company’s I.T. department. I was grateful when an H.R. representative called to offer me a position.
Unfortunately, the offer was far below what I felt I could accept. We dickered, but we were still so far apart that we concluded that we couldn’t make it work. I was disappointed, but continued with my search. A couple of weeks later, I was surprised when the H.R. representative called and offered me the lowest amount I said I could accept. My wife and I took a day to consider the offer before accepting it.
I have been at my new job for a month now. It is challenging, but it is also a great job. Frankly, I took a serious pay cut from my former position. Some of the benefits are a far cry from those I used to have. But in many ways, the work is better. And the shorter commute makes up for some of the shortfalls.
It has been common since the start of the recession for workers losing their jobs to be rehired at jobs that don’t pay as well. So I suppose that I’m simply part of the new workplace reality. Still, I’m not complaining. I am very grateful for my job. We have made a few sacrifices to make our budget work, but I am ever so pleased just to be employed.
As I said, I am one of the fortunate ones. Although I was laid off, I was never really unemployed. I got severance pay and a temporary job from my former employer that helped me bridge the gap until I could settle in a new permanent job.
The weeks that I spent in job search activities weren’t very fun for me. As I wrote above, the job search was challenging and frustrating. But I applied myself to it as if it were another job. I worked very hard following up leads, making phone calls, sending emails, interviewing, searching for jobs, etc.
I worked at it so much that it was kind of odd when I accepted my new job. All of that activity abruptly stopped. I suddenly had all of those hours available for other stuff. It was a huge relief, but I strangely found myself missing it for the first few days. I was surprised at how rapidly my stream of incoming emails and phone calls dried up. Life is more peaceful now.
I waited a month to write about this because I wanted to settle into my new job. I now know what it takes to find a job in this job market. It requires a serious approach, a lot of work, flexibility, and some good luck. I am grateful that it all worked out for me.
In yet another cost-cutting measure, the company decided to get rid of almost all of its software developers. The two youngest were retained, but one of those soon left for another job. This sounds cruel to the more experienced workers, but it was likely for the best. Longer term workers had built up more leave and severance pay. Had the less seasoned guys been laid off, they could well have been out of money before they had new jobs.
Moreover, I had been blessed to work for an employer that offered a fairly generous severance plan. Along with getting my leave cashed out, I had enough money to last for a couple of months.
I was one of the very few fortunate ones. Even as I sat in my manager’s office, I was offered a temporary four-to-six month position at another of the company’s offices doing exactly what I had been doing. Maybe the position would eventually become permanent; maybe not. But at least I could search for a new job while still being employed.
While this was a tremendous blessing, it was also a bit of a challenge. The moment I arrived home, I initiated my job search. My job searching activities became a second job to which I applied myself with great energy. Some of my former co-workers had been pro-active enough to already have job interviews lined up.
I soon discovered that it wasn’t terribly difficult to get a job interview. The information technology sector is one of the few parts of the economy that has picked up. Many companies are looking to technology to help them cut costs and reduce the need for other types of workers. I had my first interview just two days after being laid off.
But I quickly found that actually getting to the point of receiving a job offer can be quite challenging, especially for a developer with my level of seniority. Many employers are looking for junior level developers, which are much cheaper and often more flexible. The employers that are looking for experienced developers tend to want very specific skills. They tend to want highly skilled, narrowly focused gurus rather than broad-based steady workers.
Prospective employers are also not very keen on hiring into a more junior position someone that has been used to working at a senior level, even if you are willing to work for less pay. They suspect that you will be gone the moment a better paying job comes along.
The whole hiring process is very similar to dating and courting. Interviews are like dates. Both the employer and the applicant are testing the relationship to see if it is something that feels like a good fit.
I walked out of some interviews feeling that it had gone badly. I walked out of others expecting a callback that never came. I walked out of some hoping that they weren’t interested in me because I certainly wasn’t interested in them. Some interviews went well, but ended with the realization that it was not a good fit. Frankly the whole process was challenging and frustrating.
