Headed out to the Ol' Gym, Part II

Fierce rivalries, small gyms, jeering crowds, offensive focus--the late 1960s provided them all in the basketball world. However, many like to think those were years of innocence, certainly causing me a chuckle.  In truth, the orneriness of our valley's teenagers was off-the-charts; in fact, today's youth would probably be incarcerated if they tried doing so much of what passed as pranks during that time. Fast cars, drag races, and "harmless" vandalism ruled; of course, many today might deny their involvement in such activities, but it happened . . . trust me on that. In the Gnadenhutten community I was raised, I clearly remember so many of our "finest" athletes hanging out at Gibby's grocery store, one known for selling smokes to whoever walked through the door. I witnessed many drag races headed past our house that sat on a straight stretch headed out of town; additionally, I remember the numerous Halloween "tricks" that were pulled and the ever-present stories of the infamous "River Gang" that trolled the Tuscarawas River at the Gnadenhutten bridge.  As for any drinking, certainly not those boys! I single out my home town, but it must be stressed that this happened throughout the valley; pick a town like Tuscarawas, Midvale, Port Washington, Strasburg. . . it was the sign of the times. Despite all that shenanigans, what each community possessed was one simple unifier: Basketball. Football was in the valley; however, not all schools could afford that sport, but all of them could afford a gym and uniforms, thus stirring intense competition between these small burgs where winning fostered the coveted bragging rights that created heroes.

Walls were tight against most courts, many even having stages as backdrops (Gnadenhutten, for example). To have an uncontested layup was rare because it certainly was a sign of manhood to blast someone into a wall, taking the foul and the resultant pushing that often followed. A few courts, of course, sat in a pit-like environment being so small that the 10-second over-and-back line was simply the foul line in the backcourt (Midvale and Tuscarawas, for example). Floor colors varied, but the constants were that the floor size was limited and the red 3-foot step back line ran along both the endlines and the sidelines--for recall, this line prevented the defender of an out-of-bounds passer to not get closer than 3 feet, allowing the inbounder to at least have a little room to throw in the ball because his feet were either right against a wall or against the bleachers. As one would guess, close proximity to other players and to fans led to exciting action and frequent tumbles into the stands. Through it all, however, shone community pride.

Each community had its stars, those that the townspeople would talk about religiously because those stars' success determined their success. Strasburg had so many but, in particular, the beloved John Studer; Garaway had its Danny Andreas; Tuscarawas had its Dave Paisley; Midvale had its Dean DeMattio; Newcomerstown had its John Hurst; Dennison St. Mary's had its Tom Crosswhite; and Gnadenhutten had its Dan Jinks. Scoring was the name of the game during that time with defense being a bit of an afterthought in contrast to changes that would later impact the scoring. It was not unusual for individuals to average in the mid-to-high-20s. In fact, during that time the two highest individual scoring games in our valley's history featured Hurst scoring 58 vs. Dover St. Joe's and Jinks topping it with 59, a record that still stands today. (Point of emphasis: Gnadenhutten defeated Tuscarawas 116-115 in that game!)

I remember with pride watching many of those games; as a kid, having sports heroes was standard, and when those basketball players were so visible and close on our gym floors, it became almost like a  worship session: it was our town against yours . . . and none of us were good losers. In the fans' eyes, referees were the bad guys, challenged with keeping the gym's tensions under control. Rare was the time when fans and parents would agree with any call that went against their favorites. We must remember that these small burgs were comprised of tough people, most of whom performed hard, physical labor on a daily basis. Their entertainment was high school sports simply because the world of televised sports was quite foreign to us at that time. Our allegiance was to our schools' teams!

The picture is clear, isn't it? Community pride was at stake--it was time to win. Fights were not dominant, but they certainly happened. I clearly remember Strasburg's Bob Welling punching a Gnadenhutten player following a rough exchange for a loose ball. Surprisingly, it was an occasional part of the game. Play was physical, largely due to ten bodies competing on small floors. The game was about scoring, although the total points in a game really was not significantly different than what we see today (with a few notable exceptions as mentioned in a previous paragraph). But each team had a clear scoring leader, and that individual got most of the shots. Our hero, Jinks, had the green light to shoot whenever he could; I kid him today about being the only player in school history to never have an assist. Although that is not true, his job was to score--not to defend and not to pass . . . just put the ball through the hoop. That was the flavor of the game then; as indicated earlier, each team had a scorer and as that scorer went, so did the team.

In 1967, the valley was blessed with the state championship won by the Strasburg Tigers, a significant feat in the A/AA school classification that existed then. For one of the rare times, it allowed our valley's competitiveness to be shown on a statewide stage. Yes, other teams had previously excelled (Midvale, for example), but this championship was a turning point in our basketball history. Strasburg put us on the map! As a kid, I remember so clearly being able to watch their regional championship and then listening to their state tournament games . . . what a time it was and what a motivator it became.

The late '60s provided yet another spark in my love of the game, creating excitement, rivalries, and rich competition. Basketball and its importance in the valley have gone through numerous changes since then, many of which were caused by consolidations, but those consolidations led to a dominant era in our history: basketball in the '70s! 

