Here we go again, sports fans. It's nearly time to elect three members to city council here in the Star City of the South. And, boy-oh-boy, do we ever have choices. Not.
    To be sure, The Old Sprawler has signs in her yard, and she has made her decision, but the options for voters are not optimum. We're not looking at a field of candidates that exactly

fits anyone's idea of positively inspiring. Instead, we are faced with three incumbents who have zero to recommend them, one recycled from a previous council, one who keeps trying to get elected to anything, three tea party challengers, and a pair of independents who show promise.
    Yesterday the candidates participated in a forum that was so tightly controlled that the most the newspaper found to say about it was that it was tightly controlled. I don't have a problem with clear and specific rules, but if it was so rigid that voters didn't get a chance to hear the candidates speak to the issues that matter to them, then the entire exercise was a waste of time. It shed no light on where they might stand on any issue that may be of importance to voters. And sometimes, it only takes a hairline of difference to make that distinction. Apparently that one didn't succeed.
    So looking at the candidates, we have one incumbent who has a boxcar load of financial baggage hanging over him, and yet the local paper hasn't really made much of that. His family owned a piece of property that they wanted to sell for a tank farm. It was just over the hill from a residential neighborhood that has had plenty of trouble trying to get cleaned up in terms of slumlords, poverty and the accompanying ills. Surprisingly, when that neighborhood rose up in anger, the plan was scuttled. It's also significant to note that the candidate sleezed out on money owed to former employees, not to mention the tax woes with the city, and other similar business problems. Yet, he is running for council and because he is from "that neighborhood" where they stick together like that last battalion marooned on a Pacific island, he is going to be supported. It matters not that his personal business is in the sewer.
    Another incumbent grills speakers who come before council with their issues as though they are unreliable witnesses against his client in a personal injury case. His disrespect and verbal combativeness is legendary, as is his arrogance and dismissiveness.
    The third incumbent is recycled from a previous council and barely made the cut last time. Another one who likes to pontificate, he shows up at neighborhood group meetings and acts like he's all for them. On a more personal note, I can honestly say that the only time he's ever really had anything much to do with da Big Kitty and me would be when he wants something. Classic example: in his previous term on council there was a school board appointment coming up. He blew me off when I called on behalf of the teachers' association. Then, when his second run at council was in trouble, he came to me wanting the teachers' support. I had all I could do to keep from laughing in his face. The teachers most certainly were NOT supporting him and I sure as hell wasn't going to suggest they do otherwise. He'd already screwed us, and the city, on his choice for school board.
    We have a another former city council member running this time. She changed her vote on an issue that set us back another batch of years on a civic improvement project. If they'd gone forward with it, we'd have a great stadium - out of the flood plain - that could host some really terrific events. She was silent when her neighbors were up in arms about a project that would forever alter their neighborhood, but she says neighborhoods are important. Well, they all do, but she and the incumbents seem to like the tax money they think they'll be reaping at the expense of a lovely little modest neighborhood more than they do the residents. Her neighbors aren't likely to forgive her for that deal any more than I will ever forgive her for changing her vote on something that was so forward thinking for this city. Neither should anyone else. She can't be trusted.
    I'm going to dismiss the three tea party candidates with one sentence: Taxes are like dues you pay to belong to an organization; being opposed to taxes is like saying you want to be a Rotarian, but you don't think you should have to pay the dues.
    One newish face is a person who has tried unsuccessfully to run for statewide office. She is very smart, very difficult, and an extremely hard worker. I happen to like her a lot, but I've certainly had my issues with her. To her credit, she's made some changes in her life that have substantially made her a much more positive and likeable individual. Because she listens, one should never assume anything. Listening to constituents is one of the strengths she would bring to the table. Being able to ferret out what would be best for the body politic is another matter. Can she do that? I'd say yes. She hears what other people miss. She can draw the conclusions accordingly.
    One of the independent candidates has been to more city council meetings than some of the sitting council members. She has heard all of the proceedings. She is aware of the issues that face the current council and she is quick to point out where they have spoken out of both sides of their collective mouth. My only complaint is that she has focused on the idea that the city has spent enough time, money and energy on the downtown and that she wants the money to go out to the neighborhoods. What she wants to have happen is less clear. I like her attitude and I like the fact that she has been blogging about the foibles and the various messes created by bad decisions. My problem is that she's focused them on her own corner of the town. I'd like to know what her vision for the rest of the city would be.
    Finally, the last independent candidate is less known to me, and so far from what I've seen, he's not likely to get any more press space in the paper unless he says or does something truly spectacular. That said, I know the people who are behind his candidacy and for them I have a ton of respect. They wouldn't be putting up just anyone and I know this fellow is smart as hell or he wouldn't have their support. He would represent a segment of our city that always needs representation, and he'd probably do so in a more forceful way than either of the other two folks who come from that neck of the woods. (Those two need to retire from council!) From the very little that has come out, I think he bears watching and probably a chance.
    We're going to have a couple of additional council forums and it will be interesting to see if the candidates do anything to distinguish themselves. I certainly hope so because if there is any one word that describes this campaign season, it is dreary.
    Come on, candidates! Roll up your sleeves and get controversial! Show us what's really going on! Quit playing it safe! You aren't going to stick out in this crowd of flat-liners unless you do. Somebody lob the first rock at the incumbents, please! The targets are so big you can't miss!
   