As far as I.T. workers go, I discovered too late that it is likely better to pursue job offers through recruiters. Recruiters make money from successfully placing applicants in jobs. They develop relationships with hiring managers, so they have contacts that are difficult for applicants to develop on their own. They are able to finesse situations and present a better picture of the applicant, even if the applicant isn’t particularly adept at interviewing.
But recruiters are essentially sales people. Some can tend to paint too optimistic of a picture. Many are just looking to bolster their next paycheck. If they can’t immediately place you, they drop you like a hot potato. Some, on the other hand, are very good at what they do.
I found that it can be a mistake to just start applying willy-nilly on positions announced on job websites. Many of those go into some ethereal file that no one cares to ever look at. Another problem is that recruiters usually can’t represent you to a potential employer if you have already applied there on your own.
A good approach would be to develop relationships with several recruiters and to continue to look for jobs on your own. If you find something you’re interested in, you could shop it to your recruiter pool to see if any already have a contact at the firm.
On the other hand, some employers refuse to work with recruiters. By chatting with recruiters you can find out which companies those are, so that you can apply there on your own. Recruiters often know enough about a company to give you a feel for the company’s culture. You can get an idea of how well you might fit into the organization.
A very important avenue that should not be overlooked is to ask everyone you personally know for help in finding a job. You never know when a friend, family member, or acquaintance might have a contact that could lead to a job. Most jobs come through networking with people. In fact, you should pursue your job search from every possible angle, because you never know where your next job might come from.
Following advice of a job coach, I created an email ‘newsletter’ to all of my personal contacts. I then spammed them with an email message that had my resume attached. A few responded: some with opportunities and some with encouragement. I later found that others had prayed for me. Interestingly, this little newsletter eventually led to my new job, although, the process took a while.
Along the way, I worked with a professional job coach that helped me bring my resume into the 21st Century. I found that it is good for someone with multiple skills to keep various resume versions that highlight specific skills. Employers looking for narrow skills often care little about the other skills you have developed. In some cases, having those skills on your resume can hurt you, because it looks like you are not specialized enough for the position they have open.
A couple of months before being laid off, I had obtained a smartphone. Up until then, I had been just fine with a “feature phone” (aka “dumb phone”). But I found that the smartphone offered many features that proved extremely helpful during my job search, including immediate email and Internet connectivity.
After nearly a dozen interviews, I interviewed with a firm that seemed like a natural fit for me. Moreover, the opportunity had come through an old Scouting buddy, who worked in the company’s I.T. department. I was grateful when an H.R. representative called to offer me a position.
Unfortunately, the offer was far below what I felt I could accept. We dickered, but we were still so far apart that we concluded that we couldn’t make it work. I was disappointed, but continued with my search. A couple of weeks later, I was surprised when the H.R. representative called and offered me the lowest amount I said I could accept. My wife and I took a day to consider the offer before accepting it.
I have been at my new job for a month now. It is challenging, but it is also a great job. Frankly, I took a serious pay cut from my former position. Some of the benefits are a far cry from those I used to have. But in many ways, the work is better. And the shorter commute makes up for some of the shortfalls.
It has been common since the start of the recession for workers losing their jobs to be rehired at jobs that don’t pay as well. So I suppose that I’m simply part of the new workplace reality. Still, I’m not complaining. I am very grateful for my job. We have made a few sacrifices to make our budget work, but I am ever so pleased just to be employed.
As I said, I am one of the fortunate ones. Although I was laid off, I was never really unemployed. I got severance pay and a temporary job from my former employer that helped me bridge the gap until I could settle in a new permanent job.
The weeks that I spent in job search activities weren’t very fun for me. As I wrote above, the job search was challenging and frustrating. But I applied myself to it as if it were another job. I worked very hard following up leads, making phone calls, sending emails, interviewing, searching for jobs, etc.
