LouiKa TexAr

LouiKa TexAr

At the beginning of August 2011, I spent a week in Conway Arkansas at the University of Central Arkansas (UCA) attending my second year (Year Two) of the Community Development Institute (CDI). Originating at UCA in 1986, CDI—UCA is one of five regional locations of the Community Development Council, a non-profit organization providing a “Certified Community Developer (CCD) program designed to advance the standards of competence among community development professionals”. The certification program—Professional Community and Economic Developer (PCED)—trains both community development professionals seeking professional credentials, and volunteers in core competencies required for effective community and economic development. These core components are integrated “into professional development opportunities, certification study materials, testing of knowledge and demonstration of applied learning” obtained over a three-year period, or sooner if one opts to attend other Institute locations. Other CDI Institutes are located in Idaho, Illinois, Texas, and West Virginia.

To say that the week was reinvigorating—even inspirational—is an understatement. 2011 CDI—UCA students, speakers and instructors came from across the South representing Mississippi, Alabama, Arkansas, Georgia, Louisiana, Oklahoma, Tennessee, and Texas; the Midwest’s Kansas; and the Southwest’s Arizona. In addition to its educational purpose, CDI advances the cause for regional community and economic development, as professionals from across the country come together to work on problems unfettered by state lines and topographic boundaries.

Year One introduced participants to community development principles including social justice, self-determination, cooperation (working/learning together), sustainability, participation, inclusiveness/diversity, and continuous learning, as well as strategic planning and ethics. Their challenge was putting the lessons into action as Year One participants set about planning in the New Town Simulation. The Simulation resembles Monopoly on steroids as six individual community/economic development teams compete for resources, form political alliances, and get an inkling of the complexity of the politically charged often egocentric economic development environment.

The invaluable lesson learned in Year Two was the importance of business retention. We must cherish and nurture what we have— never forsaking the local for the global. The ideal business portfolio seems to be a mix of local and international—well cared for Mom & Pops (in all sizes) as well as the more seductive Big Box employers. We were encouraged to embrace the Creative Economy and new media trends in marketing our communities.

In his keynote presentation, Dr. Vaughn Grisham inspired us with case studies of community leadership and cooperation, and warned us against tolerating mediocrity. A two-hour Poverty Simulation was eye-opening as we were assigned roles to play which dictated our marital, parental, and economic status. New County Simulation was our opportunity to apply both Year One and Year Two collaboration and leadership skills. Year Two Class Leaders introduced disaster after disaster to remedy— including corralling a truckload of escaped monkeys infected with an unknown, extremely contagious virus. Time and again Year Two worked together to develop and implement a cooperative plan among New County’s three municipalities.

The curriculum for Year 3 covers organizing community development, tourism, grant-writing, working with non-profits, housing and retail development, historic preservation, and a community redevelopment case study. Above all the final year cements the importance of collaboration. I can only speak to 2011 Year Three’s experience as an observer. Through conversations with individual members, I’ve learned that from their first year together as 2009 Year One, the group worked collaboratively, consistently recognizing the value, effectiveness, and efficiency of cooperation. So much so that at this year’s 2011 Awards Banquet, the CDI Ernest Whitelaw Award bestowed upon a “recipient exemplifying the highest standards of dedication to the field of community development and demonstrate strong leadership throughout their CDI experience” was voted upon and accepted by the class as a whole under the name, LouiKa TexAr, an amalgamation of their states of origin.

Driving home from CDI as I crossed Mississippi from Greenville to Starkville, I was amazed at the beauty and bounty of the fields and communities. The route is a feast of photo perfect images of farms, barns, silos, and old sheds, vast stretches of corn and soy beans, homes—large and small, and small towns inviting me to pull over, take a break, and have a cup of coffee. Highway 82, like a magic carpet, propelled me through the history of Mississippi—the river, the soil, the Indian Mounds, plantations, crops, droughts and floods, farm owners, the meager lives of slaves and sharecroppers, and the Southern diaspora.

Mississippi vibrates with life and potential. Driving, I couldn’t help but think how easy it is to stay in my small office surrounded by plants and books, forgetting the real Mississippi that can only be experienced by being out in it. In my travels, Mississippi’s small towns, larger municipalities, and cities always present me with wonderful opportunities to meet and mingle with the locals. I love the stories of the trials and tribulations, and the hopes and dreams residents have for their communities.

Dr. Grisham encouraged us to celebrate victories—large and small—that we accomplish together. Given the state of the economy and the fact that there are never enough resources, even in the best of times, the story of Stone Soup comes to mind.

In Stone Soup, a hungry traveler induces local villagers to participate in his delicious meal of stone soup—yes, water and a simple stone… In the end villagers add onion, potatoes, and carrots before they go to waste to make an abundant soup.

The moral and message of Stone Soup is that satisfaction is not so much achieved by filling our stomachs, as by the productivity and happiness that comes from sharing. That’s the goal of community development.

Photo Source: http://issuu.com/ucaoutreach/docs/ernest_whitelaw

Women in Combat & Other 80s Issues

The Washington Post ran an article March 16, reporting the results of a March 10-16, 2011 telephone poll. From a random national phone sample of 1,005 adults, the Post/ABC News poll tallied seven in 10 Americans as supporting allowing female soldiers to serve in ground units engaging in close combat. The results are timely given that we are fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, while monitoring the conflict in Libya. Simultaneously the Pentagon is reviewing whether women should continue to be barred from combat units, despite
current duties involving engagement with opposing forces in both active war zones.¹

Statistically, seventy-three percent of those polled supported women serving in direct combat roles. Of that number 73-percent of the women and 72-percent of the men supported formal combat roles for women. Further defining demographics include 80-percent of self-described Democrats, 62-percent of Republicans, and 73-percent of independents supported allowing women in combat. According to the Pentagon, currently 14.5-percent (203,000 of approximately 1.4 million) active-duty troops, and another 18-percent of the National Guard and reserve forces are women. Approximately 10-percent (25,000) of the active duty forces serving in Iraq and Afghanistan are women. As of 1994 Pentagon policy bars women from serving below the brigade level with a primary mission of direct ground combat; however, women are allowed to serve in units that might face combat-related action. If the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan have proven anything, it’s that war is ever-changing and evolving with no front lines ²

In the Post article, Pentagon spokeswoman Eileen Lainez stated, “While women are not assigned to units below brigade level whose primary mission is direct combat on the ground, this doesn’t mean they are not assigned to positions in combat zones that could place them in danger.” The Military Leadership Diversity Commission has recommended the Pentagon terminate current policy banning women from combat, leveling the playing field for “all qualified service members”. Created in 2009 by Congress, the Commission was established to facilitate the equitable inclusion and advancement of women and minorities “to serve in top military leadership positions”. Though having actively served in Iraq and Afghanistan, female soldiers without orders for formal combat assignment have been hindered in their access to medical and mental-health benefits for combat-related injuries.³

Reading the Poll, I was struck by how much has changed yet stayed the same since 1982 when the Equal Rights Amendment (ERA) failed ratification, due in part to the likelihood of women serving in combat. In reality a great deal has changed for women since Phyllis Schlafly, president and founder of Eagle Forum/STOP ERA, opposed the Amendment stating, among other things, that it would: force women to serve in combat; legitimize homosexual marriage; and deny women spousal support—by their husbands.⁴ We won’t mention the threat of unisex bathrooms.

