A while back, my wife turned left onto a busy street, then signalled that she needed to move right across two lanes of traffic so she could pull into the grocery store. But as she put on her signal, a driver in the right lane sped up to block her move, then proceeded to inform her of his opinion using a very specific finger.
Now, it’s not like she cut him off. She was just signaling her need to get into the next lane. But the other driver’s reaction left her with gritted teeth and boiling blood. And it’s fairly easy to imagine the mood of the other driver. I doubt his gesture was his way of telling her that he thought she was number one.
So here we have an everyday, completely normal circumstance that ends up leaving two people irritated and seething. But what if it had been handled differently? What if instead of blocking her path, the guy had slowed down to let her in? My wife waves to say thanks, and the other driver gets the momentary warm fuzzy feeling that comes with the simplest act of kindness.
The difference such acts can make was brought home by an email I received the other day. Like everyone else, I get emails forwarded with every manner of joke, prayer, advice and admonition. Some are cute, some troublesome and some just not worth the time to read (though, of course, not anything that’s been sent to me by anyone reading this). But every so often there is a little gem that pops out and makes me take notice.
I got one of those the other day. It simply said, “If you want to cheer yourself up, do something to cheer up someone else.”
So simple and so true. And cheering up someone else doesn’t require silly jokes and funny faces. Tiny acts of kindness – letting the other driver have the open parking space, letting the person who’s holding up the checkout lane know that it’s okay, giving back the incorrect change that the cashier gave you – make others feel better about the world around them. In the process, we feel better about ourselves.
For years I’ve carried a small clipping that quotes Harry Gray, former CEO of United Technologies, speaking on putting aside our focus on life’s grand awards in order to enjoy the little things – a glorious sunset, a kiss behind the ear, a four pound bass, hot soup, cold beer.
I often pull that out when I find myself fretting about things beyond my control. For all my want of a house on the lake, a better car, a bigger boat, the most enjoyable and rewarding moments are those I spend on my deck smelling the flowers while watching my kids play. Those moments bring more contentment – a much underrated emotion – than all my successes.
We can help others enjoy those moments. For proof I offer this little anecdote. I was in college when I received a call from a stranger, informing me they had found something I might want. She arrived at my door with a wallet that I had lost. In it was my cash, my driver’s license and that clipping reminding me to appreciate the little things in life. A simple act of kindness that cheers me to this day.
4/29/2005
4/28/2005
Opportunities Abound Beyond Rec Center
[Second in a series about a proposed community center in West Chester, OH]
When someone suggested that last week’s column questioning the wisdom of building the West Chester Community Center in the face of some daunting economic challenges was too pessimistic, I was reminded of a story about the dot-com boom-and-bust. A CEO said it was like driving a Ferrari 120 mph, certain that the next gas station was just around the corner. Had they known it would be hundreds of miles, they’d have chosen to drive Toyotas at the speed limit. In other words, they would have chosen prudence over wild optimism.
I believe prudence is wise, especially after reviewing the township’s feasibility study that projects family membership fees somewhere between $640 and $1,165 a year. To a lot of families, that’s a big chunk of cash that many can’t afford.
But prudence need not mean stagnation. As Bob Marley once sang, when one door is closed, many more are opened. While I don’t subscribe to the view that this is a question of schools versus pools, I do believe it is a question of how we choose to allocate community resources. And choosing wisely could open a lot of doors, some simple and some breathtaking.
For example, what if we scaled back the plans so they’re closer to the modest concept many of us on the original 2012 Vision Committee envisioned? We could incorporate a much needed new library with some of the amenities offered by the Community Center such as a senior center, meeting rooms, an auditorium or facilities for the arts.
What if all the energy that’s been spent trying to make the community center a reality were instead directed toward changing state law so that the township could indeed spend TIF money on schools, thereby maintaining educational excellence while reducing demands on the taxpayer?
What if we installed the sidewalks so many long for, creating a walkable community that is safer for our children, healthier for all of us and more interconnected than it will ever be given our current dependence on the automobile?
And finally, what about West Chester’s hidden gem? When the community center was first proposed, Voice of America was still a web of radio antennas and wires. Today, it’s parkland nearly half the size of New York’s Central Park. Imagine not only ball fields, ponds and forested bike paths, but also pools and every other amenity we envision for the Community Center – and more – all in a much grander campus-like park setting.
