Would the Indians Move?

Every once and awhile I see Indians fans make remarks about the team's attendance that if they continue, the team could eventually move. While the fears are certainly justified here in NE Ohio with what happened to the Browns back in 1995, is it very realistic to think that the Cleveland Indians would move if the attendance stayed where it currently is? In short, the answer is no, and here's why:

1. Attendance

Game this past May against Seattle I went to

Professional sports teams derive their income from a variety of sources, including ticket sales, but television rights, advertising, and corporate clients (suites) are the main sources of income. Sure, it's not like ticket sales are unimportant or don't supply any money at all, but a team not doing well at the gate doesn't necessarily mean it's losing money or not doing well financially. The Indians during the 1990s are a great example of this in that they were sold out from 1995-2002, yet did not rank at the top in terms of revenue. That's not to say the sellout streak didn't help them financially, but in the end, the power of TV is what reigned supreme, followed by the major increase in suite revenue from moving into Jacobs Field from Cleveland Stadium, not attendance.

If attendance were that important of an issue, then the Tampa Bay Rays would've moved years ago. Their attendance has never been good and currently ranks LAST in the Major Leagues despite the Rays being in the chase for both the East Division title and a Wild Card spot. This is also a team that went to the World Series just a few years ago and has been in the playoff hunt for the last several years now. While the Indians are still technically in the playoff chase here, they're a long shot. The team has made the playoffs once since 2002 (2007) and the last 3 years has started out very well only to fizzle by the middle of the season and finish below .500.

2. Market size

Downtown Cleveland in May 2013

One thing people seem to overlook is the market size of existing teams and potential new markets. One post mentioned Charlotte as a place the Indians could move or San Antonio. Portland, Oregon is another city that has actively tried to get a Major League Baseball franchise. Cleveland, even with its own population loss and growth in other cities, still ranks as the country's 18th-largest media market. There are sports from 3 of the 4 major sports leagues here (no NHL team). I've noticed a lot of times people will look at actual city populations as opposed to metro and/or media market size. Yeah, Cleveland (396,000) is a smaller city by population than Charlotte (775,000), San Antonio (1.38 million), and even Portland (583,000), but in terms of market size, Cleveland is larger than all 3. Portland is the closest at #22 and is the 3rd largest market without a Major League Baseball team (after Orlando, FL at #19 and Sacramento, CA at #20). San Antonio, despite being the largest city of this group, is actually the smallest market (#36) and if it had a Major League Baseball team, would be the smallest market in all of MLB (Cincinnati is currently the smallest market at #35). Charlotte is #25 and actually isn't even the largest market in North Carolina. That would be Raleigh-Durham, which ranks 24th and is home to the NHL team. Charlotte, of course, is home to the NBA Bobcats (soon to be renamed Hornets!!) and the NFL Panthers. Both Portland and San Antonio are NBA-only markets.

In addition to market size, market saturation is another issue that has to be taken into consideration, not only for attendance, but TV viewership, something the Indians typically do very well at. If there are too many sports/entertainment options for a market, one or many of them suffer. That's why you likely won't see an NHL team in Cleveland anytime soon or an NBA team in Pittsburgh or Cincinnati. Cincinnati and Pittsburgh are smaller markets than Cleveland, plus both Cincinnati and Pittsburgh have major college athletic programs in addition to their pro sports teams. Columbus, Ohio has a similar situation because of Ohio State. Not only is Columbus between two cities with professional sports, but Ohio State controls a significant amount of attention and fan interest that would hurt a parallel professional sport like football or basketball. Hence, Columbus has an NHL team and a Major League Soccer team, neither of which are present in Cleveland or Cincinnati and don't directly have high-interest counterparts across town at Ohio State.

3. Stadium

Summer 2012 on a ballpark tour I took

If this were happening at old Cleveland Stadium, there might be cause for concern, but it isn't. Progressive Field, despite being nearly 20 years old now, is still in excellent condition and is very well-maintained and updated. Even with all the new parks that have been built since Progressive Field opened in 1994, it is still right up there with the best in terms of services, amenities, and appearance on top of a solid number of revenue-generating suites. The Indians lease at Progressive Field runs another 10 years and while a lease is no guarantee a team will stay in a city, it's a good sign. In other words, if the team got offers from other cities, they would hardly be able to give the Indians anything far ahead of what they currently have in terms of their ballpark.

When Art Modell threatened to move the Browns in 1995, his biggest grievance was that Cleveland Stadium was outdated. That meant more than it was just old; he meant it lacked a good number of suites (Cleveland Stadium had some suites, but they were added much later and there weren't that many), and it needed tons of money just to maintain it. That was on top of fan amenities and services it lacked because of the era it was built. Because of that, Modell claimed he was losing money. Attendance-wise, the Browns were doing quite well and always have. It certainly wasn't an issue of fan support here, it was a belief that the county (which owned Cleveland Stadium) wasn't supporting the team, especially in light of the Gateway Project that had opened the year prior for the Indians and Cavaliers. I could go on about how Modell was a pretty lousy businessman and him losing money was much his own fault, but those were his reasons for getting a stadium deal with Maryland and ultimately establishing the Baltimore Ravens.

Why is that important? Because the stadium did and can play a major role in a team relocating, but only when a team is faced with having an outdated stadium that lacks suite revenue and/or presents other financial liabilities. The Indians have no such complaints with Progressive Field, nor would they be able to justify in any way that they need a new ballpark for the financial health of the team, which they did when Progressive Field was built. The last MLB team to move was the Montreal Expos when they moved to Washington, DC to become the Nationals. The Expos had horrible attendance (far worse than the Indians have had even this year), had an outdated stadium (Olympic Stadium had hardly any suites and multiple maintenance issues), and Washington, DC represented a top-10 market (#8) without a baseball team (despite the objections of the Baltimore Orioles), meaning MLB could easily justify moving the Expos there because they would generate far more money in DC than Montreal, in ticket sales, suite revenue, local TV coverage, and advertising.

Fireworks in May 2013

So, the Indians moving to a market like San Antonio, Portland, or Charlotte would likely, at best, be a lateral move financially if not even lower. You might have some initial excitement about a new team, but if the team struggles for periods of time (which is more than likely for a small-market team), you'll have a team bleeding money in worse shape with a marginally newer stadium with not only low attendance, but low local TV ratings and little fan attachment. And since the Indians would remain a smaller-market team by going to an even smaller market than Cleveland, they would most likely continue to be a team that has to make smart moves and develop talent vs. just going out and spending lots of money. The Indians, while they have struggled at the gate the last several years, have a largely stable financial situation, good local TV ratings, a modern and well-maintained stadium, on top of over 110 years of history in Cleveland. While nothing is set in stone as far as any team staying in an area, and we certainly shouldn't take it for granted, it's a good bet the Tribe will be in Cleveland for generations to come. The real concerns should be the long-term health of this region. If  NE Ohio continues to lose people or stagnate in growth, these current smaller markets could become more attractive if they also continue to grow.

30 Things Ohioans Love?

Many of you have read the Buzzfeed "article" going around Facebook called "30 Things Ohioans Love", written by a New Yorker (I'm assuming New York City as opposed to someone from elsewhere in New York state) who went to college in Ohio and is dating an Ohioan. I thought I'd evaluate his/her various "discoveries" based on my own experience living in Ohio for pretty much my entire life :). Overall, there weren't that many I found that were uniquely Ohio or they were regional to part of the state but not the entire state. It would be interesting to find out where this person went to college in Ohio and where the person he/she is dating is from. Probably the biggest mistake is assuming that Ohio is rather homogeneous when it really isn't. Each section of the state has its own local customs, sayings, dialect, and preferences that can vary greatly.