Women have been active in the military since the Revolutionary War when they served on the battlefield as nurses, water bearers, cooks, laundresses and saboteurs. In every military engagement through World War II women have served in capacities ranging from clerks, mechanics, drivers, nurses, test pilots and anti-aircraft artillery trainers—freeing up male soldiers for combat duty.  In 1942 the United Stated Army formalized the participation of women in the Armed Forces, establishing the Women’s Army Auxiliary Corps (WAAC), which became the Women’s Army Corps (WAC) in 1943. During WWII, more than 150,000 WACs served in the European and Pacific theaters; Women Air Force Service Pilots (WASP) flew as stateside civil service pilots; and 14,000 Navy nurses serve stateside, on overseas on hospital ships, and as flight nurses. In the Pacific, sixteen Navy nurses were captured and held as POWs—one group for five months before being exchanged, and eleven others for 37 months.⁵

Also in 1942, the Navy established the Navy Women’s Reserve, i.e., Women Accepted for Volunteer Emergency Service (WAVES), with 80,000+ WAVES working in communications, intelligence, supply, medicine and administration; and the Coast Guard’s Women’s Reserve— known as the SPARs (Semper Paratus – Always Ready) served stateside as storekeepers, clerks, photographers, pharmacist’s mates, cooks, etc. The Marine Corps Women’s Reserve (1943) served stateside as clerks, cooks, mechanics, drivers, etc.⁶

Established in 1943 by the US Public Health Service, the Cadet Nurse Corps trained approximately 125,000 women for military nursing duty. In 1947, The Army-Navy Nurse Act of 1947 absorbed the Army Nurse Corps and Women’s Medical Specialist Corps into the United States Army, awarding permanent commissioned officer status to Army and Navy nurses. During WWII, more than 400,000 American military servicewomen served domestically and abroad in non-combat assignments. At the end of the War, most women returned to private lives, in the service of home and family.⁷

Women have gained a great deal of ground since the first female graduates completed their educations at the United States Military Academy, West Point, New York. The 1976 first co-ed class included 119 women, dwindling to the final 62 female graduates in 1980. The post-Viet Nam all-volunteer service changed the ground rules, exerting pressure on the US services academies to admit women. In the interim, women have fought in three wars, as well as the war on terrorism; flown and continue to fly combat missions; commanded the Space Shuttle; commanded a fighter squadron; been recognized and decorated for valor in combat action; and been promoted to the rank of general. As such, Pentagon policy “allowing” women to fight in wars is a bit of a straw man, it is already being done…⁸

On March 17, the Nation + World section of the Salt Lake City Tribune reprinted the WP/ABC News Poll article and results with additional comments by Elaine Donnelly, founder and executive director of the Center for Military Readiness. Donnelly maintains that women in combat units amount to unnecessary risk for both female and male soldiers, stating, “Women do not have an equal opportunity to survive or to help fellow soldiers survive. There is no ‘discrimination’ problem that requires extreme measures— such as forcing enlisted women into [direct ground combat] units — just to advance the career prospects of a future female officer who wants to become chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff.” Donnelly contends that inserting women into combat roles “shouldn’t be done to achieve diversity goals”. In addition to her opposition to women in combat, Donnelly, who has studied military personnel issues since the 1980s, recently mounted an unsuccessful campaign to prevent the government from ending the Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell policy banning gay men and lesbians from serving openly in the military.⁹

Donnelly’s opposition to Don’t Ask/Don’t Tell mirrors that of Schlafly’s original second objection to ERA—the legitimization of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgendered (LGBT) lifestyle through marriage. Whether it’s openly gay active-duty soldiers or same-sex marriage—the fact remains that it’s already being done. Numerous gains have been made in obtaining civil rights for the LGBT community, with the battle to legalize same-sex marriage being waged in legislatures at the state level. Ironically, this is the solution prescribed by former Vice President Dick Chaney, who is supportive of his openly gay daughter, Mary. Like it or not, same-sex unions, which draw a variety of responses—support, tolerance, indifferent, ridicule, etc.— exist. Again, as with women serving in combat—the reality is, it’s already being done—with or without social validation.¹⁰

It is hard to un-ring a bell, and tying gender equity to a lifestyle choice is a bit of a red herring. It certainly heightens the controversy of the subject matter, but what does it prove?

That brings me back to Schlafly’s third objection to ERA—denial of spousal support. I find this the most interesting, given the dismal probability that the majority of custodial mothers will have trouble collecting reliable child support payments from the fathers of their children. Or, consider the fact that women make less money than their male counterparts making it difficult to adequately support children, not to mention making lower Social Security contributions, a real Catch-22 with our longer lifespan and extended retirement years.

Was the defeat of ERA about combat, same-sex marriage, or equal pay for equal work?

The Equal Rights Amendment

Section 1.         Equality of rights under the law shall not be denied or abridged
by the United States or by any state on account of sex.
Section 2.         The Congress shall have the power to enforce, by appropriate legislation,
the provisions of this article.
Section 3.         This amendment shall take effect two years after the date of ratification.¹¹

Having come of age in the late 70s, I remember the Reagan Era as conservative, even regressive, with regard to social policies—particularly regarding poverty, mental health (and the phenomenon of homelessness) and women. My feminist sensibilities, i.e., the status of women, weren’t the product of radical 60s ideology, but the death of my father in an automobile accident in 1963. My mother was a “female head-of-household” long before it was a norm. High school educated, she raised me and my brother while working as a retail clerk in small town, rural Tennessee. To say that her options were limited is an understatement. The possibility that I might follow a similar path was far more terrifying than any slasher movie double-feature playing at the local drive-in.

The Equal Rights Amendment didn’t magically appear as spear-headed by 1970s “militant” feminists. “Militant” suffragist leader and founder of the National Woman’s Party Alice Paul wrote it in 1923 as the logical and necessary follow-on to the 19th Amendment(1920), which gave women the right to vote. Introduced during every Congressional session between 1923 and 1972—when it was passed, the ERA was then sent to the states for ratification. From 1972 through 1982, ERA was ratified by 35 states, falling short by three of the required 38 votes. Since 1982, it has been reintroduced in every Congress.¹²

The struggle for women’s equality has closely paralleled the African-American struggle for civil rights. ERA Task Force Chair, Roberta W. Francis, offers this historic account of the Amendment’s progress, “In 1848, at the first Woman’s Rights Convention in Seneca Falls, NY. Elizabeth Cady Stanton and Lucretia Mott, who had met as abolitionists working against slavery, convened a two-day meeting of 300 women and men to call for justice for women in a society where they were systematically barred from the rights and privileges of citizens. A Declaration of Sentiments and eleven other resolutions were adopted with ease, but the proposal for woman suffrage was passed only after impassioned speeches by Stanton and former slave Frederick Douglass, who called the vote the right by which all others could be secured. However, the country was far from ready to take the issue of women’s rights seriously, and the call for justice was the object of much ridicule.¹³

