Let the Purging Begin . . .

Since 1967, I have had a steady companion, one I have looked forward to sharing time with practically every week. Beginning today, however, that relationship is undergoing a transition, a divorce.

For my birthday way back in 1967, my grandpa Hagarman introduced me to my first copy of Sports Illustrated (SI), buying me a one-year subscription. Knowing how much I loved sports and reading, he truly had given me the perfect gift. As attested by my devotion, I have never broken my loyalty, and I certainly do not intend to do that now. However, here is where the dilemma begins: I have kept all those issues all these years, filling boxes, crates, and plastic containers that simply occupy too much space. My wife has been after me for years to make a decision about what to do with them, but I--in my procrastinating fashion--have delayed the inevitable. No more--the purging has begun.

Strange as it may sound, it saddens me to be going through all these past issues and preparing to discard them. As indicated, I have loved the magazine for so long due to the writers' command of the language, their vivid imagery, and their insightful observations. Combined with such sharp photography and humorous columnists, this magazine has been a pleasure to watch mature into the publication it is today. I can easily attest that my writing has been heavily influenced by the sentence and word combinations that I have been exposed to over the years; in short, I have become an effective writer because I have been enthralled by the written word ever since I was a young kid reading my SI. As the years wore on, I so looked forward to the writings of Frank Deford, Rick Reilly, Curry Kirkpatrick, Jack McCallum, and many others--they were my teachers in so many ways simply because I tried to envision what they were thinking while they were splicing their words and sentences together. Getting "inside" their heads was such a valuable lesson for me--I visualized them seated in front of their typewriters/computers, trying to see the faces of their readers while composing a manuscript that would provoke the exact emotion the writers desired. As a result, I became entranced with words and writing, something, fortunately, that still strongly lives within me.

As I am reviewing my collection, I am smiling so many times as I see the covers reflecting my various sports heroes at careers' beginnings and endings; I see the innocence of youth and the despair of death; I see the wide gamut of sports, the proverbial goods, bads, and the uglies; I see the in-depth analyses of modern-day sports reflecting the transition of so many sports into businesses; I see the hurting faces following tragedies. Most of all, however, I see my youth. I see me as a kid, ripping open the mail every Thursday afternoon when the magazine was delivered, waiting to see what was in that particular issue. I grew up with that magazine, and like a loyal friend, I have learned so much  along the way. I learned Mickey Mantle was basically a jerk, but I also learned that his actions in the '60s were pretty lame compared to the hijinks of the modern athlete. I learned that the sports world is full of so many colorful and unsavory characters whose selfishness became so obvious. I learned about the violence of certain sports yet the lure that keeps drawing me in today. Hell, I even learned a little about sex and its attraction--I will never forget a picture showing a barmaid in New Orleans serving drinks while carrying them on her rather sizable breasts at a Super Bowl party. Along that same line, the yearly SI Swimsuit edition remains an eye-catcher. . . and, hopefully, always will! Like vivid memories, I am finding it quite difficult to shed my friends.

Like selling a puppy, my goal is to place my magazines "in a good home." To me, the recycle container is not the home I desire. I have researched selling them, but because my name is either on a sticker or is ingrained on the cover, I have been assured that their value as a collection is not what I had hoped. Therefore, the dilemma is obvious, but I have arrived at solutions: I am dispersing issues to friends and family that reflect the week they were born, a gift that I consider somewhat unique; I am saving certain covers with the hope of framing tributes to athletes I have respected for many years (Pete Rose, Larry Bird, Muhammad Ali); after the aforementioned have been done, I will then gradually toss them into the recycle container a year at a time. I mention this because now is the time to contact me if anyone desires a particular issue. Remember this, though: Treasure it as something special, just as I have done for all these years.

I conclude with a story that still means much to me today: Years ago, my good friends Todd and Peggy Bonvechio, knowing the importance of my collection, purchased at an auction the original edition of SI. In Peggy's words, "I told the guy I was bidding against that he wasn't getting it--I'm going higher than you!" Obviously, she won the bid and presented the magazine to me. No, I am not selling that one, but I treasure it--I remain indebted to the Bonvechios for buying that for me.

So, today, I begin the purging, slicing off a little bit of my history . . . but I am doing it with a smile and a frown . . . it's been an enjoyable ride!

Dover High School: One Man's Perspective (Redux)

What follows is an updated version of a blog entry I wrote in February 2014; the issues today are practically the same as they were then with only minor alterations.


The future begins with a vision.
Often, that vision may sound ridiculous, out of touch with reality, and even ludicrous.
The vision may startle, baffle, and frustrate many . . . but that vision is where the future begins.

I look through my life, and certain changes that were criticized at the time have now become integral parts of our lives: I-77, morning newspapers, computers, internet, wireless phones, self-propelled mowers, online banking, e-books . . . who would have ever thought that we would see such changes? Today, living without these necessities is a rarity . . . they all began with a vision.

However, the problem with a vision is that a price always has to be paid to make it happen . . . and that is exactly the situation currently facing Dover's taxpayers as they consider yet again the value of constructing a new high school.  Like all taxpayers, I cringe at the mere thought of increasing my taxes, and I despise the division inevitably caused within the community because of opposing beliefs. The approaching election, due to the issue's sensitivity, has had the potential to be polarizing as taxpayers--loaded with fire on all sides--stake their claims. The bottom line is that decisions soon to be made are as critical to our "neck of the woods" as we have seen in many, many years . . . and our taxpayers need to be as informed as they ever have been.

A legitimate question must be asked:  Why would Dover even consider building a new high school? When this question was being publicly discussed over five years ago, I must confess that I, too, had the same reaction, but, the truth is, I knew the question was coming.  As a former teacher who had taught in the high school for twenty years, I had watched as repairs were constantly being made, but the solutions were not lasting as long; I had seen technology enter the building but only in small steps because the building had great limitations; I had seen the leaking ceilings that were constantly being repaired, but the repairs only endured for short durations; I had seen the buckets in the rooms trying to catch the water drops; I had experienced the varying classroom temperatures depending upon whether the boilers were fully/partially/not-at-all working on any given day; I had endured the ever-increasing smells that crept through the lower parts of the building; I had seen kids in wheelchairs not be able to access their classrooms because of building limitations . . . I could continue with these observations, but I knew that the issue of a new school had finally arrived . . . and that is where we are once again.