It won’t happen overnight. But like a garden, VOA is a canvas that we can work on for decades without jeopardizing our immediate financial future. Best of all, VOA’s historical significance and name recognition could help us leverage corporate sponsorships and government grants that might make anything from a history museum to children’s science center possible. And a century from now, instead of a 100 year-old rec center in an aging commercial district, our descendants will marvel at our vision in creating a pastoral jewel in the midst of what by then is sure to be a congested urban metropolis.
I know a lot of people have poured their hearts and souls into the Community Center. Some have dug deep into their pockets to see it become reality. We are blessed to have such dedicated citizens among us. But there are so many other doors we could open. Let’s not lock them all in one felled swoop.
When someone suggested that last week’s column questioning the wisdom of building the West Chester Community Center in the face of some daunting economic challenges was too pessimistic, I was reminded of a story about the dot-com boom-and-bust. A CEO said it was like driving a Ferrari 120 mph, certain that the next gas station was just around the corner. Had they known it would be hundreds of miles, they’d have chosen to drive Toyotas at the speed limit. In other words, they would have chosen prudence over wild optimism.
I believe prudence is wise, especially after reviewing the township’s feasibility study that projects family membership fees somewhere between $640 and $1,165 a year. To a lot of families, that’s a big chunk of cash that many can’t afford.
But prudence need not mean stagnation. As Bob Marley once sang, when one door is closed, many more are opened. While I don’t subscribe to the view that this is a question of schools versus pools, I do believe it is a question of how we choose to allocate community resources. And choosing wisely could open a lot of doors, some simple and some breathtaking.
For example, what if we scaled back the plans so they’re closer to the modest concept many of us on the original 2012 Vision Committee envisioned? We could incorporate a much needed new library with some of the amenities offered by the Community Center such as a senior center, meeting rooms, an auditorium or facilities for the arts.
What if all the energy that’s been spent trying to make the community center a reality were instead directed toward changing state law so that the township could indeed spend TIF money on schools, thereby maintaining educational excellence while reducing demands on the taxpayer?
What if we installed the sidewalks so many long for, creating a walkable community that is safer for our children, healthier for all of us and more interconnected than it will ever be given our current dependence on the automobile?
And finally, what about West Chester’s hidden gem? When the community center was first proposed, Voice of America was still a web of radio antennas and wires. Today, it’s parkland nearly half the size of New York’s Central Park. Imagine not only ball fields, ponds and forested bike paths, but also pools and every other amenity we envision for the Community Center – and more – all in a much grander campus-like park setting.
It won’t happen overnight. But like a garden, VOA is a canvas that we can work on for decades without jeopardizing our immediate financial future. Best of all, VOA’s historical significance and name recognition could help us leverage corporate sponsorships and government grants that might make anything from a history museum to children’s science center possible. And a century from now, instead of a 100 year-old rec center in an aging commercial district, our descendants will marvel at our vision in creating a pastoral jewel in the midst of what by then is sure to be a congested urban metropolis.
I know a lot of people have poured their hearts and souls into the Community Center. Some have dug deep into their pockets to see it become reality. We are blessed to have such dedicated citizens among us. But there are so many other doors we could open. Let’s not lock them all in one felled swoop.
4/21/2005
Too Many Uncertainties Surround Community Center
[First in a series about a proposed community center in West Chester, OH]
I really, really want to throw my support behind the West Chester Community Center. With a daughter who lives to swim, a son who’ll play any sport and a pair of creaky knees that have forced me to find a form of exercise other than running, we could be the poster family for the center. Furthermore, I was on the original 2012 Vision Committee that first recommended the idea. And to top it off, some of the center’s most ardent supporters are friends whose opinions I trust and respect.
Still, I just cannot bring myself to say we should build it. Perhaps if West Chester existed in a vacuum, immune to all the influences, challenges and demands of the outside world, my opinion would be different. But it doesn’t. And those challenges give me pause. Here’s why.
Putting aside the TIF funding that will be used to build the project, let’s consider the operating costs. Projections show that the center will be self-sustaining through membership and user fees. Even if that turns out to be true – and we all know that even the best-intentioned government projections have been known to be wrong – it will mean that we’ll need nearly $3 million from local businesses and citizens to breakeven each year. If we don’t hit that $3 million breakeven number, then we’ll either need to hit up the taxpayer to make up the difference or cut into other township services. Neither is a pleasant prospect.