1. Ohio State football

Ohio State vs. Toledo in Cleveland, 2009

I'd say that's a pretty accurate assessment, though it's not universal. Places that you'll find some animosity towards Ohio State football include Athens (home of Ohio University), Cincinnati (home of the University of Cincinnati), and Toledo (just south of the Michigan border and not far from the campus of the University of Michigan), though even in those places you still have many OSU fans. It's similar in many other states that have a large flagship public university or with Mormons and BYU (though not THIS Mormon!), or Catholics and Notre Dame.  But yelling "O-H!"and getting "I-O!" back is pretty common. I had that happen to me in Salt Lake City when I was walking in the airport with my Ohio State sweatshirt on. Someone passed me and yelled "O-H!" and it took me a second to realize what they did and then I yelled back "I-O!"

2. Being a Swing State
I definitely enjoy the fact that Ohio is a swing state. Sure, it means we get TONS of political ads running for months on end and a seemingly endless stream of visits from candidates, but still, it's nice to feel like your vote really matters. Part of that is because Ohio doesn't have a dominant metro area like New York (NYC) or Illinois (Chicago), so you have a balance of rural vs. urban and a pretty even balance of conservative vs. liberal. I'm sure a lot of Ohioans, though, would rather not be in a swing state so that they don't get robocalls every 5 minutes for months before an election.

3. Ranch dressing
I fail to see how this is unique to Ohio or that Ohio has some kind of unusual affinity to Ranch dressing. I've lived in 3 other states and visited every one of them except California, Alaska, Hawaii, and Delaware, and have never noticed anything different. I mean, I like Ranch dressing, but hardly exclusively, and I've seen it in peoples' homes all over. According to this article, Ranch dressing is the top-selling salad dressing in the US, and has been since 1992, so while many of us Buckeyes do love Ranch, so does most of the rest of the country.

4. Hating LeBron
I am certainly not a fan of LeBron, but I wouldn't call that "hating". It's more because he plays for a different team than anything else. That said, I'm not really a fan of any specific player to the point I follow them if they change teams. For the most part, I think most Ohioans are indifferent to it all, particularly in his hometown of Akron where he has a fair amount of support because of charitable causes he participates in there. There is still a fair amount of animosity over how he left, but mainly with sports fans and not everyone here is a sports fan by any stretch.

5. Mountain Dew
I've seen people drinking Mountain Dew all over the country. Hardly anyone I know drinks it (LDS or not), and I certainly don't. I have never noticed any unusual love affair with Mountain Dew in Ohio. If anything, I've noticed more teenagers and college students drinking it.

6. Referring to random parts of random towns and cities as "downtown"

Downtown Kent...it's not Manhattan, but it's still
a downtown!

For the most part, Ohioans follow the national norm of calling the central business district of a town "downtown", though sometimes it is misapplied, particularly in typical suburbs that never developed around a central business district (local examples of that are Stow and Streetsboro, though I have only rarely heard people refer to the centers of those places as a "downtown"). Many of the older smaller towns, Kent included, do have central business districts that have higher density and mixed use zoning, and are often referred to as downtown. But that's not unique to Ohio by any means and is fairly standard across the US and Canada. See Wikipedia: Downtown.

7. Sperrys
I have never owned nor wish to own Sperrys, and to be honest, didn't really know what they were called until I read this. I guess I have seen a lot here, but haven't noticed anything unusual or higher than any other place. I seem to associate them with certain types of people (very laid back, easy-going) rather than places. Maybe they had a lot where the author went to school or are popular with college-aged people?

8. Donatos
This is a regional thing, not a state thing. I am familiar with Donatos, but rarely ever have pizza from them because they don't have a location near where I live. I can list several other national and local pizza chains that are probably more popular than Donatos, at least in my experience, so I'm guessing this was another item more specific to where this person went to school or he/she was just around big fans of Donatos.

9. American-made cars
Maybe because I have a Honda, but I seem to notice quite a bit of foreign-made cars here, though it should be noted even many of the "imports" are manufactured either in the US or in North America (my Honda was manufactured in Canada). It would be interesting if there were a survey done of what kinds of cars people drive and if Ohio actually does have a higher percentage of American cars. We do have assembly plants for Ford, Chrysler, and GM in northern Ohio, but we also have a Honda assembly plant in central Ohio. Again, not something I've really noticed a major difference. In my own family, only my grandparents on both sides have American-made cars (Ford and GM) and my dad has a GM. The rest of us have Hondas, a Hyundai, and a Kia.

10. Defending the Cleveland Browns

I don't know if I'd call it "defending" the Cleveland Browns as much as it is just being a fan. We definitely have lots of loyal fans here for the Browns. Hope springs eternal every fall. But that is certainly not true in southern Ohio, which is Cincinnati Bengals territory. Parts of Ohio closer to Pittsburgh obviously have more Steelers fans, and NW Ohio has its share of Lions fans too. I would never say the Browns are "Ohio's Team" by any stretch.

11. Chinese buffets
I'm not really a fan of Chinese, so I don't go to buffets all that often. Again, this is something I can't say I've seen anything abnormal here, but who knows?

12. Dating their high school sweetheart far into college… or, eventually, just marrying them
The author must've known several people who did this. I know of some, but they're not all from Ohio. I know just a few from my own class who dated in high school and continued and got married eventually, but I also know people from other states who have done the same thing.

13. Cedar Point

Cedar Point, 2010

Yes, Ohioans love Cedar Point, but so do lots of people from around the country as Cedar Point is one of the most visited amusement parks in the US. Ohioans also love Kings Island near Cincinnati.

14. Referring to soda strictly as "pop"
I am one of those who generally use the term "pop", but my mom says "soda" and I know many people here that also use soda or they interchange "soda" and "pop" regularly (I do that sometimes). As this map shows, it's hardly unique to Ohio to use "pop" by any means...in fact, it's fairly common across the northern US.

15. Most restaurant chains (namely: Panera, Olive Garden, Chipotle, and Outback. I could go on.)
I'm guessing that since the author is from New York, he/she generally has a local place or places they frequent. In most of Ohio, and most other places outside large cities like New York, you generally don't have lots of local choices. But that's not unique to Ohio by any means (New York is hardly void of restaurant chains) and varies from place to place. Even here in Kent, we have several local places or regional chains. In all my travels around the country, mostly by car, I haven't noticed anything unusual about restaurant chains in Ohio or Ohioans preferences.

16. Their high school

If you ever see this picture out on the web, I took it in 2009!
Rah rah for Roosevelt!

I think, for the most part, this is pretty valid, though, again, it's not that unique to Ohio. I have found that many Ohioans do keep tabs on their high school and feel like it was a good place, but isn't that what we want? Even so, I would say most of the people from my own class are completely detached from high school. Some communities are more into their respective high schools than others (usually smaller communities are more into them, but that's typical across the country). I certainly fall into that, but a lot of that is because I live in the town I grew up in, so it's easy to do (same with my college). I would say Ohioans are more into high school sports collectively than most other states.

17. Wearing athletic clothing while having no intention of working out
I'll have to watch for this. I wear what, I guess, could be considered "workout clothing" when I do yardwork, but mostly in the summer because it is lighter. Workout clothing for me, though, is typically gym shorts and a t-shirt. I've seen people in the stores here in what could be considered "workout clothing", but I just assume they're coming from or headed to some kind of workout or other use for it. Since I don't follow people around, I can't comment if they actually work out or not.

18. Chicken bacon ranch pizza and sandwiches
I have never had chicken bacon ranch pizza (I like bacon, but don't really get it on my pizza very often) and have only had the chicken bacon ranch sandwich from Subway once several years ago when it first came out. I'd say buffalo chicken is more popular, but that's my observation and preference. Come to think of it, I can't even think of even seeing chicken bacon ranch pizza until I read the article, and I live in a college town!