Nearly fifteen years ago, our school board realized that accommodations must be made for the inevitable.  Thus, after much study and input, the decision was made to completely renovate the oldest wing of the building, to construct a new wing that would be attached to the building, and to begin devising a strategy that would make much-needed improvements to the remainder of the building.  From my perspective at that time, that was a reasonable request and, in truth, a realistic proposal.  That 4.8 mill levy would have allowed renovation to occur and would have gone a long way to solving the school's issues.  However, that levy request was defeated on two occasions--when those losses occurred, I clearly recall discussing with colleagues that we would one day regret that decision simply because replacing the building was inevitable.  Many local residents expressed to me at that time that with the state giving money to schools for new buildings, it would be foolish to pay for the building ourselves.  "Let's just wait for the state" was what I heard.  So, four years ago, the state determined that they would provide $9.2 million of our money for construction of our new high school. Interestingly, what I then began hearing was "Why do we need the state to give us money--how much will it cost us to fix things without the state?" Ironically, this levy request was soundly trounced even though the Dover Board of Education had carefully listened to the messages from the previous requests.  I must admit to being a bit perplexed following that thumping--what did we want?

Let me pause for a moment and reemphasize a point--we are in a serious predicament here in Dover.  Most stakeholders know something has to be done with our high school building--I cannot write that comment off as verbal fluff because the argument "It was good enough for me, so it's good enough for them" is so outdated that it reeks with being labeled an uninformed fuddy-duddy remark.  Yes, I understand that our country's economic situation continues to raise red flags . . . but the issue remains:  What are we going to do?

Like many, I read 30 Seconds in the Times Reporter, I ask others' opinions, and I sometimes overhear opinions while I wait in checkout lines--I get it that paying for a school is a central issue, but I also get it that people search for reasons to be negative.  Issues ranging from retire-rehire, snow days, bus routes, teacher discipline, perceived coaching slights, teacher/administrative contracts, chipped entryway steps, and a multitude of others can cloud our perspectives of what is best for our kids and our community.  Face it:  when we want to find something negative, we can easily do it--with each passing day, I am more convinced that our society is headed in a dire direction, one that makes it popular to be critical without knowledge of details, to be pessimistic because of others doing the same, and to be judgmental without even knowing what we are talking about other than what image is being presented by the media or what we heard "a buddy" say.  However, when it comes to educating our kids and maintaining the integrity of our community, I embrace the challenge wholeheartedly. 

The dilemma we are confronting is about much more that simply a building--it clearly is about the quality of our community.  We all know that the current Ohio government has been implicitly saying this to all communities, townships, and schools:  If you want a nice community, then create one--don't depend on us.  All we have to do is follow current councils', commissioners', trustees', and boards' of education minutes as reported in the press to understand the problems we are all facing.  The state has dropped the gauntlet:  Fund your own communities . . . we will help somewhat (this levy attempt is the most money Ohio has ever offered to the Dover City Schools for this project!), but don't even think of depending on us to bail you out.  Tough predicaments?  Absolutely, yet ones that can be managed if priorities are established.  What is important to us?  I will let you, the readers, answer that question.

Earlier in this article, I stressed the value of a vision . . . and that is "the food for thought" that I would like to offer this Dover community.  We have an opportunity to set up our soon-to-be high school students for the future.  As parents, we know that our kids when they become parents will be facing a multitude of issues, a significant one being the educating of their children and our grandchildren.  In this community, we have the chance to relieve them of one awesome task:  providing modern facilities that meet the demands of this changing world.  Again, I emphasize the vision.  If we see our community as it stands today without recognizing where the future is, we will be doing our children and our community a disservice.  I stress:  This issue must be addressed--we cannot continue to ignore what is inevitable.  The repeated claims of "What don't they understand?  No means no!" is a frightening indictment of Dover--I sincerely hope that that repeated claim is simply the frustrated grumblings of a minority who fail to share my vision, not the overriding sentiment of a proud community. 

Before I conclude this entry, I must stress a crucial point I would like to be heard: In the past, I had written that if the parents of pre-school, elementary, and middle school children did not get involved, our school issue would be in serious jeopardy. In truth, until this current levy campaign, I had been appalled at the lack of young parents who had stepped forward.  Perhaps it was reflective of a changing culture, but I tend to think otherwise--they simply wanted others to do their work for them. In this campaign, however, I applaud those parents of elementary and middle school children--a large percentage are now seeing with their own eyes what many of us have been saying for years. Now, it is their kids who are going to be affected; in 2014, I wrote that "it would be a troublesome time if six or so years from now, those same parents begin complaining about how decrepit our high school is and how their kids are behind the neighboring progressive schools." Somewhere in that time gap, those parents have come to a similar revelation because now we are talking about their kids, and what a difference it has made!

As difficult as it may be for many to accept, the desire to build a new school is not being based on any personal agendas--please trust me on that.  The school board members have been elected to do a job, one that opens them to personal and collective criticism--I commend them for having the courage to take a stand . . . not everybody can do that, believe me.  This issue is about our future.  We have a critical decision:  Do we want to continue to patch our way into the future, or do we want to leap into the 21st century? I do realize that many will read this commentary and criticize any and all elements of it--I respect that, but I must stress that my interest in this issue is not self serving. I am not interested in leading a campaign or running for the school board.  Like many in this community, I am retired; my contribution will be the same as the majority of Dover citizens: I will be paying additional taxes, but I will know that my decision to support this issue will have helped pave the way so that Dover High School will continue to be an integral part of our community and a launching pad for our youth.

Here is where we are:

The future begins with a vision.
Often, that vision may sound ridiculous, out of touch with reality, and even ludicrous.
The vision may startle, baffle, and frustrate many . . . but that vision is where the future begins.

Dover High School: One Man's Perspective

What follows is an updated version of a blog entry I wrote in February 2014; the issues today are practically the same as they were then with only minor alterations.


The future begins with a vision.
Often, that vision may sound ridiculous, out of touch with reality, and even ludicrous.
The vision may startle, baffle, and frustrate many . . . but that vision is where the future begins.

