Month: May 2005

The purpose of the original Memorial Day was to honor those who died in the Civil War. Its purpose today has evolved into remembering and honoring all who have died in the service of our country. What better way is there to honor and remember them than to honor and remember their living comrades, those men and women who have and are currently honorably serving in America’s Armed Forces.

Someone a lot wiser than an Ole Seagull said, “There is no such thing as a free lunch.” Since the earliest days of our history America’s Armed Forces and their families have paid the price for the freedoms and privileges that we, as a Nation, all enjoy and sometimes take for granted. Memorial Day gives us a unique opportunity to not only honor the dead but to pause, honor and say “Thank You,” to those who have and are currently serving and their comrades who are Missing In Action.

The very act of going into the Armed Forces puts one’s life at risk. Immediately upon being “sworn in,” members of the Armed Forces have given control of their lives to their military and governmental leaders. It is a control that is absolute and, from an honor point of view, irrevocable.

It could be exercised through an order “to take that hill,” in the face of withering machine gun or mortar fire, to patrol a neighborhood in Baghdad, or the assaulting of a terrorist stronghold in Afghanistan. Or, it could be an order to serve in a supply depot, training facility, or hospital thousands of miles away from the battle. Regardless of where or how one serves, the risk to their life is an inherent part of serving and is omnipresent.

History records that it is the politicians, and those in power, who start wars and that it is the men and women of their Armed Forces who pay the price of those wars. It is a price paid in separation, stress, blood, suffering, anguish, and, sometimes, death by those, who have and are currently, serving in our country’s Armed Forces and their families.

Theirs is not the job of judging whether or not the politicians and those in power are risking their lives in a noble or just cause. Their job is to do their duty. Some have served in conflicts that were “popular” such as World Wars I and II and Dessert Storm. Others served in conflicts that were not as publicly popular, such as Korea, Vietnam, and, if current polls are any indication, in Iraq. Through it all however, the men and women of Americas Armed Forces and their families have done their duty, sacrificed, and given unstintingly of themselves.

The eloquent words of William James remind us that “No matter what a man’s frailties otherwise may be, if he be willing to risk death, in the service he has chosen, that fact consecrates him forever.” Since the beginning of our Republic the members of our country’s Armed Forces and their families have assumed that risk, done their duty, and ensured that a “government of the people, by the people, and for the people, shall not perish from the earth.” For that we owe those who have and are currently, serving in the Armed Forces our undying gratitude, honor, respect, and support, not only on Memorial Day but, every day we as a Nation enjoy the fruits of their efforts, sacrifices, and service.

Can any reasonable person look at all Branson has to offer, from its outdoor activities, festivals, shows, restaurants, to its shopping, museums, golf courses, natural beauty, renowned hospitality and say that if a person wants to be entertained they can’t do it in Branson? An Ole Seagull is tired of hearing that people want “something” that Branson doesn’t offer. The fact of the matter is that when people come to Branson for the first time they like what they experience and a majority of them return again.

“But Seagull, our first time visitor numbers are down and have been decreasing for years doesn’t that mean we need “new” stars, shows, or things to attract new visitors?”

“It positively absolutely does not!”

What boggles an Ole Seagull’s mind is the concept some people have that the “silver bullet” needed to increase the number of Branson’s first time visitors is someone or something “new.” We should thank God, every day, for the depth and breadth of the entertainment that we have in Branson. It is a huge part of the experience that brings first time visitors back again and some, many times again.

Instead what does one hear, “Branson needs new stars, shows, and things to attract the “new demographics” that is allegedly so vital to her success. Can someone tell an Ole Seagull exactly what “new” star, show, or thing it was that drove Branson’s first time visitor rate to its highest levels ever during the Branson Boom of the early 90s? In the real world of Branson, as it exists today, exactly what “new” star, show, or thing(s) would increase Branson’s first time visitor rate up back to those lofty levels?”

Wait, does the Ole Seagull hear the “thundering hoof beats of the great horse Silver,” galloping into Branson to the strains of the “William Tell Overture?” Is a masked man about to present Branson with a silver bullet of “new” stars, shows, and things that will lift Branson to the next level, what ever that is, before he rides off into the sunset shouting, “Hi-Yo Silver Away?”