19. Drive-thrus in general
That's typical for just about any suburban area, so I guess it would be accurate that Ohioans love drive-thrus, but so does pretty much the entire US.

20. Saying “you’re fine” instead of “no problem” or “no worries”
This is true, though, I say "no problem" and "no worries" quite frequently. I do hear "you're fine" quite often, but haven't noticed it only in Ohio.

21. Skyline Chili
Skyline Chili is mainly in central and southern Ohio. I had never even heard of it until recently when I met some friends in the Cincinnati area at a Skyline Chili there and had a nice lunch (I actually got a wrap...I'm not a chili person). There are a few Skyline Chili locations in northern Ohio now (4 in the Cleveland area including Stow and one in NW Ohio in Lima), but it's still mainly found in the Columbus area and south and is based in Cincinnati. According to the Wikipedia article, Skyline also has locations in Indiana, Kentucky, and Florida.

22. Cornhole
It does seem popular here, so I guess it's accurate. I'm not really a fan of it, but will play it. It seems more popular with college-age and high school-aged people, though.

23. Claiming to live in a city but really living in a suburb

Yep, it's a city, like it or not!

I'm not totally sure what this means, whether it's a case of people saying they live, for instance, in Cleveland but they really live in Westlake, or a case of calling Westlake a city. Both aren't unique to Ohio. I frequently hear people say they are from a larger city, but if you ask "which part?" then they mention the more specific suburb. As for "city" vs. "suburb", a suburb often is a city, not a big city, but a city nonetheless, at least in Ohio and in the broader sense of the word. Since the author is from New York I'm not all that surprised that they make the difference, but in Ohio, any municipality over 5,000 residents is considered a "city" even if it doesn't have a central business district or is anything beyond a bedroom community. In some states, places with even just a few hundred people can be classified as a "city" since it often carries different legal definitions. "City" itself is a very ambiguous term that varies across the world and even in the US.

24. "The range"
I have never gone to and don't know anyone who goes to the range (based on the picture the author uses, I'm assuming they meant shooting range). I know people who regularly go to a driving range for golf, but not a shooting range. I'm guessing it's more of a rural thing. I can't even tell you where the nearest shooting range is off the top of my head.

25. Referring to sneakers strictly as “tennis shoes” or “tennys”
My experience has been that athletic shoes are often referred to as "tennis shoes". I hear "sneakers" a lot for shoes in general, though it's not a word I use very often since my shoes are running shoes. If I had sneakers, I'd probably just call them my shoes and then differentiate from my "running shoes". I usually call my black dress shoes "church shoes". I have never heard the term "tennys" used.

26. Graeter's Ice Cream
I had to look this one up because I've never even heard of it. Turns out, like Skyline Chili, it's based in Cincinnati, which would explain why I haven't run into it here in northern Ohio. It does have some Cleveland area locations, but none of them are anywhere close. My favorite local chain is Katie's Korner, which has a few locations in the areas around Youngstown, Ohio, including Kent.

27. Going to the beach aka Lake Erie

Lake Erie beach in Euclid, Ohio, 2013

In my experience, most people who go to the beaches along Lake Erie live fairly close to the lake (like within an hour). Many of the beaches, though, aren't bad, which is true for many of the Great Lakes, though some are rather rocky. I visited the Indiana Dunes a few weeks ago on the shore of Lake Michigan, and it was just like any ocean beach except the waves were a bit smaller (though that largely depends on the wind).

28. Referring to vacuums as “sweepers”
My grandma does this (she also calls gas stations "filling stations"), but it isn't a term that my mom adopted or that I use. Most people I know, myself included, call it a vacuum, though I do hear "sweeper" somewhat regularly. I've always considered it kind of an archaic term. If you want a unique Ohio term, try "devil strip" for the strip of grass between the sidewalk and the road. That's pretty localized to Akron and the general vicinity. Many here also call it the "tree lawn".

29. Wendy's
I enjoy going to Wendy's, but can't say I go there any more frequently than other places when I get fast food. Yes, it's based in Ohio, but it's everywhere in the US. I can't say I've noticed any greater affinity for Wendy's here than anywhere else. Maybe in Columbus where it's based... (it's actually in suburban Dublin, Ohio).

30. Being "the birthplace of aviation"

My idea for a plate

I'm actually not a fan of that slogan, though I don't think it's out of place or wrong or even questionable. The Wright Brothers were from Ohio and did a lot of their preparations for the first flight in Dayton. They chose Kitty Hawk, North Carolina because of the favorable winds and other factors, and likely slightly warmer weather since it was done in mid December. Even so, I think most Ohioans are tired of that slogan and never really identified with it. For whatever reasons, whoever's in charge of that at the BMV really likes the slogan.  I've found a lot more love for the previous slogan "the heart of it all!" I made my own license plate that draws on the many aviation and space pioneers that have come from Ohio, particularly the first person on the moon Neil Armstrong.

There you have it. I guess I was disappointed that many of the things the author attributed to Ohioans weren't unique to Ohio at all or were localized to parts of the state (in these cases, central and southern Ohio), at least in my experience, but it did stop and make me think about the many wonderful and crazy things we do in this state and why.

Ohio License Plates

I read a few days ago that Ohio will be getting yet another new license plate design coming soon.  This is after we just got our current license plate design (known as Beautiful Ohio) only about 2 years ago.  It was originally supposed to come out in 2008 I believe, but when the economy really went south, the state decided to hold off on introducing them.  Instead, they became optional late 2009 (along with the previous Sunburst design) and then in 2010 became the new standard plate.  I honestly don't have a problem with the Beautiful Ohio design.  I know some people think it's too busy, some don't like the colors, others don't like the artwork.  You're never going to satisfy everyone.  I'm more of an artsy and creative person who loves color, so the new plate was a welcome change over the boring Sunburst design.  I got my Beautiful Ohio plate back in February 2010.

"Sunburst" design, used from 2004-2010

"Beautiful Ohio" design, first used in 2009

New proposed design

Now, we will likely be getting another plate design.  Again, I'm not opposed to it, though the design kind of underwhelms me.  Reading the comments, those who disliked the Beautiful Ohio design really liked the new design, while others derided it as boring (again, you can't satisfy everyone).  The new red part of the new design is supposed to emulate wings to continue Ohio's obsession with connecting to the Wright Brothers.  What I do like about the new design is that "OHIO" is bold and easy to read.  The last three plate designs for Ohio have all had "Ohio" in script, which is very hard to read.  I'm someone that likes to be able to look at a license plate while I'm on the road and easily be able to tell which state it's from.  The thin script used for Ohio has never been something I've liked.  Make it bold!  The new design does that, which I like.  I don't mind the overall simplicity either.  I do like all the little slogans and facts in the background, but who's gonna see them and read them?  Interesting idea, but not very practical to me.

Anyway, for the longest time I've thought we should incorporate the fact that Neil Armstrong, the first man to set foot on the moon, is from Ohio.  That's a pretty cool fact to me.  No disrespect to the Wright Brothers, but we've had "Birthplace of Aviation" on our license plates since 1998.  More than just the Wright Brothers came from Ohio, not to mention that North Carolina also capitalized on the Wright Brothers' flight with their "First in Flight" moniker.  So, here's my plate design.  I'm sure people might think it's too busy, but I think a lot of people would like it.  It uses one of the pictures from the "Earthrise" series taken from the surface of the moon, which would be easy to use since they're in the public domain already.  This is my idea:

Separating Doctrine From Culture

The whole issue I blogged about back in November about being a "Utard" seems to come up every once and awhile.  Basically, the problem boils down to people being unable to separate being a "Utahan" from being a "Utard" and assume that those of us who don't live in Utah have some sort of general dislike for "Utah Mormons".  Is there a prejudice outside of Utah towards church members from Utah?  Absolutely, though it varies greatly by location and the individual and is not always negative.  Some people automatically assume the worst when they find out someone is from Utah; others assume the best.  I like to get to know someone before I come to any conclusions about what kind of person they are, though I do admit, I have the whole "Utard" worry in my head when I first find out and hope I'm wrong.  Why?  I've had far more negative experiences than positive with the whole cultural divide that separates Utah (and in reality many western U.S.) Mormons from the rest of us.  That's not to say I've had all negative experiences.  I still count many friends who are Utah natives and/or still live in Utah, plus my best (and worst) mission companions were all from Utah, plus I have family there.  But to simply stand by and assume that all the negative and testimony-damaging experiences I endured, and the many negative experiences I've heard from others, are simply coincidences or isolated cases would be to ignore the problem and allow it to continue.  What I've come to believe is that it's a widespread enough problem that a negative prejudice has developed outside of Utah, though it is by no means universal to all Utah Latter-day Saints.