I worked at it so much that it was kind of odd when I accepted my new job. All of that activity abruptly stopped. I suddenly had all of those hours available for other stuff. It was a huge relief, but I strangely found myself missing it for the first few days. I was surprised at how rapidly my stream of incoming emails and phone calls dried up. Life is more peaceful now.
I waited a month to write about this because I wanted to settle into my new job. I now know what it takes to find a job in this job market. It requires a serious approach, a lot of work, flexibility, and some good luck. I am grateful that it all worked out for me.
Sunday, July 03, 2011
July 2, 2011: Camp Loll Still Inaccessible Due to Snow
For some time I had planned to drive my son to Camp Loll, BSA on July 2 so that he could begin working there for two weeks as a camp counselor trainee.
Normally the first week of campers arrives on the last Monday in June. That means that the first weekend in July is the conclusion of that week and preparation time for week #2. By the time week #1 starts, the staff has usually been in camp for two weeks. During that time they prepare the physical facilities and train to run the camp program.
This year is different. The winter season brought far more moisture than is common. The spring was unusually cool and wet. It is not uncommon for the staff to deal with a few downed trees, mud bogs, and occasional snow banks as they make the first long drive over the dirt roads that lead to camp. But this year there has been so much snow on the road that there was no possibility of vehicles reaching camp before now. It turned out that there was no possibility of vehicles reaching camp yesterday either.
We started out the day stopping at various points to pick up staffers on the trip northward. Our caravan was larger than usual because we had more people and gear than usual. We made a stop in Idaho Falls and then had lunch in a park in Ashton, Idaho.
We put gas in the vehicles and then started the 34-mile drive to Camp Loll. Once the pavement ended I was surprised at how good the condition of the dirt road was. Given Delose Conner's posts (and pictures) of attempts to reach camp over the past few weeks (6/12, 6/21, 6/24, 6/27), I thought the road would be worse.
Then we arrived at the stretch that leads down to Calf Creek. This section gets less sunlight. We expected that we'd have to dig through snow drifts here, but the depth and length of the drifts were surprising.
We started applying manual labor to the situation. Some thought that it would have been good to have a snow plow on one of the trucks. But the snow was so densely packed that I doubt that would have been much good. The stuff had to be chopped up and shoveled out.
Unfortunately we had only about a dozen shovels. Most workers were reduced to using their hands to throw aside snow chunks created by the shovel wielders. I brought three scoop shovels. The staff managed to break all three of them.
At one point we tried to get a Jeep through one of the drifts. It got high-centered so that the wheels could get no traction. The workers quickly got busy digging under the vehicle. They finally hooked a tow strap on and pulled it out by human power.
A family from Layton soon came hiking up the road over the snow banks. They had left their truck parked at the beginning of the drifts and hiked into camp. They showed Delose pictures of the road into camp. They said that once we could get past the 400 yards of drifts we were working on that the road was pretty good until the turnoff to the Camp Loll road. Half of that final two-mile stretch to camp was also heavily snowbound.
Sensing that the day was waning, Delose assigned the rangers (all 18-25 years old) to continue working on the drifts, hike to camp, and stay the night in the lodge. They were then to bring all of the digging and chopping tools from the lodge back to the snow drifts in the morning.
We loaded up the rest of the staff and drove them back to Ashton, where they prepared to spend the night camped out under the stars in the yard of a kindly farmer. At this point I left my son along with the rest of the staff and headed back home.
I don't yet know how the rest of the story goes. The plan was to ferry the staff back to the snow drifts this morning to spend the day working on getting vehicles as close to camp as possible, and to do whatever was necessary to get the gear hauled to the lodge. It's a hard working way to spend a Sunday, but they don't know what else to do. I pray that they will get the staff and their gear to camp by tonight.
In the meantime, camp leaders are having to figure out how to deal with the nutrition, hydration, and sanitation needs of this large group of young staffers. It's a tough challenge.
