Step-by-Step: How I got my COVID vaccine appointment

 Since announcing on Facebook that I had secured an appointment for a COVID vaccine, many have asked how I was able to do it. What follows are the exact steps I took. I hope you are able to use this information to get an appointment for yourself and others. Feel free to share this at will. Please note, these are the steps I took as a Maryland resident and may not be applicable in other states.

Step 1 - Check your eligibility.
Maryland is currently in Phase 2B (more info ). I qualified because I had an underlying condition. Click here to see the full list of eligible underlying conditions as defined by the CDC. Fun fact - smoking is on the list! Even if you've quit!

Step 2 - Go to Maryland's COVID site https://coronavirus.maryland.gov/pages/vaccine

Here you will see a way to pre-register for an appointment at a state-run mass vaccination site. The state will notify you when you are eligible to make an appointment. THIS IS NOT AN APPOINTMENT. I have had friends pre-register and get notified that they can make an appointment a few days later so this is a valid option. It is not what I did.

What I did do was scroll down to "Find a Vaccination Clinic Near You." I entered my zip code and hit the "Find a Vaccination Site" button. This is when the magic starts to happen.

Step 3 - Find a pharmacy near you with availability

You can see on the map that the area being searched is indicated by a circle. You can expand or retract this circle by using this slider on the top left side of the page. 

The first thing you will see listed is the opportunity to pre-register for an appointment at a mass vaccination site. Again, this is NOT what I did. Scroll down until you see "Pharmacies" and expand that section. 

Listed from closest to farthest from you will be the pharmacies that are offering the vaccine. Make yourself comfortable, this is where the work begins. 

I started at the top of the list and clicked the "Schedule an Appointment" button. This takes you to the pharmacy's site. What happens next varies slightly for each pharmacy. In some cases I was taken to the site for that specific location. Other times I was taken to the pharmacy's corporate site and asked to enter my zipcode. You will then see their availability. If there was no availability there, I went to the next pharmacy on the list repeated these steps. 

The steps for each pharmacy varied slightly. I was most grateful for the ones where I was taken to a corporate site because the messaging there was whether not there was any availability within a certain radius of my location. Below is Walgreens' message. I loved this because it meant I could skip all the other Walgreens on the list. It greatly sped up my search. 

I kept working my way down the list until I found a pharmacy with availability. In my case this was the Walmart in Waynesboro, PA. 

Pennsylvania? Took me a minute to figure that out too. Walmart was one of the pharmacies that took you to their corporate site. There I had to sign in (or create a Walmart account) and then it showed me all of Walmarts near me. Once again, I started at the top and checked each one for availability. The first one to have availability was the one in Waynesboro (23.63 miles from Frederick). I signed up for an appointment. The end.

Perhaps instead of going through all of this I should have just gone to Walmart's site. And you can certainly employ that option. But I didn't mind eliminating the pharmacies closer to me. Getting an appointment was worth the effort. Best wishes in securing yours!

Ding! Dong! The f is dead!

I haven't written a blog post since April, 2015. With so many things to talk about these days I am shocked that it took one funny looking scribble to bring me back, yet here we are.

Of course, I am speaking of the City of Frederick's recent branding initiative which resulted, among other things, in a new logo that was widely perceived as both ugly and not representative of the city.  You can get a summary of the backlash and view the logo and it's intended meaning here.

Mayor Michael O'Conner held a press conference, which was open to the public, where any and all who wished could ask him questions about the branding initiative of which the logo was a part. I thought the Mayor did a remarkable job of both taking responsibility and apologizing. He was sincere and also resolute to move forward. There is A LOT of information (correct and incorrect) whirling around and this is my humble attempt to bring a little clarity to a VERY muddy situation.

Why did we need to change anything?
The RFQ process/Why not use a local firm?
Will the city recoup any of the $45,000 spent?
But the City already has a logo!
Why not have a local contest?
Why didn't we (the public) know about this?
But it's just so ugly!
So now what happens?

(I had hoped to make it so you could click on a topic and be taken directly to that section, but I didn't have time to write this AND learn HTML at lunch today.)