That’s about as likely to happen tomorrow as it was today and yesterday. Fortunately for Branson, people like the Hall’s, Herschend’s, Glenn Robinson, Ron Layher, Dorothy and Shoji Tabuchi, Joe Sullivan, Andy Williams, Jim Thomas, Jim Stafford, Rick Huffman, and many others, have added, and continue to add, more than enough “new” to Branson’s rich family entertainment environment to give Branson more entertainment options and excitement for its guests than just about any other city of its size anywhere.

“Oh, come on Seagull, what kind of excitement? Las Vegas is so exciting that it proudly advertises, ‘What happens here stays here.’”

“Sounds like a guilty, lonely and selfish type of excitement. Branson’s excitement comes from just the opposite reason, ‘What happens here goes with you forever and is meant to be shared with those you love.’”

In an Ole Seagull’s opinion there was no new star, show, or thing that drove Branson’s first time visitor rate to its highest levels ever during the Branson Boom of the early 90s. Rather, it was the expanded awareness of Branson and what it had to offer that the exposure on “60 minutes” provided that drove the first time visitor rates to new levels. For whatever reason they came and when they came, they were entertained by what Branson had to offer, enjoyed what they experienced, and a lot of them came back.

Now, here we are some 15 years later with some looking for a “silver bullet” that will bring new visitors to town. Oh, there’s a “silver bullet” out there but it’s not new stars, shows, or things. Today, as was the case before “60 minutes” in the very early 90’s, and has been the case throughout Branson’s rich family entertainment history, Branson’s entertainment industry is providing a product that meets or exceeds the expectations of the majority of those who come to experience what Branson has to offer.

That makes it pretty simple for an Ole Seagull. History and current research shows that if people come to Branson and experience it they like it and a majority of them will come back. Branson’s “silver bullet” is the same now as it was before the Branson Boom of the early 90s, expand the awareness of the entertainment product that Branson has to offer “today.” Obviously the date of “today” will change but, if history is any indication, the ability and adaptability of Branson’s entertainment industry to meet the entertainment needs of Branson’s guests “today” will not change.

“Who was that masked Seagull?”

Special Note: Each year, toward the end of the school year, this piece is respectfully published and dedicated to our areas teachers as a “thank you” and a reminder to us all of how valuable teachers are to our community and the future of our nation. This year we would dedicate its publication to Branson Band Director Eric Matzat as he makes a career change. His dedication, character, leadership, and professionalism manifested itself not only in the performance of the bands that he directed but, more importantly, in the hearts and minds of the thousands of young men and women who marched in those bands. It epitomizes the very “nobleness” of which this piece speaks.

In terms of a “profession” America’s future does not lie in the hands of Presidents, politicians, lawyers, doctors, accountants, etc. Her future lies in the hands of the profession that will be teaching those who will become the Presidents, politicians, lawyers, doctors, or accountants, America’s Teachers.

A “teacher” is “one who teaches,” a professional who has accepted the awesome challenge and responsibility of helping to prepare our children and grandchildren to fully realize their individual potential, create the desire to fulfill it, and equip them with the skills necessary to achieve it. It can truly be said that America’s destiny and future depends upon the realization and fulfillment of that potential.

Oh sure, there are those, professing to be teachers, who do the minimum and simply go through the motions. They could be characterized as those who perform the mechanical function of providing instruction from prepared lesson plans without a personal commitment to their students or accepting the responsibility and accountability for their results.They are teachers in title only.

The true “Teacher” has a personal commitment to their students. A commitment to not only teaching the necessary information and skills that their students will need but to make learning an experience they will want to continue for the rest of their lives.They fully realize and appreciate that “how” they do what they do is as important as “what” they do and dedicate their professional lives to equipping, helping, and motivating their students to recognize and reach their full potential.

