NO!  NO!  NO! NO!

Stew Richland

Can you remember way back when you were a child and asked your parent(s) for permission to do something?  Do you remember their response?  Very often the parent would say NO!.  A parents prerogative based on: desire to protect the child, adult experience,   lack of interest,  frustration.  A precious child would then retort: “Why, How Come! “John’s father lets him go!”  What would you say?  Because “Y” is a crooked letter!.”  “You are too young to understand.”  “I will explain all this to you when you get a bit older.”  Some parents would just dismiss the request with a “I said no! End of discussion. you are dismissed.

What is wrong with this scenario?  Every child needs an explanation for a parents decision.  Depending on the child’s age and ability to comprehend,   To avoid providing a child with some logical reason for a decision made is unfair, unreasonable and some what dictatorial. It is only fair to provide  the child with some sort of comfort for a parents unfavorable response even if they don’t agree with the adult response.  Many parents have to learn to say no without feeling guilty. Setting boundaries is healthy and is part of good parenting. Its in the manner we say “yes” or “no” that is significantly critical to conveying  the correct message.

We are grown up now.  We conduct ourselves as an adult would do.(I hope)  We have learned from the past and we do not want to imitate  our parents behavior because it is not “good form.” 

Lessons learned does not mean lessons applied.  In virtually every UCO meeting I have attended where a vote was taken, I waited for some member (very often (officers ) to explain  their vote. When they don'tt, they  conveyed a message to those who  attend the meeting that a  response for the way they have voted.was not necessary.   This is not “good form”   Sometimes It’s OK to vote "No", or "Yes",  without providing a  detailed reason—even if you feel like you should offer one. However, as a UCO elected official a NO or YES response without articulating your reasons is unfair to those in attendance. . It takes a great deal of courage to swim against the majority opinion,  but going along for the sake of being part of the club is no justification for doing so. In a book that provides  guide lines for leadership this type of behavior would lead to, “Your Fired!”

Our president refers to “cigar box” accounting and use of panic mongering when Century Village residents  demand answers to questions that they feel are important to them.  It is outrageous that a UCO official  use such condescending  language to residents who just want clarification to questions. 

Elected officials should take more time to stop, reflect and access their own thinking.  UCO must take pause and reflect on their course of action and embrace the views of others.  Taking juvenile pop shots at those who disagree serve no useful purpose.

What we have here is a moralistic view of all proposals. UCO is right and all those who question are wrong. How can we assimilate  what they think  when they will not tells us. We in the Village deserve substantive answers  to issues that impact Century Villagers. We as residents deserve nothing less