Wednesday, January 18, 2012

Taste of Dunwoody 2012 is SOLD OUT

UPDATE:  TASTE OF DUNWOODY 2012 IS SOLD OUT
Let the scalping ticket brokering begin....

Back again for the 9th year in a row is Taste of Dunwoody to benefit Children's Healthcare of Atlanta.  Once again, SDOC is sponsoring the event and my husband and I can't wait for February 3!

Get tickets now.  No really, drop what you're doing, get your wallet, go here, and get tickets.  Back in early December, the event was 25% sold.  It has got to be more than that now.  Last year people thought they could buy tickets the day of or at the door and were shut out.  There were networks of people springing up looking to buy or sell.  Avoid the rush.

Taste of Dunwoody is produced by Dunwoody Friends of CHOA.  All Dunwoody moms and dads, organizing fundraising for all of the funding gaps every pediatric hospital faces.  Check them out on Facebook.  (And if any of the admins from this page are reading - update your info slide, it's about a year out of date.  8^P )  Share the TOD.  Share the FB event info too.

Last year I posted why CHOA fundraisers and support events are so near and dear to us.  Can't think of anything that has changed since then.  Some of you didn't believe my comment about working at the cancer kids' summer camp.  So I dug around and pulled out the camp group picture:

The counselors in their rugby shirts are around the edges and our patients with their siblings are in the middle.  That's one of the official group shots of Camp AOK ("Anderson's Older Kids") around 1995-ish.  It was 103 degrees in the shade and we all had sweat in places we don't discuss in polite company.  The photo was taken the first night of camp after the campers arrived and got settled.  I was the co-counselor of "Cool Chicks Only" cabin.

This summer camp was exactly like any other.  Except the camp nurse was a certified nurse practitioner with an oncology specialty and had to organize maintenance chemotherapy regiments for half of the campers.  Usually that just meant medication in pill form.  A pediatric oncologist was on site at all times.  The guys in the clinic fought over who got up to camp for the week.  The child life specialists (psychology team) sat with the counselors before arrival to discuss each of the campers - who was back this year, who was new, who would never be back again.  These teens saw life and death first hand more than many people do.  Child Life  was always on hand to allow them to talk out their feelings and cope with their own well-founded fears of their own mortality.  That was also the reason for "summer prom":  some of these kids did not live to see their high school senior prom.  But most of the teens in this picture are healthy adults today.

The support programs provided by CHOA through private donations and sponsors are similar to what I have worked with in the past.  Medical care is only the beginning.  For children with serious health issues and their families there's a lot of work involved in finding a new "normal life".  This is what Taste of Dunwoody and other Friends' events are paying for.  Taste of Dunwoody is a lot more than just a party!

Psst - tickets.  Go get 'em.

Monday, January 9, 2012

Don't Ask, Don't Tell

Dunwoody City Council Meeting January 9.

The short version:  paranoia and hate mail campaigns win the day.  Home based business owners can not expect any rights from this Council.  Except for the right to pay taxes to the city.

The long version:

The first read of the home occupation amendment was converted to a "discussion" per Heneghan.  He insisted that the council "slow down" on its recommendations regarding home business owner rights.  I guess 10 months of discussion is moving too fast for him.

The neighborhood nazis have the ears of the council. Bonser related an anecdote about an "illegal" business causing traffic problems.  She did not say if the people involved in the "illegal" operation were penalized in some way.  Heneghan claimed that the sign ordinance in combination with this new ordinance will allow homes to have commercial signage.  What the sign ordinance has to do with occasional customer contact was never made clear.  Home based operations are not permitted to have signage, period.  Shortal also shot down any expansion of home business owner rights.  He also was skeptical of having a page of links to community organizations on the Dunwoody city government page.  Deutsch explained that the Community Council wanted to streamline the process for home business SLUP applications.  Nall asked questions that pointed out difficulties in the practical application of parts of the amendment.  Thompson and Davis were silent.

There are some glaring contradictions in the "discussion".

Heneghan and Bonser are concerned with "unintended consequences" of allowing home businesses to visit with customers at home.  They were not concerned, however, with the unintended consequences of allowing the same homeowners to raise farm animals in their backyards.  The "needs" of a half dozen families indulging a hobby carry more weight than 500 families making a living.  Hmmmmmm..............

Concerns were expressed regarding "deliveries" at odd hours of the night that would disturb neighbors.  Concerns were not expressed about DeKalb Sanitation or the USPS making rounds as late as 9 PM the past few weeks.  Double hmmmmmmmmmmmmmmmms.............

The council expresses concerns about potential parking issues due to home based customer contact.  The same council is not concerned about the inconvenience of street parking for any other reason.   Especially when it is provided by the city as Joe Hirsch pointed out in his public comment. Triple hmmmmmmmmmmmms...........

The council is concerned for neighbors who may be "annoyed" by a home based business.  The council is not concerned about home business owners being harassed by council members' friends in HOAs.  Home business owners have no protection from accusations of "nuisance" that stem from a personality conflict or other frivolous source.  If there is a conflict, the blame will always be placed on the business owner.  I'm running out of hmmmmmmmmmms.

I have no hope that the "discussion" of this ordinance amendment is going to get anywhere.  The general assumption is that all home business owners are careless, evil, and the perpetrators of all things uncomfortable.  Any opinion defending a home business owner that did respect their neighbors was dismissed as an aberration.  Several hundred business owners smeared with a handful of anecdotes with no supporting evidence and no chance for appeal.  This is what Dunwoody calls "transparency in government."  I give up.