I look through my life, and certain changes that were criticized at the time have now become integral parts of our lives: I-77, morning newspapers, computers, internet, wireless phones, self-propelled mowers, online banking, e-books . . . who would have ever thought that we would see such changes? Today, living without these necessities is a rarity . . . they all began with a vision.

However, the problem with a vision is that a price always has to be paid to make it happen . . . and that is exactly the situation currently facing Dover's taxpayers as they consider yet again the value of constructing a new high school.  Like all taxpayers, I cringe at the mere thought of increasing my taxes, and I despise the division inevitably caused within the community because of opposing beliefs. The approaching election, due to the issue's sensitivity, has the potential to be polarizing as taxpayers--loaded with fire on all sides--stake their claims. The bottom line is that decisions soon to be made are as critical to our "neck of the woods" as we have seen in many, many years . . . and our taxpayers need to be as informed as they ever have been.

A legitimate question must be asked:  Why would Dover even consider building a new high school? When this question was being publicly discussed over five years ago, I must confess that I, too, had the same reaction, but, the truth is, I knew the question was coming.  As a former teacher who taught in the high school for twenty years, I had watched as repairs were constantly being made, but the solutions were not lasting as long; I had seen technology enter the building but only in small steps because the building had great limitations; I had seen the leaking ceilings that were constantly being repaired, but the repairs only endured for short durations; I had seen the buckets in the rooms trying to catch the water drops; I had experienced the varying classroom temperatures depending upon whether the boilers were fully/partially/not-at-all working on any given day; I had endured the ever-increasing smells that crept through the lower parts of the building; I had seen kids in wheelchairs not be able to access their classrooms because of building limitations . . . I could continue with these observations, but I knew that the issue of a new school had finally arrived . . . and that is where we are once again.

Nearly fifteen years ago, our school board realized that accommodations must be made for the inevitable.  Thus, after much study and input, the decision was made to completely renovate the oldest wing of the building, to construct a new wing that would be attached to the building, and to begin devising a strategy that would make much-needed improvements to the remainder of the building.  From my perspective at that time, that was a reasonable request and, in truth, a realistic proposal.  That 4.8 mill levy would have allowed renovation to occur and would have gone a long way to solving the school's issues.  However, that levy request was defeated on two occasions--when those losses occurred, I clearly recall discussing with colleagues that we would one day regret that decision simply because replacing the building was inevitable.  Many local residents expressed to me at that time that with the state giving money to schools for new buildings, it would be foolish to pay for the building ourselves.  "Let's just wait for the state" was what I heard.  So, four years ago, the state determined that they would provide $9.2 million of our money for construction of our new high school. Interestingly, what I then began hearing was "Why do we need the state to give us money--how much will it cost us to fix things without the state?" Ironically, this levy request was soundly trounced even though the Dover Board of Education had carefully listened to the messages from the previous requests.  I must admit to being a bit perplexed following that thumping--what did we want?

Let me pause for a moment and reemphasize a point--we are in a serious predicament here in Dover.  Most stakeholders know something has to be done with our high school building--I cannot write that comment off as verbal fluff because the argument "It was good enough for me, so it's good enough for them" is so outdated that it reeks with being labeled an uninformed fuddy-duddy remark.  Yes, I understand that our country's economic situation continues to raise red flags . . . but the issue remains:  What are we going to do?

Like many, I read 30 Seconds in the Times Reporter, I ask others' opinions, and I sometimes overhear opinions while I wait in checkout lines--I get it that paying for a school is a central issue, but I also get it that people search for reasons to be negative.  Issues ranging from retire-rehire, snow days, bus routes, teacher discipline, perceived coaching slights, teacher/administrative contracts, chipped entryway steps, and a multitude of others can cloud our perspectives of what is best for our kids and our community.  Face it:  when we want to find something negative, we can easily do it--with each passing day, I am more convinced that our society is headed in a dire direction, one that makes it popular to be critical without knowledge of details, to be pessimistic because of others doing the same, and to be judgmental without even knowing what we are talking about other than what image is being presented by the media or what we heard "a buddy" say.  However, when it comes to educating our kids and maintaining the integrity of our community, I embrace the challenge wholeheartedly. 

The dilemma we are confronting is about much more that simply a building--it clearly is about the quality of our community.  We all know that the current Ohio government has been implicitly saying this to all communities, townships, and schools:  If you want a nice community, then create one--don't depend on us.  All we have to do is follow current councils', commissioners', trustees', and boards' of education minutes as reported in the press to understand the problems we are all facing.  The state has dropped the gauntlet:  Fund your own communities . . . we will help somewhat (this levy attempt is the most money ever offered to the Dover City Schools for this project!), but don't even think of depending on us to bail you out.  Tough predicaments?  Absolutely, yet ones that can be managed if priorities are established.  What is important to us?  I will let you, the readers, answer that question.

Earlier in this article, I stressed the value of a vision . . . and that is "the food for thought" that I would like to offer this Dover community.  We have an opportunity to set up our soon-to-be high school students for the future.  As parents, we know that our kids when they become parents will be facing a multitude of issues, a significant one being the educating of their children and our grandchildren.  In this community, we have the chance to relieve them of one awesome task:  providing modern facilities that meet the demands of this changing world.  Again, I emphasize the vision.  If we see our community as it stands today without recognizing where the future is, we will be doing our children and our community a disservice.  I stress:  This issue must be addressed--we cannot continue to ignore what is inevitable.  The repeated claims of "What don't they understand?  No means no!" is a frightening indictment of Dover--I sincerely hope that that repeated claim is simply the frustrated grumblings of a minority who fail to share my vision, not the overriding sentiment of a proud community. 

Before I conclude this entry, I must stress a crucial point I would like to be heard: In the past, I had written that if the parents of pre-school, elementary, and middle school children did not get involved, our school issue will be in serious jeopardy. In truth, until this current levy campaign, I had been appalled at the lack of young parents who had stepped forward.  Perhaps it was reflective of a changing culture, but I tend to think otherwise--they simply wanted others to do their work for them. In this campaign, however, I applaud those parents of elementary and middle school children--a large percentage are now seeing with their own eyes what many of us have been saying for years. Now, it is their kids who are going to be affected; in 2014, I wrote that "it would be a troublesome time if six or so years from now, those same parents begin complaining about how decrepit our high school is and how their kids are behind the neighboring progressive schools." Somewhere in that time gap, those parents have come to a similar revelation now we are talking about their kids, and what a difference it makes!

