mu2010

Or are they fleeing "creeping density"? They might tell you they dislike density and are fleeing density, but ask them why they dislike density. They'll tell you it's because of noise, traffic, and maybe access to nature. They dislike density they're so used to density being done so poorly. To me sprawl does not necessarily mean low density. There are lots of highly dense sprawled out places. See Polaris in Columbus for the most extreme example but I think many suburbs all over Ohio would qualify. There are tons of apartments and newer houses around the mall. High density but you need a car to go anywhere. Horrible traffic. If you gave people a complete urban area where their own two feet can get them to parks, groceries, and other necessities, they might not hate density so much. Not everybody wants to be on top of each other like they're in Manhattan. But if you had a well designed city with good transit and the level of density of say, Collinwood or Glenville (as originally designed), you could get a nice sized yard and a nice sized house and still be able to walk places.

Yes, the cultural attitudes of the time certainly were in favor of moving farther out. As well as many economic incentives which we've discussed here at length. I didn't mean to be so harsh on my aunts and uncles (who I love very much :D), I just meant to say that they do in fact move outwards due to noise and traffic. I've heard it from their mouthes. Those pictures are awesome. I will show them to my parents tomorrow, they will love them. Actually my Dad was talking a few months ago about Ridgebury being a dirt road in the 60s. They live a few streets East of Brainard, on the corner with Ridgebury.

I think your description applies well to the initial suburbanization of American in the 50s-70s caused by white flight, unsanitary conditions, etc. Since then, many, many people (and I can only speak using anecdotal evidence of people I know) leave well functioning suburbs with good schools and services, due to noise and traffic. I grew up on the East side in the same neck of the woods KJP is referring to. My family lives on Ridgebury, actually. We make those left turns out of our driveway. Most of my parents' siblings live outside Cuyahoga County. They go to subdivisions in Bainbridge and Chardon, and they drive to Cuyahoga County for work. Noise and traffic are a big factor they will cite. Cuyahoga County taxes are another one.

I think KJP is correct. The people who move like this don't refer to it as sprawl, they refer to it as noise and traffic, but they are essentially fleeing sprawl. I have several coworkers in Columbus who refuse to live inside 270 because of the "noise and traffic." So they move out to places like Johnstown and before that, Powell and Lewis Center. They bring the noise and traffic with them. Lewis Center and Powell have some of the worst traffic in the area, far worse than those of us in inner ring neighborhoods. For those of us inside 270, it seems to me we actually have less noise and traffic because we actually have the road capacity to handle the population.

It can just be a continuing shuffle of the two teams between the three cities. Every few years they rotate.

Great thing for Canton. Only thing is I hope it doesn't suck the life out of downtown Canton, which is actually a pretty cool place with a bit of momentum right now.

Classical-music-UDF is a neighborhood staple though. Hopefully we can get a UDF highrise.

Could not agree more with Coach Brian Billick in this column. The constant personnel changes have to stop. And I've been saying that since like 3 regimes ago. We are better off continuing to employ Pettine/Farmer and let them improve and learn from their mistakes, than to fire them and bring in whatever 3rd rate guys we can get on the open market. Browns must stop digging a bigger hole: Stick with Mike Pettine By Brian Billick for NFL.com Nov. 6, 2015 at 11:41 a.m For the long suffering Cleveland Browns' fans now sitting at 2-7 -- fresh off a third straight double-digit loss, this time to in-state rival Cincinnati on national television -- the valid question becomes ... Where do we go from here? I would suggest a time-honored phrase -- "When you find yourself in a hole, the first thing to do is to stop digging" -- as a good start. I am sure the steady drumbeat of fire the coach, fire the GM or, heck, just fire someone will resound loudly on the Cleveland and national airwaves and in columns. In my opinion, you'd only be making it worse by continuing to dig. Since the Browns were reconstituted in 1999, they have had three owners, eight head coaches and half a dozen general managers and personnel directors. More recently, they have fired Eric Mangini after two years, Pat Shurmur after two years and Rob Chudzinski after just one year. By all means, go ahead and fire Mike Pettine after just two seasons. That seems to be working real well for you ... What is the definition of insanity? Repeating the same act over and over again while expecting a different outcome. Cleveland, just stop digging! More: http://www.nfl.com/news/story/0ap3000000574211/article/browns-shouldnt-look-for-other-answers-stick-with-mike-pettine

People from Cincinnati who started following other teams in the 90s are pissed. They have delighted in ragging on The Bengals all these years and suddenly their own team is The Bengals. I know one of those guys from college. West side Cinci born and raised. "Huge Patriots fan." Super obnoxious.

Yay! Big win for all of us who want a more centrist, less polarized, more compromising government, and I do have to give props to the Ohio GOP for not fighting this. Hopefully next year we can do the same thing for the congressional districts, but I do expect it to be more of an uphill battle. This was basically a trial run. Marcy Kaptur's district... the "Snake on the Lake..." has got to go.

Coleman did say in his final state of the city that lack of rail is one of his biggest regrets. So I could see him spearheading that.