To a large extent true “Teaching” is an art form. It requires the same type of dedication, commitment, and skill that a painter would use on a great canvas, a music composer would use on an opus, a lawyer on a jury, or an entertainer on an audience. What makes the successful musician, singer, comedian, painter, or author? Is it the mere application of “the mechanics” of what they are doing or their ability to communicate and relate what they are doing to their audience?

Even as the success of an artist is directly linked to their ability to relate what they are doing to their audience so too is the success of a Teacher, only more so. Although the professional entertainer wants and desires to reach every member of their audience, they can still be very successful if they reach a substantial majority of their audience.

A Teacher however, does not have that luxury. For them, success and failure is measured in the eyes, minds, and hearts of each individual student. The Master Teacher said it best. “If any man has a hundred sheep and one of them has gone astray, does he not leave the ninety-nine on the mountains and go and search for the one that is straying?” He was not willing to lose even one.

The Teachers heart and spirit transcends mere “mechanics and basics” and goes to the concern and commitment of dedicating themselves to their students and their individual ability to effectively apply what is being taught. It is a task that, in a lot of cases, is made more difficult by influences outside of the Teachers direct control such as the physical or mental challenges of individual students, school funding issues, child abuse, and dysfunctional families to mention a few.Fortunately, for America and Her children, in spite of these additional challenges, there are those who feel a calling to become, in the truest sense of the word, “Teachers.”

Where then is the nobleness of Teaching? It is obvious that it is not based on factors such wealth, title, or power and yet, it is nobleness in the truest sense of the word.Nobleness based on the character, honor, generosity, dedication and commitment of those who are true Teachers and the quest they have chosen, preparing our children for the rest of their tomorrows.There’s not much that is nobler or more important than that, not much at all.

Recently the Ole Seagull received an email from a veteran, Ronald, of Sand Springs, OK. It succinctly stated what a number of people have been wondering about “Branson’s Welcome Home…Americas’s Tribute to Vietnam Veterans.” Ronald said, “In reference to this summer’s Vietnam Vet Reunion, Operation Homecoming. Why are all the other [Branson] reunions free to the groups that had homecomings but, ‘the homecoming we never had’ costs us $79.95. Proof of military service should be the ONLY requirement.” To that an Ole Seagull would humbly add, “Amen.”

Why a community that has successfully run “A Veterans Homecoming,” an event honoring all our nation’s veterans, for years without charging “registration fees” would suddenly change that proven model boggles an Ole Seagull’s mind. What a curious way to give someone the homecoming they never received?

“But Seagull, once you pay it everything else is free?”

“Not really. According to the Schedule of Events there is a $50 fee for the Fishing Tournament and a $50 fee for the Golf Tournament. Besides, if a person pays $79.95 how ‘free’ is any of it?”

It seems that the major item included “free” with the $79.95 “Registration Fee” is color coded dog tags that serve as the admission to Saturdays Grand Finale Concert. According to the web site, the Grand Finale Tribute, “Starts at 11:00 am and goes until after dark at an outdoor venue at Saddlebrooke” and is for “registered attendees only.”

To some it will be a grand show but in a town full of great entertainment, that has honored veterans of all wars, including Vietnam, for decades it is but another show or is it? What if it rains? The website states that, “No rain date or refunds given due to weather or acts of God.”

The T.V. ads, promotional pieces, and web site all stress that “registration” for the event is $79.95 per person. As but one example, if one clicked on the “Registration and Reservations” link off of the main page of the event site, http://www.operationhomecomingusa.com/index2.html, they would be told, under a caption entitled “Registration Fee” that the “Cost of registration for Welcome Home is $79.95 for each adult; $39.95 each for children 13 – 17; children 12 and under free.”

“Whoa now Seagull, aren’t the vast majority of the activities during the week free like they are for the “A Veterans Homecoming” event that has been run in Branson for years?”

“Yes, there are basically only three activities that have a charge, the golf tournament, the fishing tournament, and the “registration” for $79.95.”

And that’s the sad part, the impression that a lot of Vietnam Veterans like Ronald get about the registration fee, that they are being charged a fee for an event that is supposed to honor them. An impression that is in large part caused and reinforced by, the very advertising used to promote the event.