As I stated originally and have restated many times, this is nothing personal against the state of Utah.  As a state, Utah really isn't much different to me than any other state.  There are things I love about the state (the mountains, for one!) and there are things I don't like about the state (like the desert climate and the horrible drivers on I-15).  I can say the same about every state in the U.S. I've been to (42 and counting), including Ohio.  No, this is speaking out against certain prevalent cultural elements that exist primarily in Utah, simply because Utah has the unique situation of having the single-largest group and highest concentration of members of the church; cultural elements that I find contradict church doctrine yet are constantly (and improperly) mingled with it as if they are one in the same.  Basically, if the church were most prevalent in, say, Illinois or Wyoming or Florida I'd be saying the same thing about those states.  And yes, parts of Idaho (like Rexburg) also have these same cultural elements.  Because the elements are so much associated with doctrines of the church, they not only give Latter-day Saints a bad name overall in many cases, but even amongst each other it creates problems where the line between cultural traditions and doctrines is blurred.  The elements that have created this culture are mostly those from the 1840s that were common in the United States when the Saints arrived in the Salt Lake Valley.  Once they got to the valley and began spreading out, they were largely isolated, so while the rest of the country moved on with certain cultural "norms" the previous ones were able to take deep root and eventually creep in the same level as doctrine amongst the Saints.  For instance, the charge that the church is very "clannish" actually comes from the early development of the church in the 1820s-1840s.  Just take one read of Joseph Smith History and his descriptions of the various Protestant sects.  The various sects were very divided against each other and did not intermingle, something that for the most part is not true today.  Of course too, the early church did often have to go it alone because of persecution, which also contributed to that "stick with your own" mentality to the point where visitors tend to be ignored.  This is not something that generally happens in other areas of the church, but has happened to me and I've heard many others talk about experiencing this in Utah.

As for the term Utard, again, people need to understand this isn't a term for anyone from Utah, at least the way I use it.  That is Utahan.  Utard is not a term I came up with, but I thought it was a clever play on words and it seemed to fit what I felt it was describing when I first heard it on my mission.  In doing a Google search for the term, I've discovered it has several meanings; some related to the church, some not.  I guess for die-hard Utah lovers, it's unfortunate that their state name is so easily turned into a derogatory term, but to think that Utah is the only state people make fun of is ridiculous and ignores reality.  It's just that other state names aren't as easily combined with another word!  The only one I could think of off the top of my head was "Floridiot" and honestly, I've never heard it used!

So, we definitely shouldn't just come to a rushed judgment about someone just because they're from Utah, and Utahans shouldn't make quick judgments about people from the "mission field" (a term which I feel is TOTALLY misused out west).  Whether good or bad, that's a form of prejudice and it prevents us from really getting to know someone, not just here but in any instance of prejudice.  We're all on the same team here working for a common good, but we also must not stick our heads in the sand and pretend there's not a major cultural problem where large amounts of members exist because there certainly is a problem.

Report card nonsense

The Ohio Department of Education released their annual report cards for every public school district and individual school in the state.  Every year I find myself thinking less and less of these report cards as I see not only how they "rate" schools and their districts, but how certain people react.  Basically, the state will come out and say a school or district was given a designation.  The main overall ratings are Excellent, Effective, Continous Improvement, Academic Watch, and Academic Emergency, which the media commonly references with letter grades (Excellent = A, Effective = B, etc.).  In elementary and middle schools there is additional criteria, that, if met, results in the school and/or district being rated Excellent With Distinction (which the state and media equate with an A+).

I've always been bothered because most people look at the overall rating and make their judgments about a school or district based on that rating alone.  They don't bother to look at the reasoning behind the overall rating or what caused it.  So in one way it can create a false sense of security for schools or districts that are rated Excellent or Effective.  Such was the case in Ravenna last year.  The district was rated "Excellent" by the state despite meeting only 15 of the 26 "indicators" the state uses.  In the other case it can create this false sense of alarm that a school is getting worse or in bad shape because of a particular rating or if a rating goes down from year to year.  I saw this a few years ago when Kent was lowered from "Excellent" to "Effective" and I read comments from parents online who were concerned the schools were getting worse and wondering if they should take their kids somewhere else.

For those who are wondering, the state uses 3 basic criteria to come to their overall rating and then have what they refer to as a "value added assessment" which is used for grades 4-8 and adds the "with distinction" to an Excellent rating.  The first criteria is a series of "indicators" that are based mostly on standardized test scores as well as daily attendance and graduation rate (obviously the graduation rate only applies to high school).  A school "meets" these indicators by achieving the state designated average or above.  The total number of indicators for a district is 26 (24 are test related) while a 9-12 high school will have 12 indicators.  The more indicators met, the better.  To be "Excellent" a school/district must have met at least 94% of the indicators (11 for high school, 24 for a district).

The next criteria is what is known as the "Performance Index".  The Performance Index is a weighted average that measures what percentages of students who passed the state test in different levels of understanding (from "untested" to "advanced") based on how well they scored.  The more students who pass as "advanced" and "accelerated", the better.   Untested students and those who score at "limited" or "basic" understanding hurt the average.  This basically tells us how well students are doing on the test as opposed to that they are simply passing or not.  The highest Performance Index score is 120.  To achieve "Excellent" a school must have a PI score of 100.

The last main criteria is "Adequate Yearly Progress" or AYP.  This is a Federally mandated criteria that to me is virtually unattainable in its long-term hopes.  Basically, in terms of the whole student body and amongst various sub-groups of students (minorities, gender groups, students with disabilities, etc.), there must be certain improvements in test scores.  The theory is that by 2015, 100% of all students will be proficient in reading and math.  Unfortunately, 100% is unattainable in the real world because it not only requires every student to take it seriously, but it also assumes that a student not passing a proficiency test is purely the fault of a teacher, school, or district.  What's scary is that if a school or district doesn't make AYP for 5 consecutive years, changes as extensive as replacing the entire administration and teaching staff or turning the school into a charter school are options.  Mind you, a school will "not meet" AYP if any sub group doesn't make it in a given year, even if every other group makes this alleged "adequate" progress.  How scary is that?  A school can be doing everything right but because of an arbitrary number the entire school could be completely restructured.  And seriously, I have a hard time believing that every school can be making such progress every year.  Eventually you're going to hit a peak.  To be "Excellent" a school or district must meet AYP in all areas or not have it for 3 or more consecutive years.  Even if the other criteria are met with "Excellent" status, not meeting AYP in any area (remember, not meeing AYP with any group means the school/district didn't meet AYP at all) for 3 consecutive years means a school can be rated no higher than "Continuous Improvement", the 3rd or 4th highest rank (equivalent of a "C" grade).  See how that can send the wrong message to someone who just looks at the final rating?