“After the Civil War, Stanton, Susan B. Anthony, and Sojourner Truth fought in vain to have women included in new constitutional amendments giving rights to former slaves. The 14th Amendment defined citizens as ‘all persons born or naturalized in the United States’ and guaranteed equal protection of the laws – but in referring to the electorate, it introduced the word ‘male’ into the Constitution for the first time. The 15th Amendment declared that ‘the right of citizens . . . to vote shall not be denied or abridged . . . on account of race, color, or previous condition of servitude’ – but women of all races were still denied the ballot.” ¹⁴

Finding this unacceptable, in 1872 in Rochester, NY, Susan B. Anthony, cast a ballot in the presidential election, citing her citizenship under the 14th Amendment. Subsequently, she was arrested, tried, convicted, and fined $100, which she refused to pay. The 1875 Supreme Court decision in Minor v. Happersett stated that “while women may be citizens, all citizens were not necessarily voters, and states were not required to allow women to vote”. For the rest of their lives, Anthony and Stanton pursued passage of the Suffrage Amendment on a state-by-state basis, neither living to see women granted the right to vote. The early 1900s saw women enter the workforce (by necessity), begin to campaign for progressive social reform, and eventually win the right to vote on August 26, 1920. The 19th Amendment states, “The right of citizens of the United States to vote shall not be denied or abridged by the United States or by any state on account of sex.” ¹⁵

In June 1963, President John F. Kennedy signed the Equal Pay Act of 1963, which amended the Fair Labor Standards Act, into law. The Act denounced sex discrimination as:

• Depressing wages and living standards for employees necessary for their health and efficiency
• Preventing the maximum utilization of the available labor resources
• Causing labor disputes, thereby burdening, affecting, and obstructing commerce
• Burdening commerce and the free flow of goods in commerce; and
• Constituting an unfair method of competition ¹⁶

The law provides, in part, that: No employer having employees subject to any provisions of this section [section 206 of title 29 of the United States Code] shall discriminate, within any establishment in which such employees are employed, between employees on the basis of sex by paying wages to employees in such establishment at a rate less than the rate at which he pays wages to employees of the opposite sex in such establishment for equal work on jobs, the performance of which requires equal skill, effort, and responsibility, and which are performed under similar working conditions, except where such payment is made pursuant to (i) a seniority system; (ii) a merit system; (iii) a system which measures earnings by quantity or quality of production; or (iv) a differential based on any other factor other than sex…¹⁷

The 2007-2008 110th Congress saw the Equal Rights Amendment introduced as S.J. Res. 10 (Sen. Edward Kennedy, MA, lead sponsor) and H.J. Res. 40 (Rep. Carolyn Maloney, NY, lead sponsor) without a ratification deadline in their proposing clauses.¹⁸ The Lilly Ledbetter Fair Pay Act of 2009 amends the Civil Rights Act of 1964, stating that the 180-day statute of limitations for filing an equal-pay lawsuit regarding pay discrimination resets with each new discriminatory paycheck.¹⁹

In her 2010 Op-Ed piece in the New York Times, Christina Hoff Sommers, resident scholar with the American Enterprise Institute,²⁰ aired opposition to the Paycheck Fairness Bill—killed November 2010 ²¹, citing that the wage gap between men and women “isn’t necessarily the result of discrimination… there are lots of other reasons men might earn more than women, including differences in education, experience and job tenure.” ²²

Another factor affecting earning ability includes marital status… “A recent survey found that young, childless, single urban women earn eight percent more than their male counterparts, mostly because more of them earn college degrees”… as well as “individual choices being made by both male and female workers.”  Research has long contributed individual absence from the workforce as a factor— “women are more likely than men to leave the workforce to take care of children or older parents. They also tend to value family-friendly workplace policies more than men, and will often accept lower salaries in exchange for more benefits. In fact, there were so many differences in pay-related choices that the researchers were unable to specify a residual effect due to discrimination.” ²³

Sommers acknowledged the bill’s supporters concerns that women’s choices may be perceived as “skewed by sexist stereotypes and social pressures… [which] are interesting and important points, worthy of continued public debate… [She worried that] employers would be held “liable for the ‘lingering effects of past discrimination’ — ‘pay disparities’ that have been ‘spread and perpetuated through commerce’… forcing employers ‘to guard against intentional discrimination’” as well as “police potentially discriminatory assumptions behind market-driven wage disparities that have nothing to do with sexism… [particularly] sexist attitudes [where]     society places a higher value on male-centered fields like business than on female-centered fields like social work.” ²⁴

Sommers predicted a “legal nightmare for even the best-intentioned employers… feminist expert testimony when cases go to trial, and… media firestorm.” Rather than contend with high-profile multimillion-dollar lawsuits, well-intentioned employers would settle.²⁵ “The Paycheck Fairness bill would set women against men, empowers trial lawyers and activists, perpetuate falsehoods about the status of women in the workplace and create havoc in a precarious job market. It is 1970s-style gender-war feminism for a society that should be celebrating its success in substantially, if not yet completely, overcoming sex-based workplace discrimination,” she concluded.²⁶

If pay inequity is so innocent, why is Walmart, the world’s largest retailer, requesting that the US Supreme Court “reject the largest class-action sex-discrimination lawsuit in history, brought by female employees [seeking] billions of dollars”? Filed ten years ago the lawsuit alleges that since 1998 Walmart both paid women less and granted them fewer promotions in its 3,400 U.S. stores. As Sommers surmised, the business community is watching, as a positive outcome allowing for a class action has far-reaching implications for working women challenging discrimination. Described as pitting women’s and employees’ rights against business interests, Robin Conrad of the U.S. Chamber of Commerce considers the case to be “the most important class-action case facing the court in over a decade.” Marcia Greenberger of the National Women’s Law Center, commented that, “The ability of women
to be treated fairly in the workplace hangs in the balance.” ²⁷

Large class-action lawsuits have enabled groups of plaintiffs to sue corporations, yielding huge payouts from the tobacco, oil, and food industries. Corporations prefer that an individual or small plaintiff groups pursue lawsuits as their resources are minimal compared to those of big business. More often than not an individual or small group will give up.

I don’t see equal pay as an impetus for gender or class warfare— stepping into my mother’s shoes, I see it as a way to provide shelter and food for my children, pay my mortgage and medical bills, and plan for some sort of retirement, a “perk” I have “earned”.

Is being paid enough money to take care of my children and myself an unreasonable expectation?

Nobody threatened to deprive my mother of my father’s surviving spouse and dependents social security benefits. That’s what paid my college tuition, as my thrifty mother banked it and planned for my future. We were “lucky”— though growing up without a father is far from ideal. We had extended family, and knew we wouldn’t be hungry or homeless. Not every woman is as “lucky” as my mother… That said, contemporary women have made gains. Bells have rung on the issues of women in combat, same-sex marriage, (comically on) “potty parity”, but not yet on pay equity.