The warmer temperatures and the clearer skies means that snow is now melting rapidly at Camp Loll and surrounding areas. The roads might be passable in a few more days even without digging. At this point, the staff cannot wait for that to happen naturally.
Tomorrow was to be the beginning of the second week of campers. The council has already cancelled the first two weeks of camp. The loss of that revenue presents a serious budgetary challenge for the camp. Camp leaders hope to get the camp and the staff ready in one week so that they can host campers on July 11. Once they survey the condition of the camp, they will know whether even that date is too optimistic.
There have been a few times during the history of Camp Loll that the first week of camp has been cancelled due to climate conditions. As far as I know, this is the only time the second week of camp has also been cancelled. I believe it is also the latest that the staff has been able to access the camp.
Camp support people here at home have been working to find some way to get a tractor up to the snow drifts. But that's a problem. Many owners of such equipment have gone away for the holiday weekend. Even if such equipment could be secured, a trained operator would be needed and both the equipment and the operator would need to be transported to the location. The staff will likely solve the problem through hard work before all of that can happen.
While this is a tough spot for camp leaders and staffers to be in, it will make for deep memories. It will also likely foster a special bond among the staffers that have this experience. Although I worry about my son, I am grateful that he has an opportunity to be part of this. He is rubbing shoulders with some very high quality youth. I hope he learns much good from them as they go through this experience together.
UPDATE: I just got word that they were able to get the staff and vehicles into camp at 4 pm today. There is lots of snow in camp, but it is melting rapidly. As has happened in other heavy snow years, the staff will work at doing snow removal in critical campground and program areas throughout this week. There will still be plenty of snow banks around when troops arrive next week, but they will hopefully still be able to run a regular program.
Normally the first week of campers arrives on the last Monday in June. That means that the first weekend in July is the conclusion of that week and preparation time for week #2. By the time week #1 starts, the staff has usually been in camp for two weeks. During that time they prepare the physical facilities and train to run the camp program.
This year is different. The winter season brought far more moisture than is common. The spring was unusually cool and wet. It is not uncommon for the staff to deal with a few downed trees, mud bogs, and occasional snow banks as they make the first long drive over the dirt roads that lead to camp. But this year there has been so much snow on the road that there was no possibility of vehicles reaching camp before now. It turned out that there was no possibility of vehicles reaching camp yesterday either.
We started out the day stopping at various points to pick up staffers on the trip northward. Our caravan was larger than usual because we had more people and gear than usual. We made a stop in Idaho Falls and then had lunch in a park in Ashton, Idaho.
 |
| Loll staffers socializing before lunch in Ashton, Idaho |
 |
| Enjoying the shade |
We put gas in the vehicles and then started the 34-mile drive to Camp Loll. Once the pavement ended I was surprised at how good the condition of the dirt road was. Given Delose Conner's posts (and pictures) of attempts to reach camp over the past few weeks (6/12, 6/21, 6/24, 6/27), I thought the road would be worse.
Then we arrived at the stretch that leads down to Calf Creek. This section gets less sunlight. We expected that we'd have to dig through snow drifts here, but the depth and length of the drifts were surprising.
 |
| 400 Yards of Snow up to 5 Feet Deep |
Unfortunately we had only about a dozen shovels. Most workers were reduced to using their hands to throw aside snow chunks created by the shovel wielders. I brought three scoop shovels. The staff managed to break all three of them.
 |
| Snow removal by shovel and hand |
 |
| Scout power |
Sensing that the day was waning, Delose assigned the rangers (all 18-25 years old) to continue working on the drifts, hike to camp, and stay the night in the lodge. They were then to bring all of the digging and chopping tools from the lodge back to the snow drifts in the morning.
We loaded up the rest of the staff and drove them back to Ashton, where they prepared to spend the night camped out under the stars in the yard of a kindly farmer. At this point I left my son along with the rest of the staff and headed back home.