I do not and will not advocate violating the law. However tonight's discussion made it clear that homeowners who work from home will not have any rights or protections afforded them.   You can still apply for your SLUP if you insist, but you are subject to wholesale smear campaigns and whatever other tricks City Hall demands.  I predict that most home business owners will default back to "don't ask, don't tell".  The standard, per Bonser, is set by the scofflaws who do not bother to get licensed or pay their taxes.  All others are judged by that lowest denominator.

Is it worth it for a home based business to obey the licensing laws?

I believe not.  There are great expenses in time and effort with no support or positive acknowledgement from the city, and unchecked harassment from community activists.

Should every home based business obey the law anyway?

That's up to you.

Sunday, January 8, 2012

To Link or Not to Link - and When

Everyone wants links to their website.  You get more people happening upon your site, and you get better SERPs (search engine results placement).  More links means more eyeballs.  But there is a time when links are more trouble than they're worth.

Back in the day, everybody just linked to each other.  Remember "web rings" and link pages?  That was the beginning of SEO.  But like the rest of the Internet the perception of who links to whom has evolved.

Links to other websites have been used since 1995 to reference related content.  It made it easier for webmasters to connect content without having to duplicate it and take up space on their own server, or to reference copyrighted content that could not be legally duplicated.

When you put a link on your website to another website, you are implying an endorsement.  It's a big sign post that says, "Hey, look at this!  It's good stuff!"  If it wasn't related to your content, or beneficial to your site, you wouldn't bother.

Linking to other sites can have a downside.  It can take attention away from what you're promoting or selling.  If the linked site changes its content, it can reflect negatively on your presentation.

What if there is a conflict between the sites' purposes, regardless of the content?  For example, if the Playboy Foundation wanted to link to Dunwoody Baptist Church, would DBC benefit?  I doubt they would think so because the organizations' philosophies are so different.  Or what if a local city government wanted to link to one of their houses of worship - but only one, out of many in town.  You just ran head-first into the First Amendment, prohibiting the establishment of religion.

Dunwoody City Council is discussing adding links to community groups on its website.  (First agenda item for Monday's meeting.)  Having worked with government entities and organizations with government connections, I am very familiar with this type of situation.

The Background:  The DHA approached City Hall and requested that a link to the DHA be placed on the main page at dunwoodyga.gov, alongside the Chamber of Commerce and CVB.

Problem:  the entire reason for the links to the Chamber and CVB was because of an agreement between those two organizations and city government to create a "unified branding" to reinforce each other.  The DHA was not involved in this agreement.

If the City added a link to the DHA (and ONLY the DHA) in addition to the Chamber and CVB, everyone is between a rock and a hard place.  The Chamber and CVB are bound to a strict style guide in their marketing because of the branding agreement.  There are all kinds of restrictions on how they may or may not use images, logos, colors, etc in all of their materials, including the websites.  It can be a real hassle for each group to distinguish itself from City Hall.  (Ask me how I know....)

So on one side, if the DHA were to be displayed as the Chamber and CVB, they would have to be bound by the same marketing restrictions.  Since becoming more familiar with the DHA, I don't see that happening in this time-space continuum.

On the other side, if the DHA didn't have to follow the same branding style restrictions, the CVB and the Chamber would be on the phone screaming bloody murder at City Hall 2 minutes after the link appeared.

Beyond the implications of the branding project, you have the implied endorsement.  A prominent link by the City to the DHA alone implies endorsement of that organization, to the exclusion of all others.  Every other HOA in town would bristle.  How is it fair for a city government to endorse one HOA but not others?  The arguments over that scenario would make the Chicken Debacle look like a toddlers' playdate at Brook Run.

Hutmacher, in his memo associated with the recommendations (linked above) takes the right approach for any organization faced with the question of building links.  It's a good rule of thumb for any business looking to reference or endorse information outside their own website:

1)  If your business or organization is part of a larger national or international group, consult their guidelines first before adding any more that may conflict.  The memo points out that ".gov" domains have inflexible regulations on advertising private entities.  I learned about that working on websites for both M. D. Anderson (a state-funded hospital) and the DAR (a private organization that was incorporated by an Act of Congress which brings with it responsibilities for their content and the potential for intervention by the Feds.)

2)  Decide what information or content would enhance your site without competing with it. Think about what would make good reference material, or what would make your business or organization appear to be an authority on your subject.

3)  Use a legal disclaimer.  Disclaimers are the final protection between your intentions on your website and a court of law.  But it won't change the visitor's impression:  that your site is endorsing another.  Hutmacher's memo indicates a disclaimer that would absolve the City of any legal ramifications of a link to other content.  In addition, the memo outlines classes of content to be added as community organizations as a whole.  If a single link to a single HOA were added to the exclusion of all others, that would be an endorsement no matter what kind of disclaimer was posted.  But when you add all HOA's, plus houses of worship, and schools etc for good measure, that perceived endorsement is diluted.  The proposed content becomes an authoritative reference on Dunwoody life.

4)  Create a clear website policy going forward regarding the evaluation of links to outside content.  It will make your life much easier when this question comes again.  There will always be something new on the Internet (social media, anyone?) that may or may not be worth referencing.  With a clear focus on your site's goals, you can make decisions about outside links that will strengthen and reinforce your company's web presence equally and fairly even as the Internet evolves.