It was frustrating, for me at least, to come away from the last meeting without a name for our group. That said, it is truly not a trivial or arbitrary matter. It's well to give this choice our full attention and sufficient time. Expecting that we will jointly 'rule' on an acceptable and appropriate name at our next meeting, I respectfully offer a recollection:
For our name to fit the purposes for which I came to the group, the name may be associated with a place, but not one more local than "Columbus". Even if our numbers are drawn mostly from our west side campaign territory, there are associations with Grandview (or any place), that don't relate and would turn away some people. If our 'member/participants' are mostly local to Grandview, our mission is no smaller than Columbus, and it is certifiably a national and even a global one.
The word "change" is linked to the incoming presidency. As was observed at the meeting, there is a clear down side to drawing too near the current presidency. Even if we could avoid placing our group on the tides of presidential popularity, I'm fine with associating our group with "the horse we rode in on". We wouldn't be here if we thought that horse won for reasons of popularity only. Aligning our selves with the political organization of the president or his party is, for me at least, another thing. The need for our groups service work is unrelated to party, politics, or organizational affiliation. If there are advantages to coordinating our work with the national and other local organization, we should use them, of course. Regarding our name, I would prefer that some ambiguity and multi-valence be preserved.
Going somewhat beyond the matter of our group name is the matter of the two sorts of functions we may choose. Community service projects in which we've already taken part are clearly in our scope. Political activity relating to policy and debate is not one we've discussed much, though we have corralled the issues into a few categories. Some are coordinating and gathering information on these issues for the group. Some of us, maybe all, would like to contribute to the redirection of local and national policy. I encourage all to attend to the news, to our own presenters, and to be ready to contribute you thoughts and ideas on our group web site.
Ken Odiorne
February 10, 2009
