18 Comments | leave a comment | RSS 2.0 for this post | trackback |
lovely tribute. thanks for sharing. |
That’s sad about the bus. Why on earth did they think it was their place to judge his intent. About 4 years ago a wealthy couple in the ward shelled out the big bucks to rent one of those giant hamster wheels for a combined activity. No one seemed to mind, and I’m sure quite a few suggested doing it again next year. |
I’d love to ride in style like that! But there were probably legal considerations as well, insurance, etc. He sounds like an awesome human being. I’m starting to wonder if we all will have interesting stories to tell by the time we’re 70. Lessons learned, drama survived, etc. Would that we’d all be so generous in spirit. |
The thing that amazed us about Stoney is he told us about his first marriage without excuses. He didn’t try to make himself look good and his wife seem greedy. She lived in a chicken coop for 5 years. That is hard time. |
You did say that he told you that his first wife ran up a bunch of credit card debt even after they were divorced and that he paid it off without fighting about it, didn’t you? That sounds like he was saying she was a greedy spendthrift and he was very giving and generous, even saintly. I’m not trying to say he was not telling the truth, but I don’t think you can say he didn’t try to paint his wife in a bad light or didn’t try to make himself look good. Much of that story made him look very good indeed. Maybe that’s just the truth of the matter, but when we only have his side of the story, it’s hard to know for sure. He sounds like a good guy, and very frugal. Was the decision not to have children an issue of being frugal, or was it that they tried and never could have them? Did they ever think of adopting? Just curious as to why they ended up childless. |
Good point, MCQ. But then again, I wouldn’t have ever admitted to living in a chicken coop for 5 years, knowing my spouse wanted out of it. The assumption was Stoney couldn’t have kids. His first wife didn’t get pregnant and Doris got checked out, she was fine. I don’t think adoption was a consideration. I think their attitude was if God wanted it to happen it would. I’m sure there are people who would say Stoney was a competitive business person. You don’t amass the fortune he had without stepping on someone’s toes. I think the reaction to his buying a bus is a signal to how some folks thought of him. I loved him. |
MCQ, was it popular at the time for those who are childless to adopt? I know right now it’s kinda like the latest trend to adopt babies from foreign countries, but was it always that way? If you couldn’t have your own you took care of others. |
I don’t know the time period you’re talking about, but adoption has been around for a long time. No, it didn’t always include the option to adopt from foreign countries (which is not necessarily always a great thing anyway), but it has been available for generations. I don’t know the story of this person, and I wouldn’t presume to judge him even if I did, but I suspect that he and his wife could have adopted children if they wanted to do so. I’m curious as to why they chose not to pusue that option, but I certainly don’t think it makes them any less wonderful people. |
The OP says they got married in 1948, so I guess in the 50s and 60s–assuming the idea of having children dies off by the time one hits 50. |
I don’t know how long it’s been policy, but wards and stakes are not supposed to own vehicles. There’s precious few things that a ward or stake or branch is allowed to own. If he was going to own and operate the bus, pay for fuel and maintenance, pay for insurance, and hire a commercially-licensed bus driver, that’s one thing. He could have then given free rides to anyone he wanted. If he wanted riders to contribute money for each ride to pay expenses of fuel and upkeep, then it would have been a commercial operation, and he would have had to get the appropriate transportation licenses. If he wanted to donate it to the stake, and let the stake own it, that’s an entirely different matter, that the church would have likely forbidden. Because the stake would have had to pay for fuel, maintenance, insurance, hire a licensed bus driver, etc., and get the appropriate commercial transportation licenses. For a big vehicle like that, you need to be using it frequently in order to amortize the cost, even just counting the insurance and licenses. You can’t just use it once a month and let it sit. You would go broke. It would have been, and still would be, much cheaper over-all to _charter_ a bus from a commercial bus company for their monthly (or however frequent) temple trip. That way, the riders could chip in for the charter cost, and if the bus had enough passengers on the temple trips, everyone would be paying less than if they drove their own cars. |
Bookslinger- What about Huntsman giving the church a jet for the presidency to use? Did he out and out donate it or does the church just use it as needed? I still agree with Stoney Stonemets. His bus could have been used by the whole Colorado region for church trips, hiring drivers as needed. The individual riders could have donated funds and I am sure Stoney’s generosity towards the buses needs would have continued. I am cynical enough to suspect people really did just think he was showing off and refused to think outside of the box. Good thing the Early Church leaders accepted donations from members. |