I don't yet know how the rest of the story goes. The plan was to ferry the staff back to the snow drifts this morning to spend the day working on getting vehicles as close to camp as possible, and to do whatever was necessary to get the gear hauled to the lodge. It's a hard working way to spend a Sunday, but they don't know what else to do. I pray that they will get the staff and their gear to camp by tonight.
In the meantime, camp leaders are having to figure out how to deal with the nutrition, hydration, and sanitation needs of this large group of young staffers. It's a tough challenge.
The warmer temperatures and the clearer skies means that snow is now melting rapidly at Camp Loll and surrounding areas. The roads might be passable in a few more days even without digging. At this point, the staff cannot wait for that to happen naturally.
Tomorrow was to be the beginning of the second week of campers. The council has already cancelled the first two weeks of camp. The loss of that revenue presents a serious budgetary challenge for the camp. Camp leaders hope to get the camp and the staff ready in one week so that they can host campers on July 11. Once they survey the condition of the camp, they will know whether even that date is too optimistic.
There have been a few times during the history of Camp Loll that the first week of camp has been cancelled due to climate conditions. As far as I know, this is the only time the second week of camp has also been cancelled. I believe it is also the latest that the staff has been able to access the camp.
Camp support people here at home have been working to find some way to get a tractor up to the snow drifts. But that's a problem. Many owners of such equipment have gone away for the holiday weekend. Even if such equipment could be secured, a trained operator would be needed and both the equipment and the operator would need to be transported to the location. The staff will likely solve the problem through hard work before all of that can happen.
While this is a tough spot for camp leaders and staffers to be in, it will make for deep memories. It will also likely foster a special bond among the staffers that have this experience. Although I worry about my son, I am grateful that he has an opportunity to be part of this. He is rubbing shoulders with some very high quality youth. I hope he learns much good from them as they go through this experience together.
UPDATE: I just got word that they were able to get the staff and vehicles into camp at 4 pm today. There is lots of snow in camp, but it is melting rapidly. As has happened in other heavy snow years, the staff will work at doing snow removal in critical campground and program areas throughout this week. There will still be plenty of snow banks around when troops arrive next week, but they will hopefully still be able to run a regular program.
Friday, July 01, 2011
Grateful for the U.S.A.
A few years ago I wrote about my annual pre-Independence Day liberty ritual. Every year I watch the six-hour series Liberty! The American Revolution. I follow that up with A More Perfect Union, which depicts the constitutional convention.
I actually watch these documentaries while working out in the morning. It's kind of funny, but I have great difficulty sitting down and watching anything on TV for more than a few minutes. I say that it's funny because I grew up being quite a TV connoisseur.
Nowadays I get antsy if I watch TV for any length of time. I can't stop thinking about all of the other things I could be doing. TV programs can't hold my interest for long. It's OK to have the TV on in the background while I do something else, but I just can't bring myself to devote much time to sitting down and watching TV. It isn't interactive enough.
This year I have added to my liberty ritual the reading of Pauline Maier's recent book, Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788. Maier is recognized as one of the foremost authorities on the American Revolution and the early history of the United States.
I am currently about two-thirds of the way through Maier's book. I tend to agree with this Washington Post review of the book, which says:
However, opponents of the Constitution were also far from united in their views. A relative minority seems to have thought that the document was irredeemably flawed. Most opponents appear to have been in favor of remedying problems prior to its implementation. They understandably felt that they would be in a worse position to negotiate such changes once the document had gone into effect.
Maier shows that the deliberative process that occurred in very different ways in different states produced a general understanding of the people's perception of the Constitution's most egregious flaws. The result was that the Bill of Rights became the first item of business for the 1st U.S. Congress. It was championed by many that had previously argued against the need for such amendments.
In fact, most Americans quickly accepted the legitimacy of the new national government and recognized the value of the amended Constitution. While fights broke out on occasion when the Constitution was being discussed by people prior to its ratification, hardly anyone seems to have given serious thought to opposing the new government once the document was ratified. It was quite common for leaders of the opposition movement to run for Congress.
