In the volatile 1960s, Bob Dylan delivered a chilling message to an entrenched establishment: “Come senators and congressmen, please heed the call, don’t stand in the doorway, don’t block up the hall, for he who gets hurt will be he who has stalled the battle outside ragin’, it’ll soon shake your windows and rattle your walls, for the times, they are a-changin’.” The song served not only as a battle cry for young revolutionaries, but also as a commentary on an older generation that just didn’t get it: “Come mothers and fathers throughout the land, and don’t criticize what you can’t understand, your sons and your daughters are beyond your command…” Dylan builds on this theme in “Ballad of a Thin Man”: “You know there’s something happening, but you don’t know what it is, do you, Mr. Jones?!” My perspective 50 years later: Change is inevitable, youthful rebellion a fact of life, traditionalist pushback a predictable reaction. Not so clear, however, is the correlation between change and understanding: i.e., if criticism of change necessarily presupposes understanding of the change, then what determines the paradigm of understanding?
One of the best concrete (no pun intended) examples of this conundrum can be found in the widespread opposition among B-W residents to the changing landscape on Fremont Street (think Beaumont Village Apartments) and ubiquitous infill development on residential blocks (think demolished homes replaced by bigger, taller ones). It’s obvious that a significant change is underway in the neighborhood, but “understandings” vary on the degree to which this change is for the better or worse. One side argues: Big doesn’t mean ugly, and development contributes to the economic well-being of the neighborhood. The other side rebuts: “McMansion” architecture is not compatible with the character of the neighborhood, and “Wild West” development is counterproductive, destroying the charm of the neighborhood it purports to benefit. Add to these polarized views the folks who are somewhere in the middle or not yet decided, and small wonder Dylan’s Mr. Jones is so befuddled!
Few if any changes come devoid of controversy. One such change a few years ago was the elimination of term limits for BWNA Board members. Previously, the limit had been six years. The argument in favor was that Board members are required to stand for reelection every two years, so why the need for mandatory expulsion after a certain number of years? I voted for the change, but with reservations: Yes, dedicated incumbents are a precious commodity; on the other hand, new leaders bring renewed energy and fresh perspectives to an organization.
Accordingly, it is with mixed emotions that I announce my decision not to seek another term as BWNA President. Waiting in the wings is Board member John Sandie, whom I enthusiastically endorse for election at the Taste of Beaumont General Meeting on April 21st, held again in the Beaumont Middle School cafeteria. John is not only one of the nicest guys you’ll ever meet, but also as conscientious and willing to help as they come. BWNA won’t miss a beat with John in charge.
As for me—well, let’s just say I’m freeing my life up a little bit, but definitely not abandoning ship. I’ll accept a nomination to fill one of the vacant at-large Board positions (which, neighbors, will still leave 5 vacancies!), stay on as B-W Newsletter Editor (until a replacement can be found), and continue to contribute articles and commentaries. In closing, I want you to know that it’s been an honor to serve at the helm these past several years and a creative privilege to write this column. Heartfelt thanks!