Why did we need to change anything?
According to numerous sources (including the mayor himself this morning), it was determined there was a need for the City and it's various departments to present itself in a consistent manner. Having a consistent message (brand) and visual style is important for many reasons. Just like a sharp suit, it makes it appear that you have your act together. This is a key message to relay to residents, prospective businesses, and other cities or government entities with which the City may work. The present state was that each department designed it's own business cards, some highjacking the City Seal as a logo and some not. There was no consistency in letterhead or other means of external communications. This project was to define the City's unique story and create an effective and coordinated means of telling that story both visually and through narrative.

The RFQ process/Why not use a local firm?
The RFQ is not the sexiest read, but it is pretty straightforward. It clearly defines how the proposals will be scored and cites a preference for local firms. Twenty-two (22) deliverables are cited, 11 for the City overall and 11 for City Departments. They were:
1. One-day Branding workshop with City staff
2. Two-day Branding workshop with City staff and external stakeholders
3. Research Competitive and Current State
4. Positioning statement
5. Internal Brand statement
6. Logo Development w/ three (3) rounds of revisions
7. Tagline
8. Formalized Brand Guidelines
9. Key Marketing Messages
10. Expanded Brand Style Guidelines
11. Rollout Plan
Please note that the Logo and Tagline ("Join the story", which they intend to keep) are relatively small parts of what wound up being a $45,000 expense. You can read the full RFQ here. The list of companies who responded to the RFQ is here.

Will the city recoup any of the $45,000 spent.
No. And I happen to agree with that. The firm used (Northstar) fulfilled their contract. And please remember that included three logo revisions. So all the upset about the appearance of the logo and the lack of transparency in the process overall is the City's fault. Northstar did the job we agreed to pay them to do. Full stop.

But the City already has a logo!
No it doesn't. It has a seal which was perceived by most as the city logo, but it's not. Also, I don't think it makes a good logo at that. It is what the Mayor said would be used as a logo moving forward but I, and others, think it needs some work. It looks very outdated and is too detailed to size well (for example, shrinking to put on a business card). I believe nearly everyone agrees that the "Clustered Spires" represent the City and should therefore be part of the logo. However, there is no current plan or timeline for "logo clean-up" and I don't blame them. Too soon. Maybe next year.

Why not have a local contest?
While I love this in theory, it is the wrong approach for this project. This project produced more than just a logo. There is a report (you can read here) that very clearly, and in detail, describes what Northstar learned about Frederick and how. I was fully prepared to determine that Northstar had simply done a bad job. This is not at all the case. They successfully uncovered and documented some of the best attributes of the City of Frederick. If you read no other part of the report, read the "Narrative." I dare you not to get swept away in the wonderfulness that is this town. The report makes clear that Northstar did a great deal of work that goes beyond the logo. That being said, the report also states on numerous occasions that one of the City's assets was its "High levels of citizen engagement and pride." It's nice that they think that's great. It's a shame that they barely took advantage of it. But back to the question... This project was too big for a "contest" (insert your best election joke here) However, I believe there may be room for one in the future. More on that later.

Why didn't we (the public) know about this?
That I can't answer. Though acknowledging that the public could have had more touch points on this particular project, the Mayor did get just the slightest bit defensive about the City's communications with it's stakeholders in general. He noted the many public meetings that are regularly held and the feedback currently being solicited for the City's Strategic Plan 3030. There is definitely room for improvement in the communications department and hopefully that work will be done. Meanwhile if you are looking for transparency about the Branding Initiative, every inch of the process and the deliverables are (finally) here.

But it's just so ugly!
Yes, I agree. But I have to say that when you immerse yourself in Northstar's Final Brand Presentation (basically the Readers' Digest version of the Final Report) and you see the logo in context with all the other elements of the report including samples of signs, etc the logo does not look that bad. It's still bad mind you, but not as horrid as it is on it's own. Though pointless, I (and I suspect the Mayor) do wonder what public reaction would have been if we had been fed the narrative in tantalizing bits over a period of time... building both buy-in and suspense?