As difficult as it may be for many to accept, the desire to build a new school is not being based on any personal agendas--please trust me on that.  The school board members have been elected to do a job, one that opens them to personal and collective criticism--I commend them for having the courage to take a stand . . . not everybody can do that, believe me.  This issue is about our future.  We have a critical decision:  Do we want to continue to patch our way into the future, or do we want to leap into the 21st century? I do realize that many will read this commentary and criticize any and all elements of it--I respect that, but I must stress that my interest in this issue is not self serving. I am not interested in leading a campaign or running for the school board.  Like many in this community, I am retired; my contribution will be the same as the majority of Dover citizens: I will be paying taxes, but I will know that my decision to support this issue will have helped pave the way so that Dover High School will continue to be an integral part of our community and a launching pad for our youth.

Here is where we are:

The future begins with a vision.
Often, that vision may sound ridiculous, out of touch with reality, and even ludicrous.
The vision may startle, baffle, and frustrate many . . . but that vision is where the future begins.

What Do I Know . . .

I could care less whom you vote for in this upcoming election; your political leanings have no impact on me or my opinion of you.


The aforementioned disclaimer is important because I am venturing into an area that has intrigued me for years, yet one in which I realize I am merely an observer with probably not enough intelligence to actively debate. Having said that, I am taking a stab at offering political observations based on views from a common man, views that have been formulated by my lifetime reading, viewing, and listening to others' points and opinions. Here's hoping the perspective from my seat may prove somewhat interesting to my readers!


*The rampant hate and distrust currently prevailing in our country will--in the long run--be the best solution to our nation's insecurity; let's face it, we're horribly close to fragmenting in all directions. We all fully recognize that the American people are fed up--fed up with what, though, could probably not be agreed upon, but the bottom line is so many are beyond peeved. Our only direction now is to go up; our elected representatives must know that business as usual is not going to fly. We are demanding cooperation and compromise--digging in and sabotaging simply have led to our problems. I am quite confident that positive change will ultimately prevail, although I realize I may be a bit of a minority at this time. As the saying goes, "Sometimes we have to bottom out before change occurs"--if we have not bottomed out in our political confidence right now, we are dangerously close to doing so.


*As I rack my brain to remember where I first read this next point so many years ago, I recognize that the logic behind it makes such perfect sense today: Make all political terms six years in duration with no re-electing involved. From the moment a candidate for any office is elected, the process of holding that seat seemingly becomes the number one objective, as opposed to truly being the people's voice. The two and four-year terms currently existing at various levels oftentimes lead to wayward behavior, apparently catering to various groups with the express purpose of being re-elected. Eliminating that possibility seems perfectly logical to me. An elected representative gets six years; beginning that term, the individual knows he/she has six years to do what was promised . . . if it cannot be done in that time, let another interested individual try.


*We often equate our deteriorating political structure with failed people--I tend to disagree with that, for the most part. Our world has changed to a picture none of us could have ever envisioned. Essentially, a world war has broken out, but the enemies have no clearly defined borders--they are in all corners of the world, it appears, and to fight this war with the same devices and strategies we have used in the past does not make logical sense. In Vietnam, we were exposed to fighting enemies who basically looked the same as the friendlies; today, that has escalated even further. We don't know who the "bad" guys really are, and to say that we will "bomb the ____ out of  'em" sounds fine, but the realistic solution is not so cut and dry. To fight today's wars and eradicate the world's dangers requires a sophistication that baffles many who simply want to "take 'em out." If only it were that easy, the enemies would be gone by now.


*The real travesty in our country today is not the presidential candidates we have representing us. No, the real obscenity is the vast millions that is being spent to elect a president and various representatives. We have a difficult time raising funding to fight poverty, drugs, and violence, but we have absolutely no problem raising money to elect a candidate. Common sense tells me that is an absolutely ridiculous predicament . . . the money is out there, so availability is not the issue. What matters is that infamous struggle for power . . . seems sad, doesn't it?


*I remain convinced that the emergence of the Tea Party from several years ago--while it has basically led to an obviously chaotic Republican Party--is merely a precursor to an emerging and possibly effective third party. As with any change, the timing is of utmost importance. Right now, the timing is ripe--if it's going to happen, it will be within the next few years. People are that disgusted with where we are today.


*I am still trying to make sense of a few conflicting thoughts; our religious teachings promote open arms to all and devotion to helping those less fortunate than we, specifically the poor and downtrodden. However, when that belief is mentioned in political circles, we oftentimes become extremely defensive, citing that the rich should not be singled out for their success. Translated, why should the rich be forced to share their wealth? As is obvious throughout America, numbers of people attending church are nosediving for a variety of reasons. Is it possible that because the churchgoing numbers are lagging that the effect is our sincerity and willingness to help others are taking hits? On that topic, I am unsure of what conclusion to draw . . . maybe it is mere coincidence, but somewhere in there I sense a connection.


*We are so quick to attack public figures today, none more so than whoever is the sitting president. If we take a quick recall, America has been so fed up with any president as evidenced by our vicious attacks on the two President Bushes and now President Obama. Truthfully, I don't know if any of those presidents have deserved the massive and personal attacks they have endured; sitting here today, I cannot determine if our current president has been effective or ineffective. As with any presidency or leadership position, history will dictate that. Twenty years from now, we may intelligently say that President Obama was ineffective . . . or maybe not. Safe to say, though, that the president most respected in our lifetime has been John Kennedy. Why, however, might be because he was assassinated, which led to such overwhelming support for his legacy . . . he went out as a hero. Seldom does a living president receive the same accord.


*The current presidential race presents such a dilemma. Safe to say, many will be holding their noses as they vote. Both are flawed candidates who have underscored any legacies they might have with perceived scandals, both are offensive in their own ways, and both are polarizing. We have been pigeonholed into believing we have two real choices, but I am not buying that: along with the outlying candidates, we do have the option of writing in nominees. No, those write ins will have no chance of winning, but--at the least--we can vote our conscience.