I'm all for accountability.  I really am.  But as an educator, I'm also aware that a student's successes and failures are not completely the result of the school he is attending or the teachers he has.  There are many outside variables that the state doesn't take in account at all or doesn't weigh as heavily as I think they should.  There are also many elements to what makes a good school and those are not all currently measured or even evaluated by the state.  At the same time, there needs to be some sort effective way to evaluate teachers and schools for the benefit of students and parents as there are too many bad teachers out there.  Unfortunately, though, the current system looks at only part of the picture and largely awards or punishes schools and districts for many things they do not have control over.  My next blog will go over ways that individuals can assess whether they or their children are in a good school with a good teacher.

Markets

For those of you who don't keep up with college sports, this past week saw three big changes in the world of college athletics with three teams changing their league affiliations: the University of Colorado announced they will move from the Big 12 to the Pac-10 conference effective in 2012, Boise State University announced they will move from the Western Athletic Conference to the Mountain West Conference also in 2012, and the biggest so far was the University of Nebraska-Lincoln announcing they will move from the Big 12 to the Big Ten effective 2011. Rumors are still flying about possible other Big 12 schools leaving for the Pac-10 or Southeastern Conference (SEC) and even more for the Big Ten. For the Big Ten and the Pac-10, the main reasons cited for adding the respective schools to their conferences was the additional markets each school brings to the conference. For the Big Ten, which owns and operates its own television network (Big Ten Network) adding more markets adds additional subscribers which of course adds additional revenues to the conference members. The Pac-10 is hoping to start its own network, so adding Colorado and the Denver market will help boost revenue for that as well. The University of Texas has been discussed for several conferences including the Pac-10, Big Ten, and SEC because it would likely "deliver" several large markets in the state of Texas and boost revenues considerably for whichever conference (including the Big 12 if it survives) takes it.

But that begs the question: what is a market? There are several markets, but here we're talking about media markets. Nielsen Research came up with Designated Market Areas (DMAs) and the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) follows the Nielsen DMAs in their own market designators (known as Television Market Areas or TMAs). Within the DMA/TMAs are smaller radio markets. In northeastern Ohio, for instance, Kent is part of the Cleveland-Akron (Canton) DMA/TMA. It includes 17 counties in the region. The only part of northeastern Ohio it doesn't include is the Youngstown-Warren area, which is its own DMA. You can usually tell markets by which cities have their own TV stations. The Cleveland-Akron market currently ranks 18th nationally, so it is considered a "mid-sized" market. The size is determined by households within a DMA, so naturally the largest cities in the country are also the largest markets. Within the Cleveland-Akron DMA are three radio markets, which are defined by a research company called Arbitron: Cleveland, Akron, and Canton. For Kent, even though we're officially in the Akron radio market, radio signals don't stop off at borders, so we can easily get stations from the Cleveland, Canton, and Youngstown markets with little problem. On top of that, many of the major and mid-sized radio markets have a high-powered AM station that can be heard well outside its market area. In Cleveland, WTAM 1100 AM can be heard at times in 38 US states and much of Canada. WLW 700 AM in Cincinnati and KSL 1160 AM are other examples I can think of off the top of my head that are also high-powered.

As I've followed the discussions mostly by fans of the various colleges and their respective conferences, the phrase that comes up about a potential school is its ability to "deliver" a particular market. For instance, many believe that if the Big Ten added Rutgers and/or Syracuse then it could potentially "deliver" the New York market (the nation's largest) to the Big Ten Network. By "deliver" it means there is significant interest from the population, enough so that cable companies want to add the Big Ten Network to their basic lineups. The more people who have access to BTN, the more money it gets since cable TV gets their revenue largely from subscription fees instead of advertising like "free" TV does. When it's on a more basic lineup, people get it whether they want it or not, translating into a lot more subscribers. Such is the case in the markets presently served by the Big Ten Network in the states that have member schools: Minnesota, Wisconsin, Michigan, Illinois, Indiana, Ohio, and Pennsylvania. Within those states are several large and mid-sized DMAs including #3 Chicago, #4 Philadelphia, #11 Detroit, #18 Cleveland-Akron, and #23 Pittsburgh among others. Indeed, one of the biggest arguments against the Big Ten inviting the University of Pittsburgh to join is because while the school has excellent academics and athletics, it does little to add to the Big Ten Network as Penn State already "delivers" the Pittsburgh market to the Big Ten, much like Ohio State already "delivers" the Cincinnati market (University of Cincinnati was also discussed lightly as a possibility by some fans). Because many of the Big Ten schools are large state schools, they have the ability to not only deliver specific markets, but entire states with multiple large markets. Not only does Penn State deliver both of Pennsylvania's largest markets, but Ohio State delivers the Cleveland-Akron DMA and also Columbus (#34), Cincinnati (#33), Dayton (#65), Toledo (#73), and Youngstown (#110). The same holds true for basically every school and state in the Big Ten because they have large alumni bases throughout their respective state and region, plus they have large followings inside their respective states.

With Nebraska joining the Big Ten, though, people have wondered how adding the main school in Nebraska, which has a population of less than 1.8 million people, will add much to the Big Ten Network. Indeed, the largest DMA in Nebraska is Omaha, which is ranked #76 with the Lincoln, Nebraska market down at #105. First, Nebraska generates interest well outside of the state of Nebraska. Their fans travel anywhere for games and their alumni are not restricted to the state of Nebraska. Indeed, I wouldn't be surprised if the Big Ten Network were picked up in the Kansas City market (#32) because I would imagine there are quite a few Nebraska alumni there. Still not the huge market many were hoping, but the potential for marquee matchups with fellow Big Ten schools and out-of-conference schools could generate additional subscribers outside the conference "footprint". One need not be an alum of a school to be a fan! Whichever conference lands the University of Texas will likely have the Dallas-Ft. Worth (#5), Houston (#10), Austin (#48), San Antonio (#37) and several smaller markets delivered because like many of the Big Ten schools, Texas has significant interest throughout the entire state.

Really this post was triggered by some comments I read from a well-meaning BYU fan who was talking up why a major conference like the Big 12 (assuming it doesn't implode soon) would want to add a school like BYU. One of the things he cited was the Salt Lake City market, which he correctly stated is ranked 31st in size. Yeah, I know, I pick on Utah a lot on this blog, but in this case I wasn't really looking for it but it just presented itself. Indeed, SLC is the nation's 31st largest DMA. What most people don't seem to understand is that in land area, the Salt Lake DMA coveres the entire state of Utah and includes large chunks of Nevada and Wyoming as well as a few southern Idaho counties, so comparing it with other markets isn't totally accurate. True, the vast majority of the population actually lives in the Wasatch Front (Ogden, Salt Lake, and Provo metro areas), but still if many of the other markets covered the same area Salt Lake does, things would look a lot different. Nielsen estimates approximately 944,060 households in the SLC market. Let's use Ohio as an example. If the Columbus market (which ranks a few notches behind Salt Lake) covered all the markets based in the state (several parts of Ohio are in other markets, plus some markets like Cincinnati extend into other states), it would include 4,136,840 households. So yes, Salt Lake is somewhat of a valuable asset for building revenue and expanding presence, but it isn't nearly as high as some seem to think. BYU could definitely deliever the SLC market, but I think it could also deliver the Las Vegas market because of the large number of Latter-day Saints in metro Las Vegas. Like Notre Dame is America's Catholic university, BYU is the "Mormon" university and thus can draw fairly decently (though not nearly as well as some seem to believe) in many places in the country as many members of the Church will come support the school (I am definitely NOT counted among those!).

Also see:

• Nielsen Media Market ranks - this ranks all of the DMAs in the US and is the most recent as far as I know
• Arbitron Media Market map - this map shows the radio and overall media (or TV) markets for the entire country.  The radio markets are colored by size rank and the media markets are outlined in heavy black lines.