I’m befuddled by what’s so threatening about equal pay for equal work—especially since being a competent employee AND responsible mother is two jobs, not one.

Works Cited

1.      The Washington Post <http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/federal-eye/post/7-in-10-americans-support-allowing-women-in-ground-combat/2011/03/16/ABqJ6Be_blog.html&gt;

2.      Ibid.

3.      Ibid.

4.      The Equal Rights Amendment <http://www.equalrightsamendment.org/era.htm&gt;

5.      Army Women’s Foundation. <http://www.awfdn.org&gt;

6.      Ibid.

7.      Ibid.

8.      Women in Military Service Memorial. <http://www.womensmemorial.org/Education/timeline.html&gt;

9.      Salt Lake City Tribune. < http://www.sltrib.com/sltrib/world/51446724-68/women-combat-percent-pentagon.html.csp&gt;

10.  Ifill, Gwen. (October 5, 2004) The Cheney-Edwards Vice Presidential Debate transcript Case Western Reserve University. Cleveland, Ohio. Accessed March 22, 2011.

11.  The Equal Rights Amendment

12.  Ibid.

13.  Ibid.

14.  Ibid.

15.  Ibid.

16.  Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. <http://archive.eeoc.gov/epa/anniversary/epa-40.html&gt;

17.  Equal Employment Opportunity Commission. <http://www.eeoc.gov/laws/types/equalcompensation.cfm&gt;

18.  The Equal Rights Amendment

19.  GovTrak.US. <http://www.govtrack.us/congress/bill.xpd?bill=s111-181&gt;

20.  The American Enterprise Institute, a non-partisan conservative think tank with the mission “to defend the principles and improve the institutions of American freedom and democratic capitalism—limited government, private enterprise, individual liberty and responsibility, vigilant and effective defense and foreign policies, political accountability, and open debate”, <http://www.aei.org/docLib/2010-Annual-Report.pdf&gt;

21.  United Press International. <http://www.upi.com/Top_News/US/2010/11/17/Senate-kills-Paycheck-Fairness-Act/UPI-38001290032394/&gt;

22.  Sommers, Christina Hoff. “Fair Pay Isn’t Always Equal Pay.” New York Times. The Opinion Pages. 21 Sept 2010. <http://www.nytimes.com/2010/09/22/opinion/22Sommers.html?_r=1&gt;

23.  Ibid.

24.  Ibid.

25.  Ibid.

26.  Ibid.

27.  Msnbc.com. Wal-Mart sex-bias suit could be landmark case. 22 Mar 2011. <http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/42216418/ns/business-us_business/&gt;

To Be Better

On Saturday, January 8, 2011, Arizona Rep. Gabrielle Giffords, a three-term Democrat, was shot at point-blank range at a public gathering in Tucson, Arizona. Her assailant, Jared Lee Loughner, initiated a shooting rampage, firing 31 rounds from a Glock-19. The assault left six people dead including a civic-minded nine-year-old girl and a congressional aide. Another fourteen people were wounded or injured. Though Giffords survives, she faces long-term rehabilitation, given the seriousness of penetrating brain injury.

Almost immediately, media began to report public responses including conspiracy theories and the potential link of the attempted assassination to right-wing campaigns featuring elected officials targeted for defeat. Ads featured the officials’ photos trained in the crosshairs of gun sites. A quick google of the phrase “gun site” (to determine its correct spelling) yielded several links, one in particular, AlterNet (1) with its ranking of the top ten Gun States, i.e., those with the highest number of gun-related fatalities and most permissive gun laws.

Ironically, Mississippi leads the list, being No.1 in gun deaths at 18.3 per 100,000 and 4th out of 50 for permissive gun laws; Arizona is No.2 with 15 gun deaths per 100,000 and 1st out of 50 for permissive gun laws. Arizona is followed by Alaska at No.3 (1.6/100K, 11th/50); Arkansas at No.4 (15.1/100K, 7th/50); and Louisiana at No.5 (19.9/100K, 23rd/50).

Loughner purchased his semi-automatic handgun legally at the Sportsman’s Warehouse in Tucson, and his ammunition from Wal-Mart. In 2000 Giffords, a centrist Democrat and “long-time gun owner” who supports gun owners’ rights, supported a ban on semi-automatic weapons. Her support for the ban resulted in Giffords receiving low grades from both the National Rifle Association and the lobbying group, Gun Owners of America. In 2008, she joined a bipartisan group of lawmakers sending an amicus brief to the Supreme Court arguing for the gun owners’ rights.

At the time Giffords issued this statement: “As a gun owner, I am a strong supporter of the Second Amendment. In February, I was proud to sign the Amicus Brief in District of Columbia v. Heller asking the Supreme Court to uphold the lower court ruling that overturned the long standing DC gun ban. We have a long tradition of gun ownership in the United States… It is a tradition which every law-abiding citizen should be able to enjoy.” (2) That said, one ponders the issues at play in the attack on Giffords.

The rush to accuse Sarah Palin and Fox News seems misplaced given the juvenile nature of their slurs and fantasies. The first thing that comes to mind upon seeing a public figure or media network post a photo of an elected official framed in an imaginary gun site is what bad form it presents. Professionals don’t do that sort of thing. Adults, other than comedians and buffoons, don’t talk about shooting, poisoning, choking, etc. anyone, particularly those on the opposing team. (3) It’s called sportsmanship, good manners, or common sense. Take your pick.

I’ve never understood people who fall under the spell of mean-spirited, though dominant, personalities capable of negatively swaying opinion towards another individual, cause, or coalition. I like to make my own decisions. If you rail too loudly and persistently against something in an attempt to sway me, there’s a good chance I’ll become suspicious of YOUR motives. If I’m going to dislike an individual, cause, or coalition, it’ll be based on MY experience and perception. Much like gun owners don’t cotton to having their right to bear arms threatened, I’m very protective of my right, ability, and RESPONSIBILITY to form my own opinions.

Armed attacks on the defenseless— be they elected officials in public places, co-workers in their workplace, or students in their elementary, high school, or college environs— are the acts of cowards and/or the insane. Is integrity and/or mental health of an individual the responsibility of the public at-large? Do we drop a dime or rat out the “crazy” person among us, or monitor and seek to assist them in some way? When do compassion and concern cross the line to dread and avoidance? A closer look at every mass murder gun incident in the last twenty years yields clues to the possibility of pending disaster. Peers and teachers saw the signs, but often parents were oblivious.

Loughner was banned from the Pima Community College campus for disruptive classroom behavior and irrational outbursts regarding his Constitutional rights. Re-enrollment was contingent upon the results of a mandated mental health evaluation. He was refused entrance into the armed forces due to his repeated admittance of drug use. Why would a person in such direct conflict with authority want to serve in the military, an organization structured upon a foundation of heterogeneity, intense common belief/focus, and the subordination of the individual for the greater good? His inability to fit into that system resulted in rejection. Ultimately acceptance and recognition, at some level, have been motivators for more than one assassin.