*When I critique Donald Trump, I see a rich man's Pete Rose. Both are flawed, both have oversized egos, both seek major forgiveness for past transgressions, both have devoted followers who forgive each as being "merely human"; likewise, both are polarizing with an abundant number of people who despise them and will never overlook their pasts, both have a fervent passion to achieve something that probably will never happen (Pete's getting into the Hall of Fame and Mr. Trump's quest for the presidency), and both feel they are picked upon by the establishment. Sadly, I assume both will be sad characters as they continue aging . . . except Mr. Trump will have more money.


*My final observation is quite simple, yet so many continue to not get it: The media will always win simply because they have the last word. The deterioration of so many aspiring political candidates hinges on being perceived by the public as non-credible, non-trustworthy, and non-promising. Today's difference is that the media will not hide from the truth. President Kennedy's sexual forays were well hidden during his living years as were so many transgressions by so many other politicians and celebrities (think Mickey Mantle, for example)--couldn't happen today. Having so many media sources (not even talking about Wikileaks and so many other social sites) allows practically all rumors and stories to be considered factual. As stated, I read constantly; what I know has been primarily shaped by what I have read, positively or negatively. In short, I do not know if what I have read is truly factual and on point. I know what the media wants me to see and understand--how else can we evaluate when columnists write conflicting viewpoints about the same issues/events/occurrences? I am shaped by what I read, but non-readers are basically shaped by the flavor of the month--whatever they hear, they have a tendency to latch onto, whether it is rational or not. That is the world we live in today . . . who do we believe?


A long entry today, my friends, one I hope you have at least partially appreciated. As I stated with my first entry a few years ago, I am jumping into the fire to express myself . . . it doesn't matter if agreement exists. What matters is that we use our brains and think about what is happening around us!


Previous blog entries may be found at michaelagunther.blogspot.com, or I may be contacted at mag.gunther@gmail.com

Killing Big Mo

Big Mo could be dying a slow death. Just when all the momentum seems to be headed in the proper direction, a crack appears. When it happens, we throw stones, oftentimes boulders, intended to silence or hurt the ones who broke the momentum. Welcome to Dover, my friends.

Allow me to take an inventory about what has been occurring in Dover over the past year:

*Allied Machine has completed a beautiful addition and renovation to its worldwide headquarters;

*Novogradac and Company Accounting is nearing completion of a stunning three-story complex;

*Union Hospital is also approaching the end of a wonderful office project on the north end;

*Union Hospital has added a multi-million dollar emergency center;

*Parkway is adding to its growing auto mile by beginning to build yet another superstore;

*The city of Dover is developing the river bank to enable easier access to the water and enhanced recreation facilities;

*The City of Dover is rapidly advancing on a synchronized traffic light system;

*The City of Dover has been tearing up old corners and curbs and pouring new concrete for improved aesthetics and ease of mobility;

*The City of Dover has methodically improved the beauty of its park by investing thousands in ball field improvements and access to the kids' play area;

*The City of Dover has continued to pave as certain streets begin to deteriorate;

*Dover's residents passed on the first attempt a levy designed to add firefighters and to assist them in the near future as the city's plans include building a substation on Dover's north end.

Readers, you do see the pattern, right? Big Mo is hitting Dover at a pace probably unseen by most of us alive today. As a resident, I am thrilled by what I am witnessing--we are on the move!

But, wait . . . here is where the crack appears.

The Dover City School Board has--without success--for over a decade tried to convince taxpayers that a new high school is sorely needed. Plans have been altered; potential sights have been presented and rehashed; meetings with supporters and opponents have been held; public meetings have been publicized and created discussion; in-depth meetings with the state of Ohio, the Ohio Facilities Commission, engineers, architects, and construction personnel have been ongoing. . . in short, due diligence has been paid. Having been part of this process in the past, I am beyond confident that the need is real, despite the ongoing myths that have occasionally surfaced such as "they let the school fall apart so they could get a new one." Beliefs such as those are beyond any discussion, so I will refrain from even providing a counter.

However, a major crack has severely impacted the perceptions of many hoping that we could add one more slice to the momentum by building a new high school in the town's center where the majority of townspeople have said they want it. The Dover City Council has decided not to endorse this project. I, for one, am extremely disappointed in that decision. Truthfully, it is hard for me to write those words because I consider the council representatives that I know--including the mayor--as friends of mine. A few are even my former students, so I certainly do not expect any fallout from expressing my views. This council and city leadership are comprised of good, caring people, but, for whatever reason, it appears that perhaps personal acrimony toward the school is raising its ugly head. For the life of me, I cannot comprehend the lame excuses that I have read: "We are not telling people how to vote," . . . carries no weight for me. In fact, it is almost laughable. Somewhere behind that evasive rhetoric is one or more hidden dislikes or lack of trust toward the Dover City Schools. I want to hear what it is that truly is bugging the council. Let's remove the politically weak statements and state a truth: What is it that is causing the hesitancy?

When our mayor was campaigning for his re-election, he stood on my front porch and in response to my question of "Are you going to support the school's new building?" the response was quick and to the point: "Yes, as long as they follow my suggestion--I have told them we will give them Fifth Street and they can build it there." The key point was simple: as long as they follow my suggestion.  Well, guess what? That is where the school's last (and also current) proposed site has been located. That is also why I shake my head when I read a quotation recently attributed to him in The Times-Reporter that "there was never any plan to get on board with." I don't understand that confusing line.

The City of Dover may still end up writing an editorial letter explaining their rationale--which I hope they do--but I must stress that it is painfully obvious that the needed support will probably be perceived as less than sincere. As a high school teacher, one of my guiding principles for students was that "Perception is Reality," an understanding that their values and their beliefs are on display in so many ways. I believe we have seen that our council--as a group--is not on board with the school's project. Again, I am so disappointed in that thinking, but  I reiterate: I cannot help but think that perhaps members of council are allowing personal resentment to cloud their judgment--I certainly hope that is not true.

In the past, I have written many blog entries, mostly all expressing observations I have made. I like to think that maybe a few people may be interested in my views, but I certainly understand that many may hold differing opinions--I am fine with that. As we well know, though, that is the beauty of the process--we can still progress without complete agreement. That, my friends, is the crux of my argument: no, my vote will not be determined by whether the council endorses the potential new high school construction, and I doubt if many others are hinging their vote on council's actions. The point is that the perception that the city government is on board only adds credence to the momentum we have going for us in this city at this exact moment. Their hesitancy continues to cast a negative pall that absolutely is not needed. If we want to keep moving forward, we need the city to--at the least--quit any behind-the-scenes bickering that may possibly be occurring and acknowledge that this construction project will be just another great addition to a fine city. I want this building to be a crown jewel for our community, I want our taxpayers to consider this levy's approval, and, most of all, I want this city council and its leadership to embrace the ongoing momentum we currently have.