So now what happens?
First of all we throw away the awful logo which Mayor O'Conner emphatically stated during the Press Conference (no one had the audacity to cheer at that moment, but there were BIG smiles all around). The City has already posted the following Press Release. Step one as defined today was to roll back the use of the hated logo. This will not happen overnight as some materials had already been updated with the logo. The City also intends to move forward with the City Seal as it's logo. I think that's a fine interim idea but as stated earlier the seal does not a good logo make. It is too detailed and outdated. I would like the City to proceed by laser focusing on the  brand message... ya know all the other pieces of the project we paid for. I want that messaging shoved down our throats until each and everyone of us has "drank the Kool-Aid." I want every City business, resident, and employee to be able to communicate that message to others and to be excited about doing so. Then, and only then, when we are all back on the same page. I would like to see the logo re-done. The logo should be little more than a refresh of the current seal (which can remain as a seal) that is simpler and easier to apply to a number of things (like cars, or pens, or signs). I hope at this point it is needless to say that some public input would be required in this endeavor. I'm not saying the winning logo should be chosen by public vote (one thing I learned this week was that there are a whole bunch of people out there who don't know a thing about marketing!), but a public vote could definitely be part of the process. There are many, many ways to implement the public's voice. And now, we all know, that doing so is paramount.

Just one more thing...
A lot of you are hating me right now because I did not include depictions of either the since discarded logo or the City Seal. Another thing I learned through this is that visuals speak to our emotions far more directly words (I refer to any refugee picture ever). There has been more than enough emotion around this issue as is. By not including the visuals here, I hoped you would be able to focus on the facts of the matter, as good or as bad they may be.

2 Quick Things

I'm Gay. Or Am I?
GREAT news! We sold enough of the "I'm Gay" t-shirts to have them go to print! Thanks to everyone who purchased one. They are printing now and should arrive in your mailbox around the first week of May. Wear them with pride (every pun in the world intended)!
 

Thanks to your support $100 has been donated to the NOH8 Campaign!


ESPN Reporter Lashes Out at Tow Lot Attendant
Britt McHenry should be fired.

Whoa! Wait! Siobhan, are you saying that everyone who lashes out at another human should be fired?

No, I'm not. But Britt Mc Henry should. As she stated, she's on television (a nationwide network). That means that anyone who watches TV is her customer. If I talked to my customers like that, I would surely be fired. She should be too.

An Open Letter to Indiana

Dear Indiana,

I know many of your citizens, former and current, and none of them are (100%) insane (I'll admit that many are "quirky"). In fact, the ones I know are all caring, intelligent, empathetic and fair. It is to them that this post is dedicated.

WHAT THE EVER-LOVING FUCK?!?!?

I'm sympathetic to the fine people of Indiana because we've all voted someone into office who has later proved themselves to be bat-shit crazy. We don't mean to do it. They run a strong campaign, do a good job for a few years, build some trust, and then WHAMMO! It's happened to all of us. I do not blame you, fine citizens of Indiana, for your Governor (who shall remain unnamed in this post lest he rises even higher on Google's search engine).

In case you didn't get to see the news, this Governor signed into law the "Indiana Religious Freedom Restoration Act". This "law" allows business owners to deny service to gay couples. Or at least that's how it's being advertised. In truth, it does much more. It says that anyone can refuse service to anyone based on religious beliefs. The law does not mention homosexuals, or homosexual couples, at all (you can read the law here). Frankly, that was all just marketing. Which should have straight folks shaking in their boots.

{WARNING - Gross generalizations and stereotyping ahead! Hang with me, please!}

You know the deli you love that is owned by a Jewish person? They can refuse you service because you eat bacon. Bye-bye pastrami on rye!

The Muslim that owns the local store? Better not send a woman to pick up a few things unless she's properly covered.

Aethists? You may as well plant a garden and build a bunker right now because you got nothing.

Here's the thing...