While it is all the rage in certain circles to pooh-pooh the idea of American exceptionalism nowadays, I believe that such a view requires one to willingly don blinders. The U.S. undeniably has its flaws, some of which are quite glaring. But the overwrought focus on those imperfections is as irrational as the unwillingness to acknowledge them.
I believe that a fair reading of history shows that the U.S., as far as nations go, has been the most consequential force for good known to mankind to date, notwithstanding its problems. Some of the best features of the American system have been successfully copied around the globe. Yet no other nation has yet so successfully generated so much liberty and prosperity among its citizens.
As a grateful beneficiary of this system, the story of how it all came about fascinates me. Regardless of whether one believes that this process was divinely guided or not, it must be recognized as quite remarkable. This is what I will be thinking about this weekend as we celebrate our nation's independence.
I actually watch these documentaries while working out in the morning. It's kind of funny, but I have great difficulty sitting down and watching anything on TV for more than a few minutes. I say that it's funny because I grew up being quite a TV connoisseur.
Nowadays I get antsy if I watch TV for any length of time. I can't stop thinking about all of the other things I could be doing. TV programs can't hold my interest for long. It's OK to have the TV on in the background while I do something else, but I just can't bring myself to devote much time to sitting down and watching TV. It isn't interactive enough.
This year I have added to my liberty ritual the reading of Pauline Maier's recent book, Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788. Maier is recognized as one of the foremost authorities on the American Revolution and the early history of the United States.
I am currently about two-thirds of the way through Maier's book. I tend to agree with this Washington Post review of the book, which says:
"In contrast to historians who see the ratification of the Constitution as the result of elites' manipulation of the masses, Maier tells a far more suspenseful and complex story. Her superb work provides an object lesson in the value of the deliberative process and the extent to which moderation and compromise are at the very foundation of our government. As Maier convincingly shows, the Constitution's preamble did not simply represent a rhetorical flourish or an abstract philosophical theory. It was the very means by which "We the People" chose to embrace a peaceful revolution in government."There is some evidence that more than half of the general population of the states opposed ratification of the Constitution in its original form. Its ratification was far from a sure thing. The story Maier tells shows how close the document came to not being ratified in many states. It is somewhat of a miracle that it happened at all.
However, opponents of the Constitution were also far from united in their views. A relative minority seems to have thought that the document was irredeemably flawed. Most opponents appear to have been in favor of remedying problems prior to its implementation. They understandably felt that they would be in a worse position to negotiate such changes once the document had gone into effect.
Maier shows that the deliberative process that occurred in very different ways in different states produced a general understanding of the people's perception of the Constitution's most egregious flaws. The result was that the Bill of Rights became the first item of business for the 1st U.S. Congress. It was championed by many that had previously argued against the need for such amendments.
In fact, most Americans quickly accepted the legitimacy of the new national government and recognized the value of the amended Constitution. While fights broke out on occasion when the Constitution was being discussed by people prior to its ratification, hardly anyone seems to have given serious thought to opposing the new government once the document was ratified. It was quite common for leaders of the opposition movement to run for Congress.
While it is all the rage in certain circles to pooh-pooh the idea of American exceptionalism nowadays, I believe that such a view requires one to willingly don blinders. The U.S. undeniably has its flaws, some of which are quite glaring. But the overwrought focus on those imperfections is as irrational as the unwillingness to acknowledge them.
I believe that a fair reading of history shows that the U.S., as far as nations go, has been the most consequential force for good known to mankind to date, notwithstanding its problems. Some of the best features of the American system have been successfully copied around the globe. Yet no other nation has yet so successfully generated so much liberty and prosperity among its citizens.
As a grateful beneficiary of this system, the story of how it all came about fascinates me. Regardless of whether one believes that this process was divinely guided or not, it must be recognized as quite remarkable. This is what I will be thinking about this weekend as we celebrate our nation's independence.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)