Please don't kill Big Mo.

  

"We All Want Change, but . . ."

"We all want change; however, we don't want to change!"

     I would like to claim the aforementioned as my own creation, but I must confess that I recently saw it on a website; the moment I saw it, though, it struck me as possessing power and insight . . . allow me to role play for a few moments.

     First, a quick inventory of what we apparently don't like:

*Over-taxation                                        

*Government intervention                     

*Health care costs

*Cost of schools

*Authority

     Of course, many more additions could be made, but I will focus on these for this discussion. Let's examine society ten years from now by focusing on a life where none of us is forced to change as individuals, but life as we know it changes for us:

*Over-taxation: let's relieve the ever-present tax burden--our property taxes, sales taxes, and whatever other taxes we pay are frozen as of this moment. Of course, to achieve that goal, upkeep and repairs of roads, bridges, highways, buildings, and infrastructure will be done at a 2016 rate and pace as opposed to a 2026 rate and pace. Complaints regarding increased potholes, unsafe bridges, falling buildings will have to fall on deaf ears. Sorry, the price of living "the way it used to be" is steep . . . something has to give.

*Government Intervention: To accommodate the people's wishes, the government will begin to economize by eliminating certain departments such as the IRS, the Department of Education, and the Department of Homeland Security. In 2016, we say that the government has too much control over our lives; thus, the obvious solution is to reduce its role. Consequences? Sure . . . something has to go. Maybe academic standards will be reduced to whatever each community wants with little to no oversight from anyone other than the local school boards and administrators; maybe it will be a flat tax where we all pay the same percentage of whatever our income might be even though services may have to be cut to accommodate that. As stated, something has to give.

*Health Care Costs: To be sure all participants are treated equally and fairly and to make sure that costs no longer are spiraling out of control, perhaps changes should be made so those objectives are met. Here's a possible solution: The following groups (stereotypes) will no longer be eligible for health care coverage due to their financial drain on health care: smokers and obese individuals. Please understand that costs must be contained, so we must accept that health insurance is a privilege, not a right. The burden of taking care of ourselves will fall on the individuals, not the employer or the government. Despite the harshness of this proposal, please remember that to maintain 2016 costs, compromises and hard decisions must be made.

Cost of Schools: To alleviate the increasing cost of doing business in the academic world, certain changes are inevitable. Tax levies for property owners will freeze at 2016 rates, so new construction and building repairs will be done only if "life and limb" is affected. Additionally, salary increases for all employees will be sharply reduced. Consequences are dangerous, of course, such as building maintenance suffering. lead poisoning being a possibility due to dangerously old pipes not being kept up to date, and quality individuals ruling out education as a career opportunity. As for the kids, well, it is a possibility that their education may suddenly be stifled and complaints that American schools aren't that strong may drastically increase (and may be accurate).  But, hey, if it was good enough for me, it's good enough for them.

*Authority: In a world where respect for bosses, teachers, coaches, political representatives, religion, and police personnel is suffering, we need to get this issue corrected. Because we are leveling taxes and are being forced to "do more with less," something, again, has to give. Rather than respecting a level of hierarchy where we acknowledge that certain people have more authority than others, perhaps we should level the playing field a bit. How that can be done is beyond me; I'm more of a thinker, not a miracle worker, but I will suggest this: maybe the family structure will re-emerge as the bastion of morals. Let's hope so; for those who want society to be the "teacher" of morality and values, please remember that we cannot legislate morality--that's on the home life.

     From my seat, here's my claim: people bitch, moan, and complain about how wrong so much is--I hear that. However, to correct those problems, we as individuals must change . . . but we seemingly don't want to hear anything about that. Yep, we want society's leaders to change, but, as is frequently stated, "I'll be damned if 'they're going to change my life!'"

     So, what's it going to be? Where, when, and how do changes occur? Magically? OR The determination  to relinquish for the greater good even though the individual may have to sacrifice? To no one's surprise, no easy solution is out there until we accept that to advance, change, and prosper requires a different perspective. I am reminded of a writing I read years ago. Part of the wording was If there is no change, there is no change--simple words, simple thoughts but simple solutions?

     We all want change . . . but we don't want to change--true?


                                                                     ........
In a response to inquiries, if any reader has missed my postings, the collection may be found at the following: michaelagunther.blogspot.com. Responses may also be sent to my email at mag.gunther@gmail.com or guntherm@roadrunner.com.

"I Didn't Do It!"

"I didn't do it."

Come along with me, my friends, as I take a nostalgic journey that might possibly add to the intrigue currently surrounding the Cleveland Cavaliers and the supposed king, LeBron James.

It wasn't that many years ago when James, a high school senior at Akron St. Vincent-St. Mary's and a preordained superstar created by Sports Illustrated, suddenly was blessed with a "gift" from his financially-challenged mother. The gift, of course, was only a brand-new Hummer H2, estimated to have cost in the $50,000 range--typically not affordable to most Ohio families let alone to one who had proclaimed his life story of having had little while growing up in the city.

When this incident occurred, the Ohio High School Athletic Association (OHSAA, for easy reference), led by Clair Muscaro, a respected school and athletic administrator for many years, launched an investigation. Sparing the details, the ultimate decision was that James would be suspended for receiving illegal benefits, as defined in the OHSAA codes. Of course, in the Akron area, that decision reeked of "trying to blame the star," so the situation quickly escalated into a legal challenge and a negative barrage against the OHSAA, its controlling board, and its commissioner. Even though LeBron did ultimately serve a brief suspension, he was reinstated; I never quite knew all the legal details of that scenario (his mother "proved" that he had a legitimate bank loan), but I do remember that it smelled fishy. LeBron, in his infinite attempt to draw attention to himself, during the game he was suspended (vs. Canton McKinley, if I recall correctly), reportedly brought out a remote Hummer and zipped it around parts of the court during pregame, probably to show his displeasure for his image being cast negatively. Of course, LeBron and his associates decried everything; the counterargument was that the school parking lot was full of cars given to kids whose parents had bought the cars for them. The implied message was that criticizing LeBron for having a Hummer was a subtle form of racism and unfair criticism; in short, he was merely innocent.