Businesses can already make this decision.Furthermore, businesses have been making this decision to decades. The difference in Indiana, today, is that the business cannot get sued for making that decision if it is based on their religious beliefs. That sucks. It legalizes discrimination. But the truth is that most people can't afford to sue in the first place. So in that realistic regard, BIG WOOP! It's still a pretty big deal in terms of that pesky document on which our country was founded (the Declaration of Independence) which states that "We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the Pursuit of Happiness". (I'll save the "men" part for another post). BUT, there is good news! This heinous, ridiculous law does NOT prevent the following (Indianans, take note):

You do NOT have to patronize these businesses. If there is a silver lining in all of this it is that (really horrible, discriminatory) business owners will (feel a level of comfort that makes them think it's a good idea to) out themselves. We'll all know to whom we should not give our money! Yeah!

You CAN call these folks out on social media (don't be slanderous, that's illegal too!). Use the power of your social network to raise awareness.Not into social media? Fine. Tell your friends and family using whatever method of communication you choose to employ. I'm just saying, GET THE WORD OUT! 

You can buy this shirt!

I started a campaign at http://teespring.com/ForIndiana. All, as in 100%, of the money raised by this campaign will go to NOH8, an organization which promotes equality for all citizens of the United States and the world. Outside of the wedding industry, I'm not sure how discriminatory businesses in Indiana will determine which customers don't meet their religious standards. So how about we all wear this shirt (many other styles available, by the way) and confuse the hell out of them?  This campaign will only be active for 3 weeks, so don't delay!

Finally, VOTE! Vote for legislators who are not writing laws that call out groups of people based on sexual orientation, gender, or race; and allow businesses to discriminate against regular ole American, tax-paying citizens. Which reminds me, the Governor didn't do this alone. Here are all the other folks who thought this was a good idea that aren't getting enough play in this story.:

Authored by
Sen. Dennis Kruse,
Sen. Scott Schneider,
Sen. Brent Steele.
Co-Authored by
Sen. Carlin Yoder,
Sen. James Buck,
Sen. Amanda Banks,
Sen. Liz Brown,
Sen. James Smith,
Sen. James Tomes,
Sen. Greg Walker,
Sen. Brent Waltz,
Sen. Mark Messmer,
Sen. Jean Leising.
Sponsored by
Rep. Timothy Wesco,
Rep. Jud McMillin,
Rep. Don Lehe,
Rep. Milo Smith,
Rep. Bruce Borders,
Rep. Dale DeVon,
Rep. Timothy Harman,
Rep. Robert Heaton,
Rep. Chris Judy,
Rep. Eric Allan Koch,
Rep. Robert Morris,
Rep. Alan Morrison,
Rep. Mike Speedy,
Rep. Jeffrey Thompson,
Rep. Thomas Washburne,
Rep. Matthew Lehman,
Rep. David Frizzell,
Rep. Randall Frye,
Rep. Richard Hamm,
Rep. Curt Nisly,
Rep. Woody Burton,
Rep. Anthony Cook,
Rep. Doug Miller,
Rep. Jim Lucas,
Rep. Rhonda Rhoads.

It would appear that all but 3 of these folks are men. I smell "issues".

The bottom line is that all business have a bottom line. To segregate part of the law-abiding population is a bad business move. I'm optimistic that most businesses in Indiana know this. I'm also optimistic that those who don't will get their just desserts.

Being Me in the United States of America

This has been a long time coming; but recent events such as the Steubenville Rape Case, the #YesAllWomen hashtag and George Will's op-ed piece that ran in the Washington Post this past weekend that has pushed me over the edge. Fasten your seat-belts. This may take a while.

I need to say something right up front: We ALL are guilty.

Of what? Misogyny.

It's a terms that's been used a lot lately. It's also one that is met with strong, negative emotions such as hate and denial. You can look up the official definition here. That's not important. It's an old (circa 1656) literal translation of the word's Greek origins. What is important is how the ripples of centuries old ideas manifest themselves in the world today.