In 1980, Mark David Chapman killed John Lennon to attract attention. In 1981, John Hinkley shot President Ronald Reagan, and seriously wounded/permanently disabled James Brady to impress actress Jodie Foster. In 1999 in Columbine, Colorado, Eric Harris and Dylan Klebold killed 12 students, a teacher, and wounded 21 other students before committing suicide. Investigators struggled to understand what motivated the two young men, citing bullying, helplessness, insecurity and depression, the influence of popular culture, i.e., violent video games, music lyrics and the Goth subculture, as well as a need for attention. These reasons were proved wrong.

In 2007 at Virginia Tech, Seung-Hui Cho killed 32 people and wounded many others before committing suicide. Cho had a history of severe anxiety disorder that did not come to light, despite being declared mentally ill and court-ordered to attend treatment following charges of stalking. Cho’s status as a danger to himself precluded him from the purchase of firearms (a Glock-9); however, Virginia’s (No.28, 10.7/100K, 35th/50) out of sync (state and federal agencies) background checking system for potential gun buyers failed to flag Cho. (4) According to the NY Times, “The attacks received international media coverage and drew widespread criticism of U.S. laws and culture… sparking intense debate about gun violence, gun laws, gaps in the U.S. system for treating mental health issues, the perpetrator’s state of mind, the responsibility of college administrations, privacy laws, journalism ethics, and other issues.”(5)

A criminal complaint has been files by the U.S. attorney’s office in Arizona charging Loughner with “the attempted murder of Rep. Gabrielle Giffords… the murders of legislative aide Gabriel Zimmerman and chief federal judge John M. Roll, respectively; and… the attempted murders of legislative aides Pamela Simon and Ron Barber, respectively.” (6) The charge of federal murder is available when a government official has been killed in the course of performing official duties (7), and is potentially a capital offense. The Justice Department may seek the death penalty from the grand jury in the murder of U.S. District Judge John M. Roll. Attempted murder under federal law carries a maximum penalty of 20 years’ imprisonment. (8)

Congratulations, Mr. Loughner. Everyone knows who you are now.
You are in a lot of trouble…

What is the point in blaming hate speech? That’s the million dollar question. Hate speech isn’t the exclusive domain of Sarah Palin, Fox News, etc., INSERT PET PEEVE HERE. Isn’t it also the resulting polarization of our political system to prevent compromise and solution to our continuing economic and social problems? What possible good comes from deadlock? Is it that important to maintain the status quo, or worse yet, a significant imbalance of power that favors one faction to the detriment of another?

A former Republican turned Democrat, Rep. Giffords has been outspoken on controversial issues ranging from President Obama’s healthcare reforms, gun control, immigration reform, US-Mexico border policy, lowering government spending, tax cuts, as well as presenting a less liberal, more moderate stance for the Democratic Party.(9) Intelligent, educated, and sophisticated, she has been a Fulbright Scholar, a fellow at the John F. Kennedy School of Government at Harvard, and the CEO of a family business. Giffords is a proponent of mental health funding, public education, and renewable energy sources, particularly solar energy. She is married to U.S. Navy Captain and astronaut Mark E. Kelly.

So why target an accomplished public servant for assassination? Friends say Loughner thought Giffords was a “fake.” Mark David Chapman thought John Lennon was a “phony.” “Columbine” author Dave Cullen concludes that Harris and Klebold killed randomly, without intended targets. Their victims weren’t the intended targets; their larger motive was to terrorize the entire country, and they did. (10)

Sarah Palin defends heated political debate, and denounces the media for blaming political rhetoric as instigating “the despicable act of this deranged, apparently apolitical criminal.” Yet again, we are operating in fear. Fear that could be assuaged by working together, sharing information and resources, and putting an end to interagency turf wars that let international and domestic terrorists and assassins slip through the cracks and loopholes in our system.

In closing, I think we all agree with President Obama’s belief that we can all be better and live up to Christina Taylor Green’s expectations for our country— not a liberal or conservative America, but the United States of America.

REFERENCES

1  Site Ranks Most Dangerous “Gun States”: Here Are the Top Ten. Altnet.org.
2  Girouard, April. Giffords A Longtime Supporter of Gun Rights. FoxNews.com.
09 Jan. 2011
3  Rindell, Steve. “Fox News: The No. 1 Name in Murder Fantasies”. 10 Nov 2010. Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting (FAIR).
4  Luo, Michael. “U.S. Rules Made Killer Ineligible to Purchase Gun”. The New York Times. 21 Apr 2007.
5  Ibid.
6  McCarthy, Andrew. “Federal Charges in the Shootings”. National Review Online.
10 Jan 2011. http://www.nationalreview.com/corner/256757/federal-charges-shootings-andrew-c-mccarthy
7  Title 18, U.S. Code, sections 1111 and 1114
8  Title 18, U.S. Code, section 1113
9   Braithwaite, Tom. “Giffords Known for Moderate Views”. Financial Times.
10 Jan 2011.
10  Cullen, David. Columbine. New York, NY: Twelve Publishers. 2010.

Veterans Day

In 1997, my brother retired from the US Marine Corps after serving 20 years. I don’t know a lot of the details of his life lately, as we have been estranged. Now he’s sick, and that changes everything. The VA seems to think he has Hashimotos Encephalopathy, “an autoimmune disease with symptoms that can mimic many different neurological disorders…  (and) may be misdiagnosed as stroke, early dementia, Alzheimer’s, psychosis, brain cancer, primary progressive aphasia, and others.”[i] His military duties included: serving as a chemical operations specialist; a Gulf War tour that included exposure to the smoke and contaminants released by the Kuwaiti oil fires associated with Gulf War Syndrome; as well as exposure to toxic levels of chemicals in Camp LeJeune’s drinking water (1957-1987)[ii].

In October, a cousin contacted me with a barrage of distressing and confusing information. Until then, I had been unaware that his health had started to deteriorate. I wasn’t sure that I wanted any part of the drama, but feared that he might be in danger. Several phones calls helped clarify the true circumstances, and I spoke to my brother for the first time in ten years, and was relieved that he is well cared for and safe. He is docile now; whereas before, he was always somewhat soft spoken, but capable of incredible intensity.

His wife, a retired VA employee is all too familiar with the pitfalls of the VA health care system, and had not seen the progress she desired in Tennessee. Though treating him for thyroid issues, Hashimotos had not been considered, and it is a condition where time is of the essence. They’ve since relocated to the Northeast to be closer to her adult children, and in the care of another VA network. I’m afraid to ask too many questions— both out of respect for her role as his primary advocate, and/or, well, I’m not sure I want to know.

I can’t bear the thought that he might have been irreparably harmed by his military service. The loss of a limb or a sense, particularly sight and/or hearing, is catastrophic, but there are prosthetics. A person’s mind is another story, and this is my brother.