As the years rolled on, most of us in Ohio fell victim to the magic of LeBron; he truly was and remains an outstanding player, one who has led the Cavaliers to two NBA Finals. Yes, he disappointed us when he headed south to Miami, but, in fairness, the NBA is a business, and he had an opportunity to improve himself financially and professionally--can't fault him for that. Of course, we were bitter simply because we were and remain so hungry for a championship in northeast Ohio; when he left, our dreams went with him as did the Cavaliers'.  In time, however, he returned after having achieved a financial pinnacle that we cannot fathom and two championships in his belt. Again, much to his credit, he came home to give us what we so badly desire. While his incessant dribbling wears me out, I refuse to be critical of his basketball skills nor his generosity toward those less fortunate than he. As an ambassador for the NBA and as a true philanthropist, he is clearly a member of an elite few. However, as someone who proclaims he has never disrespected a coach, sorry, I don't buy it; in truth, he has done it throughout his career--perhaps it is simply a matter of how one defines "disrespect." Again, let's resume the nostalgic journey.

A few names need to be mentioned: Former coach Mike Brown--like or dislike him--was clearly not a favorite of LeBron's. If Brown were ever to open up, I suspect he could share many opportunities where LeBron outright defied him. On record, not much there, but LeBron always said what was "right," so as to avoid personal criticism. Erik Spoelstra, Miami's coach, butted heads with LeBron, even being shouldered by him on one occasion while James was walking to the huddle; Chris Bosh, an all-star level player, never really fit with LeBron's style--I have to think he was somewhat happy and relieved when LeBron headed out of Miami. My point is simple: he has disrespected many coaches, and I suspect many players.

All this brings us to the current situation with David Blatt, recently fired coach of the Cavaliers, who never appeared to be embraced by LeBron, despite Blatt's numerous compliments that James was the best player in the world and the Cavaliers' team revolved around him. I could go on, but it became painfully clear to me early this season when LeBron simply walked off the floor while play was still ongoing and recently when he spent most of the fourth quarter on the bench constantly talking to assistant coach Tyronn Lue--it was clear from James's nonverbal expressions and his ever-present talking literally out of the side of his mouth that the lack of support for yet another coach had surfaced again. Despite James's contention that he had nothing to do with Blatt's ouster, I do not believe it. The prevailing creed is that "the players just didn't like Blatt" and "he didn't know what he was doing." Yeah, right. Perhaps the discontent started with LeBron not liking him--think that might have carried a little weight in that locker room? Critics say that Blatt didn't stand up to James; if he had, I suspect he would have been fired long before last week. Remember this key point: the Cavaliers' general manager is not Pat Riley, a man who refused to allow LeBron to intimidate him. I will let you read between those lines.

No, my friends, LeBron might not have been informed or consulted about Blatt's firing, but his fingerprints are all over that situation. A man of integrity lost his job . . . again, because of LeBron and his power. Many, including me, are in the midst of choosing whether we want to go all in to back the Cavaliers yet again. As stated, I get it that professional sports is a business, but, for the life of me, I cannot get past that LeBron's power continues to be an undermining disaster. Perhaps we will fall victim to our desire to win, but my thoughts are quite simple: Regardless of how badly we want that championship, LeBron's negative vibes are rearing their ugly heads. Can I see it? Nope, but I feel it. When it's all over, we will not have a championship banner to gloat about, but we will forever debate whether LeBron's time in Cleveland was worth it or not. 

Remember these words: I didn't do it.

Tooting the Whistle

     Many moon ago, I was a starving freshman college student living in a decrepit dormitory lucky to scrape together enough money so I could join my friends once a week at the Burger Chef directly across from Kent State University's front campus. Most weeks I had the money, but several I didn't--I hated that feeling. Although I had a part-time job working on campus, that money was pretty well spoken for, so my money flow was quite limited until . . . I became interested in becoming a basketball referee. In time, I researched the process of becoming an official, ordered and studied the materials, began focusing on referees' movements rather than the players', passed the required Ohio High School Athletic Association test, and became a licensed official. From that point, another step in my evolution had begun.

     Like most players and fans, prior to becoming an official, I had based most of my reactions on how those around me acted. Typically, if a call had gone against my team or the team I was rooting for, I, without hesitation, blamed the official. For years, I had watched the sideline antics of Coach Charlie Huggins as he berated, manipulated, and scolded officials with the intent of getting the crowd to support his viewpoint and intensify the pressure on the men in stripes. Truthfully, most times it worked because it was Charlie--a basketball icon in our valley--doing the yelling. Opposing coaches--in an attempt to get the same breaks that Charlie got--tried to emulate him. Sometimes it worked; most frequently, it didn't. That was my background, so, obviously, I carried that same mentality with me: Officials deserved to be scolded.

     When the "shoe is on the other foot," however, we often change our perspectives. As a neophyte official, I had so much to learn, but like any beginner, I carried myself as if I knew far more than I did. Fortunately, in the Portage County League where I began, the league protocol required the varsity officials to bring one JV official with them, and each of the two varsity officials worked one half of the JV game with whomever they brought. I had the opportunity to work with two veterans who basically adopted me during my first two years, helped me get games, taught me the basics of officiating, and pointed out my various weaknesses as well as the few strengths I had at that point in my development. It took my working only a few games before I realized that to be a solid official required far more than I had ever considered when I was sitting in the stands. Strangely, I loved it.

     As the years passed, I made enough money to allow me to take spring break vacations; my parents had made it clear they were not paying for any luxury like that. So, I met my first goal: make money. Beyond that, though, I realized that what I was doing was a perfect fit for the teaching and coaching career I was pursuing. In time, I learned to basically tune out as much crowd noise as possible, to identify and ignore coaches who cried and moaned most of the time, to listen to those coaches who demonstrated logic and restraint, and to quasi-understand why crowds--particularly parents--were so rabid in their support and defense of their kids. Most importantly, I learned the rules, something I really had never fully explored. Nothing could be more embarrassing--although it did happen--to be caught in a situation where my ignorance of a particular rule surfaced. In short, it was on-the-job training for the coaching profession I was pursuing.