The 19^th Amendment was ratified by the majority(and therefore passed) in 1920. Some of you will read that sentence and cheer. I would join you, but I have to wonder... why didn't the Founding Fathers (yes, “Fathers”) give women the right to vote in the first place? I'm not trying to start a fight. I just want to make sure that point isn't passed over. Why argue about that when we can go further and note that it wasn't ratified by every state in the Union until 1984? I'll repeat that... the Constitutional Amendment that gave women the right to vote was not ratified by every state in the United States of America until 1984. George Orwell would be laughing his ass off. Happy 30^th Anniversary 19^th Amendment! And thanks, Mississippi!

Yeah, I know. The fact is it did pass in 1920 (a misogynistic denial-thought if ever there was one) so here's some more recent history. It was legal to deny credit to a woman until the passage of the Equal Credit Opportunity Act in 1984. I was 15. To their credit, credit card issuers seemingly embraced the Act as I was offered dozens of credit cards as soon as I entered college 3 years later in 1987. I'll let the economists argue if granting credit to an 18 year old college freshman was a good idea, but don't forget this one important fact... if I were an adult woman, of sound mind, with a reliable income and solid history of paying my bills on time prior to 1984, I could be denied a credit card for no other reason than than I am a woman.

But this is 2014! We don't do that anymore! I thought so too. And in legal terms we don't (apologies to my LGBT friends who have yet to achieve this legal state). The truth is that legal acceptance is a far cry from social and cultural acceptance, also known as REALITY.

I have the greatest parents in the world. They have allowed me to explore the world at my own pace without passing judgment. However I will never forget the night that I realized for the first time that I was teaching them in addition to them teaching me.

A new boy had come to my high school. He was tall, dark and handsome. I had an enormous crush. Sadly for me he was interested in another girl. He liked her. She liked him. He asked her out. Her father said “No.” Go back a few sentences. He was “dark."

I was crushed! Not that he didn't ask me out, but that the lucky girl who was asked was not allowed to go! At home, around the dinner table one night I said so: “Can you believe it?!?!?!” I'll never forget my parents' faces. At the ripe old age of 16 I could see them question everything they had learned, consciously or not, about how to treat people of a different race flash before their eyes (they are probably reading this and thinking “Damn, I thought we had better poker faces!”). Then they stumbled out “Yes. That's wrong.”

Because my parents are good people. They knew that discrimination was bad (after all, the Civil Rights Act been signed 20 years earlier) yet this was the first time they were confronted with the reality that their own daughter might bring home a boy of a different race. Did this make them racist? No. It was just a possibility outside the realm of their experience, at the time, in the world in which they lived. Laws are merely the first step toward cultural and societal change.

And that is where we stand today in terms of misogyny. Bet you thought I wasn't going to get back to that. Misogyny is so deeply set in our culture that we can't even see it. And by "we" I mean neither men nor women. That is... dangerous.

Two months ago I saw a commercial on TV where a grown man saw a spider, started jumping up and down, and the narrator called him “girlie.” “Girlie.” It's a phrase we've all used (I know I have) and it's terribly gender-specific.

Five days ago Lego announced that it would be making female scientist characters as part of their product line. FIVE DAYS AGO. 

Meanwhile, headlines boost op-eds questioning how woman have contributed to their assaults. Was she too mouthy? Too sexy? What was she wearing? Was she drinking?

Last night my 8 year old goddaughter texted me and I responded, “Hi, Beautiful!” One second later I questioned whether or not I was boosting her self-esteem or telling her that it was important to be pretty. I found myself asking, “What are we teaching our children?”

A child reaches up towards a hot stove. We scream, “NO! You'll burn yourself!” An attractive woman goes out by herself. We yell, “NO! You'll be attacked!”

Be insulted, men. According to several pundits, law enforcement officials, politicians, and judges; you're about as reliable and able to control your actions as an appliance. 'Merica.

I have more faith in men. The vast majority of the ones I know are wonderful and would never, EVER, mistreat a woman. Yet many of those men, and women as well, ask those same questions when rape hits the news.