One can only wonder how many Vietnam veterans have been turned off to the event and possibly even Branson because of the registration fee. How many paid it thinking it was a requirement to attend the event? What reactions will they have when they discover that there was no requirement to pay a registration fee unless they wanted to go to the Grand Finale Concert, the cost of which, unlike the golf and fishing tournaments, was buried in the “registration fee package?”

From an Ole Seagull’s perspective, the good news is that Branson, as a community, and the vast majority those that are involved with the management and sponsorship of “Branson’s Welcome Home…America’s Tribute to Vietnam Veterans” are, in fact, truly dedicated to honoring the Vietnam veteran. Too, there is still time to correct the erroneous impressions and misunderstandings that have been created.

In an Ole Seagull’s opinion, a major promotional effort should be immediately initiated to publicize that, as is the case with “Branson’s A Veterans Homecoming,” there is no registration fee required to attend “Branson’s Welcome Home…America’s Tribute to Vietnam Veterans.” Further, every veteran that has “registered” should be notified that if they not want to attend the Grand Finale Concert that they can get their money back with no deduction of a $20 processing fee.

The year was 2000 and it was a gentler time. The Taney County Commission, the county, the City of Branson, the city, and the Taney County Regional Sewer District, the district entered into a “Sewer Services and Exclusive Territorial Agreement” on Feb. 28. Surely there was excitement, love, and joy throughout the land.

The agreement stated the city’s concern about “the safe and adequate disposal of waste water and sewage, within close proximity of Branson” and protecting “the public health, safety, and welfare of the residents of the City of Branson.” It went on to state that the county, the city, and the district “desire to create a plan to provide sanitary sewage services to the Table Rock Acres subdivision, the Bee Creek Watershed, and the Emory Creek Watershed.”

“Look Seagull, the love and joy stuff aside, that’s about as exciting as having a root canal performed with a teaspoon.”

“It gets better, be patient.”

To an Ole Seagull, a sanitary sewer system has to perform two main functions if it is to be efficient. It has to collect sewage at its source and transport it to a treatment facility through sewers. The treatment facility must then treat the sewage so that it is no longer an environmental or health hazard.

The agreement provides that “the county will fund and the city will design and construct sewers in the Table Rock Acres subdivision, and in the Bee Creek and Emory Creek watersheds, to be owned operated and maintained by the City as part of its sanitary sewer system”

“Did the agreement provide for the building of any treatment plants to process the sewage?”

“No, but it did provide for the treatment of the sewage that was collected.”

It said, “The county and the district believe that Branson is the entity most qualified to act as regional provider of sewer services and that it is appropriate that Branson should be the sole provider of wastewater treatment in the Bee Creek and Emory Creek watersheds.”

“Sounds like a plan to me, especially since neither the county nor district operated municipal treatment facilities and Branson had, and was operating, state of the art facilities.”

And so the agreement was signed “for the mutual benefit of the parties” and everyone lived happily ever after. Well maybe not.

In 2005, more than five years after the Agreement was signed and became effective, the county and district suddenly had an epiphany. They decided, for whatever reason, that they didn’t like the agreement and wanted it changed whether or not the city did. In an Ole Seagulls opinion those changes, for all intents and purposes, would remove one of the strongest reasons for entering into the agreement, having the sewage treated on a regional basis by “the entity most qualified” to do so.

What is the rational for these changes? As near as an Ole Seagull can discern, trying to separate the wheat from the chaff, there are two main reasons. One is that the county wants let people have the option of having their sewage treated by another provider if it is cheaper. The other is the allegation that the county and district were forced to sign the agreement because the city allegedly said that they would oppose the extension of the one half percent county wide sewer tax if they didn’t.

“Are you saying that the reason the agreement was signed by the county and district was because the city allegedly said that they would oppose the extension of the one half percent county wide sewer tax if they didn’t?”

“No, one of the members of the Taney County Regional Sewer Board said it at a public meeting held on May 5.”

“Seagull, do you believe that the city really did that?”