Our church’s business-like approach is sometimes self-defeating, I think. For instance, the Presbyterian Church here in town gave me a key to their building for Al-Anon meetings! They do the same for AA and other community organizations. I bet they’d take that bus. Our meeting houses are way too busy, probably, to let that happen, but even if they weren’t we wouldn’t do it. It’s a bit hypocritical given that many branches meet in other peoples’ facilities until they get a building. My old branch in Tonopah met in the Elks Lodge. We had to clean up the building before church :). |
I don’t know the arrangement between Huntsman and the FP in regards to an airplane. I doubt he transfered ownership of the airplane to the church. The church is not in the aircraft management business. Even businesses that have several corporate aircraft out-source the management/maintenance to 3rd parties. My guess would be that he just puts it at their disposal with sufficient advanced notice, because he has one that is under-utilized. Smaller jets cost more to own and operate per person-mile, than flying first class on commercial airlines. Commercial airlines are profitable due to the economies of scale, and by keeping the airplanes flying (and producing revenue) for a high percentage of the time. They constantly strive to reduce the idle time. Corporate jets are not profitable to companies in terms of comparing the dollars spent to first-class airline tickets. They are used for the convenience factor of going anywhere directly, non-stop, at short notice, and not having to wait around for the airlines’ schedule. They only become profitable if they take into account the exhorbitant salary of the executives, break it down to an hourly rate, and consider that they’re saving money by not having the high-paid executive waiting around a half day or overnight for a return flight. Similar analysis would make a stake or region owning a bus unprofitable. You don’t realize the significant overhead of the cost of state and federal permits and legally mandated inspections and insurance for transportation. And hiring not only a driver, but someone to _manage_ the whole thing, taking care of permits, maintenance, and insurance. Owning a bus is not like a car-pool. You can’t offer rides (whether asking people to contribute to the cost or doing it for free) to the public (even if it’s only fellow church members) without going through all the legal hoops. It immediately becomes a _commercial_ operation in the eyes of the state and fed regulators. One of my former clients was a small mom-and-pop moving company and they were constantly complaining about the regulatory burden, both in terms of time, permits, inspections, commercially licensed drivers, etc., etc. It’s not something that could be handled by a volunteer doing a stake calling as the bus coordinator/manager. It would have to be someone who knows and follows all the legal regulations. And if the church, or a church unit, owned the bus, there would be huge liability issues, such that the church would not want a “volunteer” (ie, a called person) to be in charge of it. So, just like flying first class is cheaper than owning a corporate jet, so would chartering a commercial bus “as needed” be cheaper (and FAR simpler) than owning/managing/maintaining/insuring your own privately owned bus. So unless he was willing to create his own bus company, obtain and maintain the necessary permits and insurance, and hire his own people, Stoney likely didn’t know what he was doing with the bus idea. And I imagine that church leaders didn’t want to get into the bus business. |
I agree with Bookslinger. There are a host of good reasons for the Church not to accept the donation of a bus. The best reason however has got to be that the leaders involved didn’t feel good about it :-). The Holy Ghost trumps most everything. He does sound like a wonderful guy. When I was a teenager 30 or so years ago I was deeply impressed by the goodness and good cheer of the old high priests that I saw every week in priesthood opening exercises. They were not perfect, but the light of Christ was visible on their faces and I wanted (and still want) to grow up to be like them. |
Book is right. A ward or stake would not own a bus for that purpose. I know the relationship the Church has with John Huntsman Sr. and he owns the plane. He just makes it available to them when they need it because he doesn’t use it all the time and it’s just sitting there available for use a lot of the time. Even if people thought Stoney was showing off, it wouldn’t prevent them from keeping the bus if they were able to do so. It’s just not something that wards and stakes are in a position to do. |
.. .”And he owns the plane. He just makes it available to them when they need it because he doesn’t use it all the time and it’s just sitting there available for use a lot of the time” Um, isn’t that Stoey wanted to do? |
Could have been. My understanding is NO discussion took place regarding the options. It was pretty much “How dare you do this without permission?!” Even though Stoney could be a tough business dude, his feelings were very hurt by the menfolk in leadership. He truly did not see a problem with his bus. |
My understanding from the post was that he was trying to give the bus as a gift to the ward or stake, but it’s hard to tell and it appears LiZ doesn’t know for sure. Obviously it could have been handled better, regardless of the reasons. There’s no reason why anyone should have hurt Stoney’s feelings over a generous gift, or make him feel like the offer wasn’t appreciated. But I also feel like there must be more to the story. Heck, I’m sure there are people who feel like John Huntsman is showing off by making his plane available, but that doesn’t stop the Church from using it. |