Here is the hard truth. We have spent decades teaching women that their safety is their responsibility and theirs alone. In doing so, we have taught men that a woman's safety is not theirs. Every time we question how the victim may have contributed to their attack we are not holding the attackers responsible for their actions. We don't stop sexual assault by telling the victims to not be sexual. Humans are sexual. What we need to stop is the assault. The first step in doing so is acknowledging that it happens. The second step is stopping the perpetrators. The third step to teaching and modeling better behavior, ideals and philosophy to everyone.

I do believe that I and my safety are my responsibility. But that means I don't touch the hot stove. It doesn't mean that I don't go out. It doesn't mean that I don't look good when I do. And, no matter what, it sure as hell doesn't mean, under any circumstances, that I'm asking for “it.”  

For Better or For Worse...

“Better Late Than Never: Frederick woman walking down the aisle for the first time at 70.” That's what the headline read. As a 43 year old woman who has never been married nor is currently entertaining any prospects, I was intrigued. I read on.

The article begins that the bride “was never in a hurry to get married and didn't mind waiting.” Fabulous, I thought. Me neither. Might I have found a soul sister?

I read on. Girlfriend is not just getting married. She is doing the whole shebang. The bridal shower, the bachelorette party, the church ceremony, bridesmaids, and everything else you would find at your typical first wedding. After all, it IS her first wedding. All that hooplah isn't my cup of tea. I was lucky enough to have my princess moment thanks to pageantry, but who am I to judge? I read on.

The bride and groom met on an online dating site for seniors. She had been on the site for a while and communicated with, though never met, a few other men. She said she was “getting discouraged.”

OK, “soul sister” and I just had a parting of the ways. To be clear, I am not against online dating. However it was starting to occur to me that maybe our blushing bride HAD grown weary of waiting. It seemed like her dream of a princess moment had never really died... nor had it happened. I felt sorry and happy for her all at the same time.

I tell this story because my marital state is a frequent topic of conversation. “Why aren't you married?” It should be noted that typically my inquisitor is married and often they were whining about their spouse the week before and/or telling me how jealous they are of my single life. Thankfully I am acutely aware of the concept that “the grass is always greener on the other side.”

Both married and single lives have their highs and lows. What seems to confuse people is that the highs of one look an awful lot like the lows of the other. We singles are completely independent. The marrieds have someone upon whom to rely. Two sides of the same coin, no?

It's still a coin though, isn't it? No matter what side is up, the value remains the same. So why is it that, as a society, we value being married more than we value being single? You don't think we do? Would you mind reading that headline again? “Better Late Than Never.”

I don't buy it. I don't buy the concept that married is better than single. Nor is single better than married. They are states of equal value, not achievements.

Before the marrieds (include my mother and father who have been married for 47 years) start screaming, staying married IS an achievement. That requires dedication and work. So would staying single. Think about it. You would have to lock yourself up (emotionally, physically, or both) to guarantee lifelong single-hood. Maintaining either state over the long haul takes concerted effort.

I am making no effort in either direction. I'm not looking to get married nor am I trying to stay single. I'm taking life as it comes and am grateful for everything it has to offer.

So back to the question, “Why are you not married?” It's simple. Because I've never been married. Which is not to say that I won't be sometime in the future. Which is not to say that I will. I promise you this though, if I get married it won't be so miraculous as to require a headline.

Whatever happened to Field Day?

Do you remember Field Day? I went to Catholic school and, though a huge sports fan, am ridiculously uncoordinated. So the best part of field day for me was that I did not have to wear my uniform. But it seemed like most other kids really enjoyed the games, races and monkey bars.

Know what else I remember? We had winners and losers.  Not only did we have winners and losers, but everyone was OK with being both... even the parents! Not everyone got a ribbon. Parents didn’t scream for their kids, they screamed at ALL the kids. As in, “Get over here!” and “Bobby, stop pulling Susie’s hair!”  It’s important to note in this scenario it was neither Bobby’s nor Susie’s parent doing the yelling, and that was OK too. That was their job. There were no refs. There were no coaches. There were no fights in the stands… hell, there were no stands.

Field Day was where we learned to win graciously, lose gracefully, give it our all, roll in the dirt, and be content with the effort if not the result. I think the world needs more Field Days.