Fair criticism?

To start off, as of yesterday (May 14), it's been one year since we left the house for the last time as we headed down to Maryland for Heather's graduation. I can't believe it's been that long already and had hoped I'd have a more permanent situation in place by now, but life is what it is. I certainly can't complain too much about my current situation, though. While I'm hardly living a life of luxury, I do have a nice place to live and my needs are met with people I love and care about. That said, I'm hoping a full-time job is on the horizon, even if it isn't a teaching job so I can move on to the next stage of my life. Of course I still think about the house and the whole situation with moving, but I find they are becoming fewer and further in between. Part of the problem is living with so many reminders. Much of our stuff is still in boxes in the basement, so every time I or Mom needs something that we haven't unpacked, we have to go searching down there or in other boxes. Every time I have to go searching through the boxes, it's just a reminder why so much of our stuff is in boxes.

Anyway, that was on my mind the last few days but that's all I have to say about that. Another thing I've been thinking about concerns a lot of criticism I've been seeing from friends and strangers about Ohio in general. It was troubling to see so much of it, so I started thinking about the criticisms I've laid out about Idaho and Utah on this blog and in my discussions with people. Was this a case of "what goes around comes around" and just getting a taste of my own medicine? I really thought about this and analyzed what people were criticizing about Ohio, how I felt about it and why, and what my criticisms of Utah were and why. What I came up with is that, no, this isn't a case of karma at all. Why? Well let me explain!

The biggest reason the majority of criticisms I see of Ohio bother me is because they are almost always about things that cannot be helped, most often the weather. No amount of moaning and groaning is going to change the climate, make it sunnier, warmer, less rainy, or less humid. The weather is what it is. Yeah, we all complain here and there, but some people it seems can't find anything else but bemoan a cloudy day (but are largely silent on sunny days...hmmmm). If you're going to put a lot of energy into criticizing something, at least make sure it's something that can actually be changed! When was on my mission in Arizona and New Mexico, I didn't enjoy the desert at first. Too dry for my taste, hardly any green, and to be honest, having the same weather virtually every day got boring! I definitely learned to appreciate cloudy days and RAIN! When it's cloudless for 2 months straight and it's 100 degrees, for someone like me it lacked variety and interest. I got used to the whole climate and desertscape of course, but in the end it made me appreciate the green here in Ohio and in the east in general. Even now, when we have rainy days here I say I enjoy them because that's how things grow. Sure is nice not having to worry about irrigation! That's not to day I didn't enjoy short-sleeve weather in January! :)

While Utah's desert climate is something I don't particularly care for, it is the least of my criticisms and is far more secondary than anything. In fact, I always enjoy the mountains, especially when they still have snow on them. As for the weather, it's really not a whole lot different than Ohio since, while it is still desert, it is around the same latitude so temperatures are similar. As I started thinking, no, my main criticisms at Utah are all culturally related. In other words, they are things that could potentially (and in my opinion should) be changed. Remember, having lived in even harsher desert climates than Utah, I hardly have the same criticisms for Arizona and New Mexico as I do for Utah. Why? Because Arizona and New Mexico largely had cultures that were close enough to what I was used to (though still different...there is definitely a difference between west and east in this country!). As I have explained many times, it's not all of Utah culture that bothers me, it's the parts that are so intertwined with LDS doctrine that too many inside and out cannot recognize the difference between cultural traditions and actual doctrine. Arizona had a smaller version of that with many of the Mexican immigrants and the Catholic faith. It was very hard for them to separate what was actual Catholic doctrine from culture as they have become so melded.

There are definitely things about the culture here in Ohio that people don't like. For some it's too conservative; for others it's too liberal. Some complain it's too slow, too boring, too political, etc. Most of these criticisms are valid (based on one's experience), though at the same time they are hardly unique to Ohio. With Utah, and Idaho to an extent, much of the cultural problems I have are because I am the same religion as so many out there, so I guess I expect certain--and higher--standards from members of the Church, particularly in how we treat each other. Indeed, it's much more of a Utah LDS cultural problem than just a Utah cultural problem (remember, I have many friends who are Utah residents and natives!). It's not so much a problem because of Utah, but more because of the high concentration of members and the history of isolation in the late 19th century which allowed many of these cultural meshes with doctrine to really develop and take strong root. In other words, it could've happened anywhere. I would imagine it would've happened in Illinois had the Saints not been forced out, though it would've obviously been different since the Nauvoo area in the late 19th century wasn't nearly as isolated as Utah was.

To close, let me reiterate: yes, too much criticism can be a bad thing, but if you're going to complain, at least make sure it's something that could actually be changed if the right person or people heard you or that you could change yourself. Nowhere is perfect; everywhere we go we're going to find things we don't like about certain places and certain groups of people. The key is understanding not only what we feel by more importantly why we feel that way. If we can't rationally understand and explain why, then perhaps we're just being overly critical. On the other end, in hearing criticism we need to understand the why and lend a listening and sympathetic ear. Maybe the person would benefit from some "local advice" on how we deal with this or that (which is why it doesn't bother us as much) or maybe it's something we've never even considered and now have an additional viewpoint! Critical thinking is key!!

Commuter rail in Ohio

It was actually tough for me to decide what to blog about. I have a lot of things on my mind that I'd like to sort out (blogging and writing in general is really good for that!), so I figured I better get the first one out before it gets any worse, i.e. I find more things to blog about! :)

One thing I've been wanting to blog about for some time is the concept of commuter rail here in Ohio. The state was successful in obtaining a grant a few months ago to develop what is known as the "3-C Corridor", basically a rail line connecting Ohio's largest cities: Cleveland, Cincinnati, and Columbus. Dayton would also be included in this rail line and it's part of a larger "Ohio Hub" project for the entire state. It's not that there are a shortage of railroads in Ohio, but in terms of passenger service, northeast Ohio is currently served by just 2 Amtrak lines: the Lakeshore Limited between Boston and Chicago via Cleveland and Elyria and the Capitol Limited between Washington, DC and Chicago via stations in Alliance, Cleveland, and Elyria. Southern Ohio is served basically by one Amtrak line, the Cardinal/Hoosier State line between Chicago and New York via Cincinnati. The problem with being in the middle of a line like that is trains arrive at inconvenient hours, like 2 AM. Hardly the best times to entice travelers to use the service. Even looking at the Amtrak website, the fares are less than air travel, but not as significantly less as I thought and it takes a lot longer than even driving.

Now, I'm not opposed to rail service or additional forms of public transportation; that's not the issue. My problem is spending money on something that will end up needing heavily subsidized to keep afloat because not enough people are riding it. I'd love to see a convenient train lines between Ohio's main cities. But in looking at the initial plans for 3-C, I'm having a hard time seeing how enough people are going to use it to keep it worthwhile. First is the speed. The trains are touted as reaching a top speed of 79 mph. Unfortunately, 79 is the top speed, not the average speed. Add in all the stops in between Cleveland and Columbus and suddenly the average speed drops to about 34 mph making the trip closer to between 3 and 4 hours. The speed limit on I-71 between Cleveland and Columbus is 65 mph for most of it, but for those of us who have driven on 71 or any Interstate highway, we know most people go above 65. By driving it takes about 2 to 2 and a half hours to get from Cleveland to Columbus depending on where in Cleveland and Columbus. From here in Kent it is about the same. If I were to take this train to Columbus from Kent, I'd have to drive the 45 minutes or more to the Cleveland station, park there (or get dropped off), go through security, then have a 3-4 hour trip to Columbus. Then once I get to Columbus, I have to wait for either a friend or rely on the city's public transit system. And ticket cost for the train hasn't even been factored in because I haven't seen any details on how much it will cost. Even with gas inching up again, it's hardly THAT expensive to drive to Columbus as it barely takes half a tank. A full tank of gas is around $40-$45 at the moment, I get to choose when I leave, when I stop, and when I come back, and it still takes significantly less time. Why would I want to take the train? Even to Cincinnati it wouldn't make sense in terms of time or cost. On top of this, in order for the larger Ohio Hub to be successful, the 3-C has to be successful in ridership. See a problem?