     When I graduated from college, I continued officiating while still coaching freshmen basketball at Newcomerstown High School. As time progressed, though, my passion shifted to coaching, and I ultimately surrendered my officiating license. Unfortunately, the self-imposed pressures of coaching gradually pushed my officiating lessons aside. When coaching--regardless of what level it might be--the coach wants to win, of course. In the process, sometimes that coach may act ridiculously, may scream uncontrollably, and may assume a demeanor that is not his or her true self. If the reader failed to catch it, I just described myself in the earlier stages of my career.

     Yes, I had games where I chased the officials from the floor, earned my technical fouls, and felt my blood pressure shoot sky high all in the spirit of trying to win games. Somewhere along the line, though, I began to realize that I was turning into a man who lost his focus while coaching; it took many years for me to accept that I was shortchanging myself and my players because when I would start on the officials, I would drift from my concentration, thus making me not nearly the coach I should have been. I suppose part of it was the dreaded ego, of course, but I increasingly became aware that I was getting sick of hearing my own complaints, which seemed to be the same broken record. In time, I tried to change . . . although I did have relapses where I went nutsy on a few guys! By my career's end, though, I had come full circle--I tolerated the calls, made a few pointed observations, and then shut my mouth . . . and I like to think I became a better coach as a result.

     My point is quite simple: Officiating is hard work, far more difficult than sitting in the stands, watching a game, and offering comments. It requires keen vision, intense focus, physical conditioning, communication skills, teamwork, rule book knowledge, invisible ear muffs, confidence, and, most importantly, common sense. Just for a moment, I ask you to look around the gym at the next game and see how many of those people screaming and critiquing possess the characteristics just described. I already know the answer: an extremely small number. Yes, I will be first to admit that like any profession, not every official is on the same level; translated, several are better than others, some far better. No, not everyone can referee; unfortunately, I fear that high school and middle school sports are about to hit a crisis: not enough people are savvy enough to officiate, so the numbers of officials are dropping considerably. I question what will happen when athletic directors cannot get officials for games; my hope is it does not happen, but as numbers drop and teams increase, an officiating shortage is quickly approaching. Then what?

     As a former coach and official, I recognize the camaraderie and respect that develop between the two: it is special, make no mistake. At this point in life, I look back at officials I hold in special regard. Retired officials like Larry Gasser, Chuck Rest, Mel McAfee, Sam Fausto, Al Amicone, Roger Levi; deceased officials like Joe Pangrazio and Warren Hood; current officials like Ron Hurst, Buck Corwin, Jimmy Hood, Jim Blickensderfer, Kevin Milligan--these guys and others just like them are ones who may have irritated the hell out of me at various times, but we were on the stage together, willing to expose ourselves to the ridicule of others while earning a respect shared by few. Officials sacrifice so much to pursue a passion, one where money and reputations can be made, yet one where enemies and grudges can also be formed. What we do appreciate, though, is that without them the show cannot go on! As I look back, I miss those interactions, that banter, the dreaded looks, the occasional technical--what fun it was!

Similarities: Jimmy Haslam /President Obama

I will begin with a profound question: Where the hell are we headed?


To answer the question, I must first define "we." For this discussion, two definitions suffice: "we" are Browns' fans and "we" are United States citizens. It strikes me that the two have a shared commonality.


Let's talk about Jimmy first; I don't trust him. Two years ago I heard him talk at the Pro Football Hall of Fame Luncheon Club (after he arrived 25 minutes late and took no questions), and I came away thinking that "if anyone can talk himself out of a federal indictment, it's he." I was right on that, by the way. His business approach and suave demeanor unnerved me; what I heard coming from his mouth did not equate with his aura . . . something about him was unnerving. Granted, I am not part of his successful Flying J business world, but my gut instincts told me he was too smooth to be true. With that said, however, I wanted to believe every word he said because I have always wanted the Browns to be winners.


As time has passed, though, my belief has sunk to its lowest depth. Point blank: I don't trust the guy. Despite what he has said, I am convinced that he bought the Browns because they were the first team available and he had the money, not because he had a vested interest in Cleveland. Like a savvy businessman, he wants results--I am glad for that, but he seems to misunderstand one of the key ingredients of athletics: loyalty. After openly stating he "would not blow things up" if  the 2015 season did not go as planned, he did just that--he "blew it up." Should we be surprised when whoever gets hired as coach and general manager faces the same dilemma of being replaced fairly quickly? Building a successful program takes time, a key point  for which Jimmy seems to have low regard. Before the season, in a blog, I observed that I hoped Jimmy would give Mike Pettine four years to build rather than going in a different direction. Obviously, it was wishful thinking on my part, but, again, I don't trust ol' Jimmy . . . and I don't think too many of us do in this part of the country. As a result of the lack of loyalty, we have lost faith; as that happens, we become cynical about everything Browns-related. My expectations are that the accompanying negativity will result in lower ticket sales and fewer merchandise purchases, of course. Of larger significance, though, is the failure to trust--when that happens, we may never recover.


Discussing politics is not a wise move in this forum because I am not wise enough or informed enough to intelligently counter many arguments; thus, because I am leery of those with extreme views, my status as an independent is comfortable to me. However, such a noticeable swing has occurred in our country based upon so many factors: lack of support for the President, Democratic/Republican opposing philosophies--pick a reason. The underlying factor, though, is a complete lack of trust in the presidency, the elected officials, and the mantra being preached to us. Obviously, the following for Donald Trump and Ben Carson reflects this mistrust because they provide a supposed option. To hear people talk, however, alarms me; no longer do many describe our president by his title. Instead, he is known as Obama or any other nickname. I have seen enough cartoons that truly go beyond satire as it is defined. Rather, it is reflective of intense personal attacks designed to belittle the office and the man. That is the sign of a deteriorating society. Restating the last sentence from my previous paragraph, "Of larger significance, though, is the failure to trust--when that happens, we may never recover."


Jimmy Haslam and Barack Obama--different in so many ways yet possessive of one key similarity: many of us in this part of the country do not trust them. Maybe what they are attempting to do will be best for us in the long run, but we are almost done giving them "the benefit of the doubt." What speaks more loudly: the actual message or the delivery of the message?


We've been burned too many times.