I am far from alone in this situation. There are so many veterans and their families dealing with seen and unseen injuries from our wars. Just in my lifetime, there’s been the Vietnam Conflict, the Invasion of Grenada, and the Gulf, Afghanistan, and Iraqi Wars. My father fought in World War II and Korea. That’s a lot of veterans needing quality healthcare. We can’t shilly-shally about semantics. Is it Agent Orange? Is it Gulf War Syndrome? Is it Post-Traumatic Stress Disorder? It is a travesty that there are any homeless veterans.

Our soldiers and protectors need our help, and they need it now.

I read the news stories about young soldiers who’ve come back from war unable to cope— the tragedies of broken lives. I shake my head and think about the last ten years— not just the stupidity of estrangement, but the absolute absurdity of our country’s economic status as the result of rampant greed and missteps on the part of our elected officials— both parties. Nobody gets a pass here.

Healthcare is imperative. Opponents of universal healthcare point to Canada’s healthcare system with its limitations and waiting lists. What do you think is happening to our veterans? Ask them about waiting lists, limitations, screw-ups, etc. I don’t want to call my brother’s hospital room and have him not answer— knowing that my next step is calling the nurse’s station so a kind-hearted nurse can go to his room, answer and hand him the phone. I am so grateful that they care enough to do that for him (and for me), but I want him to be able to answer the phone.

I am grateful that the VA is running an extensive battery of tests and that his wife really loves him. Now, I want his country, our country, to make him a priority. Why aren’t we doing everything possible to make our veterans whole and secure in the knowledge that we appreciate and admire their courage and sacrifice. Are we are willing to forego our own comforts to ensure theirs?

Ancient cultures esteemed their warriors— that seems like an admirable model.
Thank you to all of our veterans, especially my brother.

---

[i] Seminara, Beverly. Hashimoto’s Encephalopathy: A Neuroendocrine Disorder.
< http://www.thyroid- info.com/hashimotos-encephalopathy.htm>

[ii] The chemicals that seeped into Camp Lejeune’s water (used for drinking and bathing at the base) were PCE    (tetrachloroethylene), a dry cleaning agent that has been linked to cancers, and TCE (trichloroethylene),  a degreasing solvent. Levels of PCE in the camp’s drinking water were measured at up to 200 micrograms per liter. The Environmental Protection Agency allowable limit of PCE in drinking water is 5 micrograms per liter     or less. The contamination at Camp Lejeune lasted for 30 years, until the affected wells were closed. Meanwhile, the Marines and their families drank the water during military assignments on the base that averaged two years.

Paying Down Debt

On Sunday, September 26, 2010, Germany paid the final payment of £59.5 million (US $94,206,350), settling reparations levied by the Treaty of Versailles in 1919 to the assist the war-ravaged nations of Belgium and France, as well as reimbursing the Allies for some of the costs of waging World War I.

According to Telegraph.co.uk (http://www.telegraph.co.uk/), the reparations paid “the price for one world war and laid the foundations for another… when Germany was forced to pay… compensation for what was then the bloodiest conflict in history, leaving nearly ten million soldiers dead.” Germany’s economy was crippled by the staggering debt, resulting in resentment and a nationalist sentiment which helped propel the Nazis to power. As Chancellor of Germany, Adolf Hitler reneged on reparations, setting in motion one of the many domino decisions leading to World War II.

Thinking about 92 years of reparation payments boggles the mind, given the subsequent events of the 20^th Century: the Great Depression, World War II, the Korean War and Viet Nam Conflict; the Civil Rights Movement; the Space Race/man walking on the moon/both Shuttle disasters; the Cold War and fall of the Berlin Wall; 9/11 and the Gulf and Iraqi Wars; globalization; the Internet (Twitter and Facebook); the housing/credit economic meltdowns and continuing recession.

That’s quite a lineup, considering how much progress civilization has made while Germany quietly chipped away at its debt. Progress cost money, and boy-oh-boy have we spent some money… From surpluses to mountains of debt—and that’s just in the last ten years. A quick look today (10/1/10) at the National Debt Clock (http://usdebtclock.org/) shows a tally of $13.5 trillion and counting, assigning $43,600 per citizen and $121,645 per taxpayer.

Recently, I listened to a young man (28 yrs old) speak regarding community economic development. Towards the end of the presentation as the answers became an intriguing mix of his professional and personal perspective, he touched on the touchy subject of social security, saying neither he nor his generation would ever benefit. He continued, saying that he and his voting peers would not continue to fund the excesses currently in place.

Looking around the room, I realized that the makeup included approximately 50% “Boomers I or Baby-boomers (born 1946-1954/coming of age 1963-1972), and Boomers II or Generation Jones (born 1955-1964/coming of age 1973-1983) with both groups concerned with job status, work ethic, and social standing; 33% Gen X (born 1965-1979) who often had  both parents working, were exposed to daycare and divorce, and were known as ‘latchkey kids’; and 17% Gen Y (Millennium or Net Generation [born 1980-1995]) who are very technology wise and comfortable with ethnically diverse groups.” 1

I agreed with and echoed his sentiment that most of us wouldn’t benefit from having paid into the Social Security system; however, I had a deer-in-the-headlights moment realizing that I am in the group he has no intention of financing in my golden years. Then I wondered who was going to be paying for his parents (possibly Boomer II or Gen X). It occurred to me that we might be booking passage on the same ice flow together… 2

He has a point. Who is going to pay for the excesses, not just of Social Security, but the litany of programs, projects, and wars we’ve rung up on credit?

As a Boomer II, I’m planning on working for a long, long time─ doing my share and covering my costs. Of course my continued presence in the workforce potentially hinders a Gen X, Y, or Z’s (Gen Z [born 1995-20XX.] “They are not yet adults and have never known a life without the internet, computers and mobile phones.”)1 opportunity for advancement.

Oh my, as a long-term and continuing taxpayer, I’m an obstacle and liability, but necessity within the system. It makes me glad I haven’t had a child, effectively “replacing myself” on this earth, while saddling him/her with debt, resentment, and uncertainty.

Revisiting the origin of this musing, John Maynard Keynes (Keynesian economics), principal representative of the British Treasury at the Treaty of Versailles/Paris Peace Conference, resigned in protest of the magnitude of the reparations, protesting, “Germany will not be able to formulate correct policy if it cannot finance itself.” It took 92 years to pay off $94 million. I’m not even going to do the math on $13.5 trillion…

I hope there are some smart thinkers out there. After they join me on the ice flow, the substantial fortunes that Bill Gates and Warren Buffet have signed over for the betterment of the future will come into play. Maybe it’ll be enough to pay off the debt, wipe the slate clean, and start anew.

1 Jackson, Jo. Veterans, Baby Boomers, Gen X, Gen Y and Gen Z: Understanding the Different Generations and Their Characteristics. Suite 101.com. Jan 4 2010. Viewed Oct 1 2010 < http://www.suite101.com/content/veterans-baby-boomers-gen-x-gen-y-and-gen-z-a185353>

2 (http://www.straightdope.com/columns/read/2160/did-eskimos-put-their-elderly-on-ice-floes-to-die)

To-Do List Topics

I haven’t blogged lately, not that I don’t think about things to say while driving to destinations farther than across town. Here are a couple of topics off  my mental blog To-Do list:

Topic #1: My New Hero

I have a new hero, or heroine is more the case. Recently I meet a young woman who’s working in Arkansas as an ARRA grant coordinator/project development specialist assisting small communities in getting wastewater treatment facilities in place. In rural areas water quality can be a big problem, as well as a complicated, time-consuming process if there’s no one dedicated/assigned to the task of carrying it through to completion. That’s what my new friend does. Before that, she lived in the Pacific Northwest working as a municipal planner in a good-sized, progressive city. When that city needed to cut staff to reduce its budget, my friend volunteered to be let go as she is single with no children and no mortgage.