Now, we can argue that West Chester has the demographics to crack that $3 million nut. But are we sure? Consider that we’ve defeated four straight levy requests – three for the schools and one for parks – in the past eighteen months. Perhaps we’re not quite as flush with cash as we like to think.
And that’s without all the pressures we’re going to feel as taxpayers in the coming years. We’ve got education that needs to be funded, an out-of-whack state budget that is going to hit schools, local governments and taxpayers in the pocketbook, and an out-of-control federal deficit.
Our friends in Washington currently spend almost $2,000 per U.S. resident more than they collect in taxes each year – all before the baby boomers start collecting Social Security, using Medicare and taking advantage of the new prescription drug benefit. At some point we’ll need to stop borrowing and start paying.
Add to that our exploding healthcare costs, reduced employer contributions to insurance, precarious energy supplies and skyrocketing fuel prices and it gets a little scary. I can’t say that all these costs will make the community center unsustainable. But no one – and I mean no one – can say they won’t. And if it isn’t self-supporting, that will become one more drain on the taxpayer’s wallet.
With all the uncertainties we face, that is not a risk we should take on. We can close our eyes and plunge ahead. But first we should ask one simple question: Is the Community Center a necessity? If the answer is no, then we should take a pass.
For all the talk of sustainable communities and the need to keep up with our rec center-building neighbors, I believe the thriving communities of the future will be those that keep overhead low while focusing on core necessities like police, fire and education. Let’s be one of those communities.
Next week: What ifs and alternatives
I really, really want to throw my support behind the West Chester Community Center. With a daughter who lives to swim, a son who’ll play any sport and a pair of creaky knees that have forced me to find a form of exercise other than running, we could be the poster family for the center. Furthermore, I was on the original 2012 Vision Committee that first recommended the idea. And to top it off, some of the center’s most ardent supporters are friends whose opinions I trust and respect.
Still, I just cannot bring myself to say we should build it. Perhaps if West Chester existed in a vacuum, immune to all the influences, challenges and demands of the outside world, my opinion would be different. But it doesn’t. And those challenges give me pause. Here’s why.
Putting aside the TIF funding that will be used to build the project, let’s consider the operating costs. Projections show that the center will be self-sustaining through membership and user fees. Even if that turns out to be true – and we all know that even the best-intentioned government projections have been known to be wrong – it will mean that we’ll need nearly $3 million from local businesses and citizens to breakeven each year. If we don’t hit that $3 million breakeven number, then we’ll either need to hit up the taxpayer to make up the difference or cut into other township services. Neither is a pleasant prospect.
Now, we can argue that West Chester has the demographics to crack that $3 million nut. But are we sure? Consider that we’ve defeated four straight levy requests – three for the schools and one for parks – in the past eighteen months. Perhaps we’re not quite as flush with cash as we like to think.
And that’s without all the pressures we’re going to feel as taxpayers in the coming years. We’ve got education that needs to be funded, an out-of-whack state budget that is going to hit schools, local governments and taxpayers in the pocketbook, and an out-of-control federal deficit.
Our friends in Washington currently spend almost $2,000 per U.S. resident more than they collect in taxes each year – all before the baby boomers start collecting Social Security, using Medicare and taking advantage of the new prescription drug benefit. At some point we’ll need to stop borrowing and start paying.
Add to that our exploding healthcare costs, reduced employer contributions to insurance, precarious energy supplies and skyrocketing fuel prices and it gets a little scary. I can’t say that all these costs will make the community center unsustainable. But no one – and I mean no one – can say they won’t. And if it isn’t self-supporting, that will become one more drain on the taxpayer’s wallet.
With all the uncertainties we face, that is not a risk we should take on. We can close our eyes and plunge ahead. But first we should ask one simple question: Is the Community Center a necessity? If the answer is no, then we should take a pass.
For all the talk of sustainable communities and the need to keep up with our rec center-building neighbors, I believe the thriving communities of the future will be those that keep overhead low while focusing on core necessities like police, fire and education. Let’s be one of those communities.
Next week: What ifs and alternatives
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)