The foregoing is Part II of a few-part series chronicling basketball in our Tuscarawas valley. Part III's focus will be on the 1970s . . .here's hoping a few readers may be intrigued by this mini-series! (For those who may not have read Part I, that entry can be found at three locations: michaelagunther.blogspot.com OR The Times-Reporter web page under "Opinion" and then "Blogs." OR my Facebook page.)

 

Headed out to the Ol' Gym

This place we call home is a treasure, packed with a storied history that oftentimes fades into the dark as time rambles before our eyes. For those like me who have been raised in this valley and chose to return, occasional reminders jolt us into remembering images, situations, and people we have forgotten. In the past six months or so, I have experienced that of which I speak. Spurred by the reading of two historical compilations, Dover's Memorial Hall Hardwood 'Carnival'  (Dr. Matthew Gladman) and Whistle Stop Stories (Al Amicone), I have caught myself reminiscing about our valley's past . . . and, oh, the memories that have surfaced. Perhaps a few readers will enjoy going down that road with me as I highlight certain remembrances focusing on gyms, schools, players, and coaches.

In truth, the roots of this blog entry began ten years ago when my good friend Bob VonKaenel and I decided to list all the schools and mascots representing Ohio's Eastern District. After much discussion, mind searching, phone calls, and questions, we compiled our list of schools still existing today as well as schools from yesteryear that were swallowed up via consolidation. Together, ninety-seven schools were identified with mascots ranging from the Flying Tigers to the Spartans to the Mounties to the Ductolites! Scrolling through that list, one can easily trace the youth of so many of our older generation, of which--I guess--I am now a quasi-official member!

Come back with me to the beginning. My neighborhood had four houses, three of which had basketball hoops with dirt courts, wooden backboards, and ratty old nets. Depending on what day it was determined on whose court we would play; regardless, the games were great, the "shooting around" was a challenge with all kinds of experimental shots, and practically every time we played, the Tuscarawas County tournament would be held among us with each of the three kids (and later adding a fourth) assuming the roles of a county school. Of course, because I attended Dennison St. Mary's my first five years, my peers, who were Gnadenhutten Indians, never allowed me to enter as the Blue Waves because we were a Catholic school! Translated, we had to be a public school, so every game represented a small county school. We knew the players' names from most of the schools, so we made it as official as we could. Heated contests always ensued in our 1-1 battles, and, of course, the age-old excuse of "you fouled me" always surfaced. Did not matter--we had the time of our lives!

Dennison St. Mary's was an important spur for me. As a child, my dad would take me to various games at St. Mary's "new" gym, which I thought was gigantic at that time. It sounds strange, I know, but I still remember watching those teams come out of that locker room flashing those white warm-up jackets and pants with each player's name bouncing on the jacket's back. Like in a trance, I would watch the entire warm-up period, mesmerized by the sound of the net when a ball would be swished and the repetitive bouncing of many basketballs. When the warm-ups came off, the Blue Waves sported the coolest uniforms I have ever seen to this day. The light blue (or whites dependent on whether it was a home or away game) capped off by stars and the high socks made each player so special. Even today, I get goose pimples when I remember watching heroes like Joey Pangrazio, John Carter, Tom Crosswhite, Danny Angelozzi, Ralph Douglass, Chris Tolloty, and so many others who wore those uniforms. As stated, my appetite was wetted by the Blue Waves.

Soon, I was able to begin playing in our biddy-basketball league held on Sunday afternoons. However, before I ever played an organized game, I received the news that I had to have a jock strap; for what reason, I had no clue. Hell, I was only in second grade, so those details were not part of my thinking. Once my parents had purchased a jock strap--a gigantic one, I should add for a seven year old--I felt I was big time. Obviously, excited I was as I got to dress in the St. Mary's locker room . . . still remember it! My coach was a good man I had occasionally seen in church, Bill Dillon, who was and has remained fiercely loyal to the Catholic school athletic programs. Of course, because Mr. Dillon was my coach, he was put on my personal pedestal. Little did he know, but he captured my enthusiasm and interest because he was kind and simplistic with me. Never did he yell, but he certainly encouraged . . . I have never forgotten that, and in my mind I certainly contrast his approach with those of several I have seen working with elementary kids today. Even though I was already hooked on the game, Mr. Dillon made basketball so much fun for me. With my dyed blue t-shirt and my oversized white gym shorts, I was so proud to be on that floor . . . a feeling that, truthfully, still lingers today every time I enter a gym.

As the St. Mary's years moved on, I found myself just waiting to actually be part of that basketball program. Wearing those warm-ups and uniforms, playing before a packed house in what I later realized was actually an extremely small gym, and getting to represent my school and my church provided my motivation. In time, however, problems emerged. The omnipresent hulk of a man, Fr. Gilbert--the church's pastor, the school's principal and athletic director as well as the bus coordinator--made a decision that no busses would run to Gnadenhutten, thus thrusting the traveling to school on my parents, who simply could not economically justify providing that transportation. I clearly remember one Sunday morning after mass when my dad and Fr. Gilbert had a shouting match regarding that dilemma. When we got in the car, my dad simply stated, "You're (my sister and I)  going to Gnaden next year." (Nothing like a shouting match with the priest coming out of church!) Thus, my St. Mary's dream ended, but a new one began as I got to see the Indians play, led by Dan Jinks!

 My plans are to expand this into a few-part series, eventually ending with observations about high school basketball as it is played today. Here's hoping a few readers may be intrigued by this mini-series! 

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.