She saw it as the right thing to do— a sacrifice she could make more easily than someone with a family and hefty financial responsibilities. Wow. That’s character, integrity, courage, compassion, etc., and kindness.

Kindness… I just don’t run into kindness that often. Good intentions? Sure, I see those all of the time, but kindness and selflessness, not so much. I’m hoping she will let me be her friend for a long time.

Topic #2: Cooperation vs. Competition.

Recently I was involved in a community planning exercise—that is a game scenario in which teams were in competition to build New Town, as well as accumulate the most cash to “win”. Activity leading up to this exercise involved several hours of presentations and discussions of community planning based upon consideration of the greater good, cooperation, pooled resources, etc. Each team received its bank (the amounts varied depending on the team’s agenda) and “secret” instructions outlining potential strategies for accruing bonus points. Each round of the game had deadlines in which points, funding, and the acquisition of assets were gained, lost, or withdrawn. Haste and pressure were essential elements of the game.

Almost immediately, an interesting thing began to happen—not only were the teams in completion with each other, but internal conflicts within the individual teams surfaced as some members saw the bottom line (the most money wins!) as the objective, while others saw cooperating with the other teams to develop a growth strategy for the greater good as the objective.

In the Round 1, I was elected the first mayor. (My goodness, I haven’t won anything since that set of water glasses in Bingo.) I must say I felt honored, until the rush of gimmes and you-owe-me’s started. My own team was VERY displeased with me for not forwarding OUR agenda (See bonus points.) over the well-being of the community. We (Madame Mayor & the Council) proposed three initiatives: a wastewater treatment plant, a school, and a town hall. We wanted zoning, but were warned that too many items diluted the vote, potentially preventing anything from passing. The school and town hall passed, but the majority of the votes had been cast. In order to pass the water treatment facility, teams would have to ante up $100 per vote to meet the required 18 for passage. To our credit, both the town hall and school were centrally located favoring no one team’s quadrant.

Remember that bottom line, those agendas, and winning? The following day’s New Town News headline screamed, “EPA disaster—Water Unfit to Drink—Industrial Pollutants Kill Fish—People Next. In Round 2, after a rousing reelection speech encouraging cooperation, pooled resources, negotiation and compromise, I was summarily voted out of office, as was my entire Council. The second mayor passed the wastewater initiative, added another school, and got a park, but the pollution issues weren’t completely remedied. In addition, New Town was an unattractive hodgepodge of industrial and residential development with no identifiable community core/downtown, i.e., Main Street/retail corridor.

In Round 4, Mayor 2 and most of his Council were voted out of office. Mayor 3 and his Council finished the game. The scores were tallied and the teams that started the game with the bigger banks still had more money. We were told that we were typical in our individual team/single-minded pursuit of the bottom line. We were told that the 2009 team had refused to be rushed and sat out a round in order to take the time to strategize their approach to growth. “After that, it was all ‘Kumbaya’ and kind of boring for us running the game,” was our game coordinator’s comment.

Hmmm. Cooperation is effective but boring. Isn’t it ironic that in 2009 cooperation made the exercise run more smoothly and effectively, and that everyone won?

Isn’t it more ironic that 2010’s cut-throat “strategy” not only didn’t yield a New Town exhibiting clear cut indicators for quality of life: healthy environment, schools, parks, jobs and commerce, etc., OR winners, as those that started with an advantage maintained that advantage. Is there a lesson to be learned here? It’s so tempting to ignore the obvious.

Small Projects & Small Town Mississippi

It has been a busy summer filled with travel to places in Mississippi that I’ve never been before. When I came to Mississippi in 2005 as a non-traditional student, my focus those first few years was getting through my coursework. In the last couple of years as the result of my work here at the Institute, I’ve had opportunities to see more of the state and meet local people. In recent months I’ve spent several days photographing at locations in municipalities hoping to undertake rehabilitation projects.

In April I went to Okolona, spending the best part of the day taking photographs and making notes at the site of the former Okolona Technical College, which was established in 1902 to provide industrial training for young African-American men and women. Closed in 1965 after funding was discontinued, the College’s buildings and grounds have suffered vandalism, exposure to the elements, and decades of benign neglect. The National Council of Negro Women purchased the site in 1990, hoping to rehabilitate the remaining facility and campus to offer training and educational services to those in need from Okolona and the surrounding region (1).

In May with other Stennis’ associates, I ventured to Marks, Lula, and Coahoma. Prior to my trip I’d never been to the Delta. In Marks, we ate lunch with Delta Mayors Joe Shego, Jr. (Marks), W.J Jones, Patricia Furdge, and several aldermen from the area. In Coahoma, Mayor W.J. Jones showed us City Hall and the adjacent building, originally the town’s elementary school, which now serves as a dorm for volunteer groups coming to Coahoma to build Habitat homes. The gym remains in sound condition. Throughout the dorm, volunteers’ signed group T-shirts deck the halls like banners from a parade, proudly identifying member origins as they have passed this way. Mayor Jones wants a face-lift and expansion of City Hall’s entrance. Later we toured Coahoma proper as it faces the town’s railroad tracks, visually inspecting a wonderful turn of the century two-story commercial building, and newer one-story structures─ all in need of rehabilitation.

The same day Lula’s Mayor Patricia Furdge showed us her town’s center. We walked through town assessing, photographing, and discussing possibilities. Lula has a three-block downtown, which includes its City Hall, an active one-story convenience store adjacent to a well-preserved two-story commercial building. In addition there’s a grocery store, a good-sized Quonset hut, and an abandoned laundromat with a mural depicting life on the Mississippi River., We walked to the Civic Center and a playground farther down the road. Again─ all in need of rehabilitation.

My role in our visit was to photograph and develop preliminary plan drawings of potential improvements. In Lula, fresh paint would provide immediate and impressive results.

In Coahoma, I’d like to see City Hall with its adjacent volunteer dorm, gym, and small front lawn developed into a unified campus. These are small projects and there is grant money available, but the clock is ticking.

Funding in this economic climate has become the 800-lb. gorilla in the planning process. Redevelopment in the Delta has long suffered from the lack of funding that larger municipalities have begun to experience in our continuing recession. Knowing that funding is scare and competitive, I’ve been mulling an alternate approach inspired by the Peace Corps microloan program (2), which upon review is not that dissimilar from the credit building programs HUD offers first-time home buyers. However, rather than relying exclusively on federal dollars, I’m more interested in cultivating local resources and assets.