Now I can see people using this service, particularly people who don't have a car of their own (like college students) or people just looking to take a day trip who don't want to worry about finding parking (like to a big event such a baseball game or football game). And there will be people who take it because they want to or don't mind the extra time. Not everyone likes to drive! But will those be enough to keep an entire rail network going? I have a hard time believing they would.

While I was in Utah I had the chance to see and learn a little bit about Utah's newest transportation option, a commuter rail system known as FrontRunner. It currently stretches from Salt Lake City in the south to Ogden in the north and soon will be extended south to Provo. It's obviously on a much smaller scale than the 3-C Corridor would be as FrontRunner covers the Wasatch Front (Utah's major metro area) and 3-C would connect 4 major metro areas. Further, another difference is that FrontRunner was designed to help relieve traffic on I-15. Traffic in the Wasatch Front is very much north-south oriented (nature of mountains and valleys) and I-15 is the only major north-south highway, so it has to handle a lot of traffic. I-71 could be considered similar as the only major highway connecting the "3-C's", but 71 is 3 lanes almost the entire distance between Cleveland and Columbus and passes through large stretches of rural area; it is hardly congested the rate that I-15 is as 15 along the Wasatch Front passes through all urban or suburban areas. Even with the obvious differences in size of the systems and layout of surrounding infrastructure, there are still similarities that as Ohioans we should be aware of and learn from. First, ridership is nowhere near what the Utah Transit Authority (UTA) had hoped or promoted when lobbying for construction of FrontRunner. The biggest complaint I heard from my friends and family in Utah was the cost of tickets being too high. Put that together with the time (other complaint: no faster than taking the UTA buses and certainly slower than driving, even in rush hour) and it doesn't leave much enticement. Without a certain number of riders, the service ends up being a black hole of money. The goal should be a self-sustaining system or as close to one as possible.

The lesson is that transportation options need to offer something that is an advantage over other options available. Flying, for instance, offers major savings in time. Driving offers more individual choices and preferences in terms of where to go and when. Unless rail can be faster than driving but cheaper than air, there will be little reason for most people to use it. People use subway and bus systems in large cities because it is cheaper and faster than trying to drive on congested roads and paying for parking. Blame it on the car companies all you want, but most Americans value being able to go where they want when they want and not worrying about set schedules. That's why we own cars and commute to work or school. True, we do conform to schedules when we travel by air, but again, the convenience of saving several hours of travel time versus going by car or rail is the incentive to give up that personal freedom. Even then, many still choose to drive long distances. Here in Ohio, I'd be much more excited if actual high-speed rail were being developed right away between the major cities, even more so if it had an option of taking your car with you and had plans for more tie-ins with those cities not along the main route. Supporters claim high speed is where 3-C is headed, but if it isn't successful initially, the plan really is nothing but an empty hope and another waste of money. This letter to the editor in the Akron Beacon Journal was something I found looking for more information and it pretty much sums up how I feel and a lot of the points I made here!

It's Fall again!

I don't know why, but every Fall I feel like I need to go around and take a million pictures of the leaves. This year is no different, though I will say I have different scenery than normal since we've moved. The Fall colors at our old house were always amazing, but it's been nice going around Kent and seeing some more, particularly in the parks. I'm hoping if we have some sun tomorrow I can get some pictures at Sand Run Metro Park in Akron. I've driven past it on the way from my after-school job to rehearsal and the colors and scenery I can see from the road are just amazing!! Sand Run is in northern Akron right on the edge of the Cuyahoga Valley, so it really doesn't feel like Ohio or even Akron at all! Unfortunately, I am already running late when I am normally driving past it, so no time to stop. Tomorrow, however, I don't have rehearsal so I hope the weather cooperates. For now, though, I have gotten quite a few pictures around Kent. I've always enjoyed Fall, not only the colors but the weather too. I didn't really appreciate the color and season here until I lived out west in Arizona, New Mexico, and Idaho for the better part of 5 years and really missed it all. There was some color in Ruidoso and in Idaho, but nothing even remotely close to what we have just here in Kent, not to mention around the area. Just the short drive from Kent to Akron along I-76 is full of color. I uploaded all of these and more on Facebook, so if you've already seen them, sorry! If you haven't, check out my Facebook album "Fall 2009" if you're on Facebook.

This is looking down in my current neighborhood. Yeah, I guess it's now "my" neighborhood, but I still don't feel like it's "mine" ya know?

These are both from a tree in front of Central School on North Mantua Street...pretty cool huh?!?

Earl Avenue in Kent...I just kind of saw it while walking and was like...WOW!

This is my favorite park in Kent, the Franklin Mills Riveredge Park downtown. This is where I got the picture of myself that's at the top of the page.

I took most of the pictures Sunday, October 25, but went back Monday to get more when the sun was at a better angle. This one above was taken on the 26th, looking south from the Main Street Bridge downtown Kent.

Looking north along the Cuyahoga from the Main Street Bridge

I am hoping to go back and get another shot of this when there is more sunlight, though I am still happy how it came out. Looking at the old 1875 train depot from under the Main Street Bridge.

Another view from under the bridge on the 26th...you can see I took these earlier in the afternoon and with way more sunlight than the ones on the 25th.

Looking up from Heritage Park, which is right below the Main Street Bridge adjacent to Riveredge Park.

Looking north from the Haymaker Parkway (SR 59) bridge. I had to fit the camera between a very small opening in the chain-link fence that lines the bridge. It's a much tighter fence than a typical chain-link fence.

These two are from the same tree in Tannery Park, which connects to Riveredge Park on the south end. I came in the park and couldn't miss this tree which is seemingly on fire! Tannery Park is on the site of an old tannery that was initially run by Zenas Kent and famous abolitionist John Brown in the late 1830s when Brown lived in Kent (which was then called Franklin Mills).

This is also at Tannery Park. I took a picture the first day I was there but it was overexposed, so I went back the next day and got this from a different angle...I loved how the leaves are pink! The small shelter there was made out of wood from the tannery when it was torn down in 1976.

My grandpa Derby got a picture of this tree at the corner of Crain and Elmwood last year and it was even more red. I found out red leaves are a sign of acid in the soil! Thanks Kirsten!

These are the stairs leading up to the Auditorium Building (now Cartwright Hall) in the Front Campus section of Kent State. In the winter, this is part of a wonderful sledding area! :)

So in case you haven't noticed, I LOVE Kent, especially in the Fall. There aren't many places that can top Ohio in the Fall or the East/Midwest in general for that matter in my humble opinion. :)

What's in a name?

I decided to do a post about some of the aspects of local history I've been reading lately. This may be of interest to some of you, but less interesting to others. This post is all about what I've learned about the history of what Kent has been called prior to being named Kent in the 1860s. It also dives into the system used in naming that was brought here by the New England settlers in the late 1790s and early 1800s.