“It makes no difference what an Ole Seagull believes, what’s important, in his opinion, is the potential stench from the lack of professionalism and integrity involved in what the county and district did if they made their decision to sign the agreement, in any part, because they believed it was true.”

“But Seagull, if the city actually did what they allege isn’t there plenty of stench to go around?”

“Where’s a rose when you need one?”

Have the Branson Board of Aldermen and the Taney County Commission invented a new game called “Seweropoly?” If so, it appears that the rules for playing the game are in dispute. In acts reminiscent of childhood, the Branson Board of Aldermen and the mayor are pointing fingers at the Taney County Commissioners, calling them names, and accusing them of not playing the game according to the rules. On the other hand, the Taney County Commissioners want to “take their toys and go home” if Branson won’t play the game according to their rules.

Unfortunately, as the aldermen and commission play Seweropoly the residents of the Bee Creek Watershed are still without an efficient central sewer system and are forced to live with the pollution and health hazards caused by leeching septic fields and overflowing septic tanks. Does it take an environmental Einstein to appreciate that overflowing septic tanks and leeching septic fields are not good for the drinking water supply and could be a major pollution source for Lake Taneycomo?

“But Seagull didn’t the state issue $16 million in bonds to the Taney County Regional Sewer Board in January to sewer the area?”

“That they did.”

“Is the County required to make payments on the bonds issued?”

“Yes, about $90,000 per month.”

“Wow that’s about $3,000 per day.”

“In Seweropoly the stakes are a lot higher than ‘passing Go and collecting $200.’”

As the Ole Seagull sat in the Branson aldermen’s meeting on Apr. 25 he was surprised, embarrassed, and shocked as they launched into an obviously scripted and orchestrated attack against both the Taney County Commission and the Taney Country Regional Sewer District. As he sat there and listened he thought to himself, “How can anyone involved with this presentation, being given in this manner, be hypocritical enough to talk about how low someone else has allegedly stooped?”

Interestingly enough, in an Ole Seagulls opinion the Branson Board of Aldermen had the “high ground” for about the first four pages of the statement. Even their “appeal” to the Taney County Regional Sewer District asking them “to focus on what you have been charged to do, and have the authority to do, rather than allowing yourselves to be intimidated and caught up in agendas that have nothing to [do with] your responsibilities” seemed appropriate.

“Then what’s your problem Seagull?”

“All the personal issues discussed after that portion of the statement saying, ‘We had originally intended to end our statement at this point’ and the manner in which the presentation was orchestrated and executed.”

“What personal issues?”

“Personal issues peripheral to the central issue?”

“What is the central issue?”

“That the County Commission, through its actions, is delaying the Bee Creek Sewer Project at a cost of about $90,000 per month or $3,000 per day for each day of such delay.”

It’s ludicrous. Virtually every one acknowledges the critical need for the sewering of the Bee Creek Watershed. The resources to do it are in place and the independent Taney County Regional Sewer District has “approved an RFP for the selection of construction management on the project” that will move the project on to the next step. Yet the project has virtually stopped and is being delayed because of inaction by the Taney County Commissioners.

“Why won’t the Commissioners take the necessary action to move the project forward as quickly as possible?

“Because they want a Feb. 28, 2000, Sewer Services and Exclusive Territorial Agreement signed by the Taney County Commission, Taney County Regional Sewer District and the City of Branson five years ago to be changed.”

“Why can’t they continue with the sewering of the Bee Creek watershed while their concerns about a five year old agreement are worked out?”

When asked that same question, Presiding Taney County Commissioner Chuck Pennel said, “Because it [the agreement] is the only tool and leverage that the County has to strong arm the city council into amending the agreement and to protect the citizens of Taney County from what I believe is the unfair tactics of the city.”

“They signed the agreement. In view of their actions, how can anyone citizen, business, developer, state agency etc. rely on their word?”

“Time will tell.”

It’s too bad that the Branson Board of Aldermen didn’t end their statement where they had originally intended to end it. It’s not what they did but how they did it that stinks but then, in the game of Seweropoly, there is plenty of stink to go around.