In microloan programs, potential loan recipients participate in the program together providing motivational support, shared responsibility for repayment, and benefit from the cumulative pride of each others’ successes. The key to the system is that the loans are small, making them repayable and sustainable. The repaid loans constitute the fund pool for future loans. Microfinance projects are small and local, keeping the successes in the community. Now, let me tie all of this together…

On June 30 Daphine Foster (3) and I made a presentation at the Mississippi Municipal League 2010 Conference based on research conducted regarding Tupelo’s historic Mill Village and yielding an draft resource identification guide for small towns, “Identifying and Fostering Small Town Assets: A Resource Identification and Development Guide for Small Towns” (4).  In the spring, once the information was compiled, it needed to be tested. I enlisted the enthusiasm of Daphine Foster, a fellow student in Jackson State’s doctoral program for urban and regional planning, to see if the guide could be useful in identifying assets and resources in her hometown, Hazelhurst, in Copiah County Mississippi. Using the guide, she developed a presentation for the Hazelhust City Council identifying local assets and resources, as well as identifying and prioritizing 25 projects under five project areas: History, Public Facilities, Parks and Gardens, Youth Areas, and Churches. The top rehabilitation projects were the restoration/rehabilitation of the historic Faler Opera House, improvement of the parks at Lakes Hazel and Hidalgo, and the rehabilitation of the municipal pool and softball fields.

For the presentation historic preservation was of particular interest to Daphine, as she had completed a Mississippi Department of Archives and History Boot Camp in early June. Her pet project is the rehabilitation of Hazelhurst’s Faler Opera House, built in the 1880s as a premiere entertainment venue featuring a proscenium arch and host to all manner of entertainment as listed in Julius Cahn’s 1897 official theatrical guide (5).

Daphine realized and researched the requirement that Hazelhurst, in order to qualify for historic preservation funding, must become a certified local government. The benefits of becoming a certified local government include the ability to: authorize local historic preservation ordinances; enact ordinances creating a local preservation commission; confer powers to a local preservation commission; provide penalties for violations; allow for the appeal process; designate local historic district or landmarks; conduct surveys of resources; recommend districts and landmarks; and review applications for construction, alteration, and demolition (6).

In the course of her presentation, it became obvious to members of the audience that the guide could be useful in gathering information on their individual municipalities─ information particularly useful in writing grants. More importantly, it provided a method for not only identifying but prioritizing potential projects. Gathering and centrally maintaining this information aids municipalities in identifying local assets and resources, particularly individuals capable of assisting in recruiting and training volunteers, and soliciting in-kind services─ all the while building a community’s confidence in its ability to plan projects, develop budgets, pursue funding resources, and implement local projects.

An important part of the prioritization process is recognizing the feasibility of implementing a project. Community participation and buy-in results in the availability of volunteers, in-kind services, and local funding to off-set grant funding. These elements should influence project ranking. As mentioned earlier, in tough economic times, the implementation of small projects can have a big impact in the community as each achievement contributes to the larger sum in the form of community pride.

Examples of small civic projects cited included: establishing neighborhood associations (7), building the Tupelo Creative Commons (8), a small pocket park adjacent to the historic Mill Village neighborhood, and the Tupelo Daffodil Project which involved the planting of 150,000 daffodil bulbs utilizing 1400 volunteer hours (9). In each instance Sherrie Cochran, Environmental Planner for Tupelo’s Department of Development Services, spear-headed the efforts, writing the grants and coordinating project activities. The success of these projects was dependent upon volunteer participation, which effectively eliminated the cost of labor and resulted in near immediate implementation of project phases at each stage of the plan.

When pursuing federal and/or state funding, volunteer labor and in-kind services are “money in the bank”. In addition, funds that have been accrued and designated, i.e., saved for projects also contribute to grant match requirements.

Already in Hazelhurst there are plans in place to use volunteer labor to begin the renovation process for the Faler Opera House. The Tupelo Creative Commons offers lessons learned for the Lakes projects. Since small projects are less expensive and more easily implemented, they are a form of more immediate gratification, keeping communities engaged in the planning process and having early successes to motivate continued activities. As mentioned earlier, when communities work together there is accountability. Accountability yields results, and results yield progress, pride, and prosperity.

Small victories are victories just the same.

________________________________________________________________________
Copies of the referenced publications are available on the John C. Stennis website at msgovt.org
________________________________________________________________________

Referenced Materials

1. Carl Small Town Center. A Case Study Speculating on the Possibilities Okolona Technical College. Mississippi State University (1997). <http://kubuildingtech.org/scriss/pdf/OkolonaDocument.pdf&gt;

2. Peace Corps. Module 2: Microfinance Methods. A Microenterprise Training Guide for Peace Corps Volunteers.   
<http://multimedia.peacecorps.gov/multimedia/pdf/library/M0068_microent_2-3.pdf&gt;

3. Also a non-traditional student, Daphine Foster retired from a 32-year career with IBM in 2006. After her 1974 graduation from Millsaps College with a BA in accounting, she joined IBM, gaining experience in many areas including executive management, sales management, project management, and consulting. 

As a retiree Daphine is actively involved in the community. She is currently serving on the Executive Board of the area Chamber of Commerce and as secretary for the county’s Democratic Executive Committee. Daphine also served as volunteer Director of the Robert Johnson Creative Arts Learning Center for three years. Daphine developed the center, designed the curriculum as well as taught the entrepreneur class and coordinated the Robert Johnson Superstar Talent Showcase.

Daphine received her Master’s in Political Science at Jackson State University in May 2009.  While working on her master’s, she was named Who’s Who Among Students in American Colleges and Universities and she was also named a member of Jackson State University’s MU Chapter of Alpha Epsilon Lambda National Honor Society.  She is currently working on her PhD in Urban Regional Planning at Jackson State University. 

4. Jones, Claudette. Identifying and Fostering Small Town Assets: A Resource Identification and Development Guide for Small Towns. John C. Stennis Institute of Government (2010).

5. Cahn, Julius. Julius Cahn’s Official Theatrical Guide containing information of the leading theatres and attractions in America. Publisher: Empire Theatre Building (1904).

6. Foster, Daphine. Resource Identification, Historic Preservation, Conservation and Alternate Funding in Hazlehurst. Mississippi’s Historic District. 79^th Mississippi Municipal League Conference. PowerPoint presentation  (June 2010).

7. Cochran, Sherrie. Neighborhood  Project Planning Guide. Keep Tupelo Beautiful. Tupelo Department of Development Services.  <http://tupelodevelopmentservices.com/ktb.aspx&gt;

8. Cochran, Sherrie and Claudette Jones. The Importance of Keep America Beautiful Affiliation. Technical Brief 200-1234-03: John C. Stennis Institute of Government (March 2008). <http://msgovt.org/modules/cms/images/thumb/159.pdf&gt;

9. Cochran, Sherrie. The Daffodil Project 2008 Wrap-Up Report. Keep Tupelo Beautiful. Tupelo Department of Development Services.  <http://tupelodevelopmentservices.com/ktb.aspx&gt;