Before I begin, I better get all the technical stuff out! The main thing is township, more properly defined as a civil township. Most people here in the East are familiar at least somewhat with what a township is, while westerners are pretty clueless about what they are since such things do not exist in most western states. In Ohio, a township is an additional, older form of civic government that consists of three township trustees. This contrasts with a village or city that is divided into wards and the council will have representatives of each ward and maybe at-large members. Townships also have limited authority. In Portage County, most townships do not have their own police or fire departments, but some do have their own fire departments. Most cases, the township will either be part of a joint fire district or negotiate coverage with the closest city while the county sheriff will cover police protection. That's the case here as Kent Fire also covers Franklin Township. Townships also do not collect income tax and thus are usually not as able as cities and villages to provide additional services like sidewalks, sewers, or an aggregate agreement for trash pickup. I actually grew up in Franklin Township, just outside the Kent city limits. Most services were either ones we contracted ourselves (like garbage pickup) or did through the county (like recycling). Townships also don't have their own municipal water supply, though many will make deals with nearby cities to buy water. Even then, most township residents have wells. That's what we had growing up. As a result, townships can be less favorable to development, so many either are annexed by a neighboring city or incorporate into a village or city. In many other states, township can mean different things or a different term is used. For instance, in New York state, the word "town" is equivalent to a township in Ohio. So, for any of my LDS friends who are familiar with Joseph Smith History where the family "was removed to Manchester" (where they literally moved a few hundred meters down the street across the line), they didn't move from the village of Palmyra to the village of Manchester; no, they moved from the town (or township) of Palymra to the town of Manchester. The village of Palmyra, New York is located near the center of the town of Palmyra (The Book of Mormon was printed in the village of Palmyra). Like in Ohio, the village and town(ship) are two distinct entities, many times legally as well as in general practice, but share a common history and even name. OK...does that make any sense?

So, given that lengthy explanation of what a township is and how it is different from a city or village, on to the names of Kent.

Franklin: The first name of what is now Kent was simply Franklin. The townships were laid out before anyone settled there and most were bought by proprietors. The survey township "Town 3 Range 9" was purchased by Aaron Olmstead around 1798. He named his land "Franklin" after his son Aaron Franklin Olmstead. Only recently as cities and villages have become more prominent have we added "township" after the name to differentiate the township from the village or city. For instance, the nearby township of Mantua (MAN uh way) is usually referred to as "Mantua Township" while the village of the same name is referred to as "Mantua". In the early days (and in older published histories) and likely into the 20th century, however, "Mantua" by itself was referring to the township. Within the township were three small villages: Manuta Center, Mantua Corners, and Mantua Station. Eventually Mantua Station dropped "station" from its name and incorporated into a village and "Mantua" came to be referring to the village of Mantua as opposed to the township of Mantua (which, for my LDS readers is where Lorenzo Snow was born and raised and Eliza R. Snow was raised). So, the first name for Kent was simply Franklin when the first settlers arrived in November 1805. I have only found one other source that even mentions "Franklin" as an early name, but logic tells me it was the first name not only for the naming conventions of the time, but also the next name. Either way, Franklin Township was one of the first named townships in the Connecticut Western Reserve. Initially, "Franklin" included most of what is today Portage County and additional lands as well.

Franklin Mills: The next name, and probably the most well-known of Kent's previous names, was that of Franklin Mills. This, of course, was the result of mills -- gristmills, sawmills, even an ANVIL mill and more -- being built along the Cuyahoga River. So naturually, when the first settlers arrived and there were no mills here, I have a hard time believing they called it Franklin Mills. I do not know, however, when the name was first used. The first settlers, the Haymakers, built a gristmill in 1807, so sometime after then. The first official record of Franklin Mills was ca. 1837 when a town plat was registered for what is now downtown Kent. The original village of Franklin Mills started along the river southeast of present-day downtown on the west side of the river, near the Stow Street bridge. The Kent flour mill (ruins at right) was said to have been built on the site of the Haymaker's original 1807 mill. The name Franklin Mills lasted until 1867 when the change to Kent was made official at the incorporation as a village. The vote to change the name was made in 1864.

Reedsburg: Only dedicated historians even know this name existed. In 1811, the Haymakers sold their gristmill to Jacob Reed, who had come from Rootstown. He made significant improvements to the mill and operated it from 1811-1816 until he sold it to George DePeyster and William Price. Portage Pathways by Loris Troyer seems to indicate residents used the name in gratitude for the improvements to the mill, but at this early stage of Kent's history, there weren't many residents at all. All we know is once Reed sold the mill, the name "Franklin Mills" returns, so that only testifies to me that few used the name, particularly those outside the settlement.

Carthage: This is another of the better-known names of Kent, though this actually began as a separate settlement. Carthage began around 1818 when Joshua Woodard moved from Ravenna and began building several small factories and buildings along the river with Frederick Haymaker near the present day intersection of North Mantua Street, Fairchild Avenue, and Crain Avenue. Locally, Carthage was referred to as the "upper village" while Franklin Mills was the "lower village" and collectively they were referred to under the Franklin Mills name by outsiders. Carthage was, however, the first officially recorded name for what is now Kent when the town plat was registered at the county courthouse in 1825. It is the village identified in Franklin Township on the 1826 map of the Western Reserve (Portage County portion at left). The name, however, didn't stick as some historians believe residents preferred the Franklin Mills name. Whatever the reasons, the Carthage name was never widely used outside of the area and apparently even in the area. The only remaining evidence of it in Kent is a small side road called "Carthage Avenue" in the area where Carthage was. The square created by Hudson Road, Fairchild Avenue, North Mantua Street, and Cuyahoga Street is identified on older maps as "Center Place" and was likely the original town square for Carthage had it been laid out and developed as a village. A small but fierce rivalry did exist between the two villages, mostly because of the competing taverns located in them.

Kent: Kent is named for Marvin Kent as he was responsible for a number of business developments in Kent's history, but most importantly the establishment of the Atlantic and Great Western Railroad in 1863. Even more than getting the railroad to come through the village, he was also successful getting Franklin Mills to be the location of the railroad shops, providing hundreds of jobs and generating significant business growth and development. The Kents had been investing in the area since the 1830s with Marvin's father Zenas owning land along the Cuyahoga River and operating a flour mill (ruins shown above) and a tannery (which was briefly operated with famed abolitionist John Brown in the late 1830s). They finally relocated to the village from Ravenna in the 1850s. Marvin Kent's son William Stewart Kent would later donate his 52.89 acre farm as the site of a new normal school in 1910. This school would evolve into today's Kent State University, a development that has shaped Kent into the crazy, unique place it is today. The name "Kent" was used for the settlement first in 1864 after residents and the post office department approved the name change. The change was not official, however, until 1867 when it was approved by the Ohio state legislature and Kent incorporated as a village.

Rockton: Prior to voting on the name of Kent, local leaders also considered the name "Rockton" in honor of Standing Rock (seen at right), a local landmark in northern Kent. Interestingly enough, Marvin Kent actually preferred this name. There are only two known uses of "Rockton" today in Kent that I could find. The first and most prominent is the local Masonic Lodge (which meets in the former Kent home). It was formed in 1859 and adopted "Rockton Lodge" believing the name of the village would become Rockton. It didn't, of course, but the name of the lodge stuck. Another usage I have seen is the neighborhood where my Ridinger grandparents live just east of the city limits (Horning Road area) is identified in the 1957 Portage County Atlas as "Rockton Heights". It appears to have been the name of the subdivision when it was first being developed. It doesn't appear in subsequent maps, and I have never heard that area referred to by that name, so apparently it didn't stick around.

References:

• Brown, R.C; Norris, J.E. (1885, 1972 revision). History of Portage County Ohio. Chicago, Illinois: Warner, Beers, and Company.
• Darrow, Ralph, ed (1999). Kent Ohio: The Dynamic Decades. Kent, Ohio: Kent Historical Society.
• Grismer, Karl H. (1932). History of Kent (2001 Revision ed.). Kent, Ohio: Record Publishing (1932), Kent Historical Society (2001)
• Plough, Cyrus T., ed (1978). 1874-1978 Bicentennial Atlas of Portage County, Ohio. Ravenna, Ohio: Portage County Historical Society.
• Troyer, Loris (1998). Portage Pathways. Kent, Ohio and London, England: Kent State University Press