On Monday, we bade farewell and celebrated the wonderful life of Ethel Wolfe Born. In life, Ethel was a diminutive woman with a very soft voice. She was also a force of nature! I had the pleasure of knowing her through three different organizations, and she was so integral to each of them.

    As I listened to the speakers detailing bits and pieces of a life well lived and savored until the very end - with no plans for it ending, I might add - something struck me about those of us sitting in the sanctuary of her church. Many of us were blessed to know Ethel through more than one of her interests and passions. It was then that her skill as a weaver began to emerge in a larger sense.
    Ethel was a member of the Handweavers Guild, the National Association of Parliamentarians, the National League of American Pen Women, American Association of University Women and a whole bargeload of Methodist women's groups. She served as a trustee of Ferrum College and wrote a history of its beginnings as a project of Methodist women. She was a gifted needle artist, weaver, writer, parliamentarian and a devout Methodist. She was also fearless in the kitchen and brewed a wonderful pot of tea.
    Those of us lucky enough to be a part of Ethel's life became the threads that she skillfully wove. She guided us in and out of the facets of her life, creating a beautiful, soft and elegant fabric.
    My introduction to Ethel was thanks to attending my first AAUW program. It was an International Affairs program that she staged at her home. The speaker was her delightful daughter Barbara Craig, a teacher of college professors, and she told us about the focus of education for girls and young women in Taiwan, where she had lived. Ethel's home was a spacious "cottage" at a retirement community, overlooking a pond. I noted a collection of thimbles and knew immediately where one I had needed to go to live.
    Some time later, a mutual friend invited two of us to attend a parliamentary workshop because she decided we were future leaders of AAUW. There was Ethel, providing a portion of the program. "There are three rules in parliamentary procedure," she said softly. Holding up a finger, "The first is that we must always use good manners," a second finger arose "the second is that the minority MUST be heard," the third finger waggled "and the third is that the majority rules."
    It was a fascinating workshop and I wound up becoming a part of the Roanoke Valley Unit of the N.A.P., where I have succeeded Ethel as the secretary. (Along with a meticulous set of instructions for what to do with the records once I leave office!)
    Some time later, I was invited to attend a Pen Women meeting, and there she was! Interestingly enough, that's where I learned she was a weaver. It is also where I learned of her dry wit and her persnickety attention to detail. When the group began to falter, she made a skillful motion that brought it back from the brink and hit the reset button.
    We needed to update our bylaws to reflect some of the changes we'd made to the organization to keep it viable, and Ethel, smarty that she was, volunteered me to work with her on that. She provided the guidance and the compass - keeping us focused and attending to the important details. I typed. And learned.
    At last month's N.A.P. meeting, Jennie Sue presented a problem for our parliamentary workshop. She'd already consulted Ethel on it, and in the course of describing the problem, Ethel interjected her opinion that the group's bylaws were beyond repair. I'd never heard her at a loss for words before, never mind her voice rising to such a level of frustration that she declared their document to be "crap!" My eyebrows shot off my forehead and off into outer space as I doubled over with the giggles. "Ethel Born just said crap!" I murmured. It's been a month and I'm still in stitches over it!
    I received an email from Ethel, four days before she left us. It listed the things I needed to adjust on the Pen bylaws. I didn't get to it right away, but when I did, I followed her train of thought easily and made the changes. Having just spent a delightful three hours with her, talking about what the group still needed to do to grow and thrive, I began to get some ideas.
    And that's what Ethel was all about. Ideas. She was full of them! Jennie Sue tells of the time she conned her into learning to play the lyre so that Ethel could have a program with one of her Methodist groups that involved the lyre. Another time she coerced Jennie Sue into learning to chant so that the group could learn to chant.
    We all agreed, when Ethel came up with an idea and assigned us tasks, we jumped. We said how high on the way up, and asked when we might please come down. She brought us together, from the different corners of her busy and productive life, and she wove her magic around us, binding us to one another in the most surprising ways. Her standards were high and her expectations reasonable. We could and we would.
    Ethel was fastidious and organized. She was a gifted archivist and while she was such a good historian, she was as forward thinking as they came. The recent changes in Robert's Rules of Order came about primarily to address the issues surrounding electronic meetings. With one of her groups, Ethel wondered if they could bring people together by means of Skype!
    And so it is that while she is no longer walking among us, her gifts to us live on. We are forever woven into a web of people who will continue to cross paths and hold her dear in our hearts.
    Rest in peace, my dear friend. I miss you terribly because I know there was so much more you planned to teach me and I wanted so badly to learn it all from you. I promise to help Jennie Sue get some herbs going at Born Cottage, and I promise to keep Pen Women alive. (I have to! Pat is now prodding me in your stead!) The warp and the woof of your influence will stay in place. Love and peace~