Agreed. To be honest I bought into a lot of the fear mongering regarding this issue. "It undermines democracy etc etc." I do think some caution and skepticism should be applied if you are talking about modifying the democratic process, but seriously, if you read this thing, it's not that bad. And the idea of being able to 'invest' in a ballot-granted monopoly *is* pretty bad. Also note one of the sponsors of Issue 2 has been trying to get it passed since the casinos. It just only got steam when the social conservatives got scared of weed.

Yes. Keep in mind you can't really ban anything from a constitution. The only things prohibited are those things prohibited by the US Constitution. What you can do is change the process of amending the constitution, which this amendment does.

That might be a workable strategy, but you're leaving a lot in the hands of the judiciary there. And the judiciary is generally tentative when it comes to taxes, at least outside of realms that are also inherently judicial, such as jurisdiction. But maybe that could thread the Issue 2 needle and avoid the need for two simultaneous votes. There's also the court of public opinion though. If we pass marijuana legalization and they try to ban it through unreasonable tax rates, a lot of noise would be made.

How do you get that from the amendment? I just read through the whole thing again, it only talks about things that already were going to be ballot initiatives.

I'd be inclined to favor 2 if it wasn't simply a way to block 3. It's entirely too easy to amend the state Constitution. At the very least, a supermajority (60%, or better yet 2/3) should be required. I wonder why our initiative process is structured to always amend the constitution. Why can't we have citizen initiatives that simply create statutory laws? EDIT - I suppose its so the legislature can't simply overturn the law. In that vein it makes sense.

That's it right there for me. It's a desperate attempt to stop a citizen initiative that the general assembly just so happens to dislike. The monopoly thing, for these politicians, was a convenient scapegoat. Let the amendment stand on its own, whether it wins or loses.

I am still undecided on Issue 3 and may end up abstaining on that question. However Issue 2 is garbage and I will vote against that, and I would encourage all of you to do that as well regardless of your stance on pot or on monopolies. On the question of the perception of Ohio if Issue 3 goes down, I do sympathize with what Hts is saying but actually I would note that the "Issue 3 is a monopoly" thing seems to be getting a decent amount of national press.

Article from Miami's student newspaper about the Amtrak station coming to Oxford: Thank you KJP for AAO's part in this! Amtrak station to come to Oxford By Leah Shaw, For The Miami Student It’s 3 in the morning and Oxford residents are awoken by the horn of the Amtrak train making its way through town. Soon enough, students will be able to hop on board this train. Within the next few years, Oxford plans to have its own Amtrak station for students and residents to take from Oxford to Chicago and beyond. The city of Oxford received approval last week from Amtrak to submit the proposal to build a stop here. In November 2014, Oxford city officials met about creating an Amtrak in Oxford for students to use when traveling to other cities. In December 2014, The Miami Student reported that Southwest Regional Director of All Aboard Ohio, an organization that promotes rail travel, had a two-part effort — getting an Oxford stop on the existing Cardinal line that goes through Oxford, and then having Amtrak expand its existing Hoosier State line to include Oxford and other Southwestern Ohio stops that would provide more service here with better times. More: http://miamistudent.net/?p=17012994

Yeah I was a sniper in Vietnam and I was driving the jeep that toppled that Saddam statue. And I swept floors. I call shenanigans. We all know Brian Williams was driving that jeep.

Is his family still the current owner? Or has it changed hands since then?

I was actually in no way expecting we would win. I had to work Monday and we were hitting the road right after the game, so the whole weekend I kept telling my friends "if they are losing in the middle of the fourth quarter let's hit the road!" Of course it went to overtime, then we sat in traffic for an hour after the game, and we didn't get back until very late. I took a few hours off in the morning, but it was worth it.

I went to the game this weekend with 3 other Browns fans, all decked out in our gear. Interestingly the Baltimore fans were very friendly to us, though we were in more expensive seats which = a less rowdy crowd. We only had one Baltimore fan say "Cleveland sucks" as she was walking by, at the end of the overtime. They all were leaving during our final possession. My friends and I thought they were way too confident the Ravens would lose, and that they hadn't watched the Browns play enough. :-D M&T Bank Stadium was cool - they have a lot of brick which showed a little more personality than the Browns or Bengals stadiums. They had crab cakes and pit beef and other mid-atlantic staples available at the concession stand. Unfortunately I didn't get the chance to wander around Baltimore and look at the rowhouses and marble steps, though we did spend the majority of the weekend in DC which was cool.

Good point - though if I recall from college, people would get penalties for "paraphernalia" and other related charges, than the actual possession. Not sure if that's still how it is.

I was reading an alt-weekly in Columbus (free times?) And they were pretty anti-issue 2. Said it harmed direct democracy and the initiative process, because a secretary of state could just declare anything he doesn't like a monopoly and doom it. Not sure if that's legit or just fear mongering. I don't like the idea of donors being able to buy a constitutionally granted monopoly, but this makes me nervous. Edit- this piece from the green party basically explains the position http://www.independentpoliticalreport.com/2015/10/ohio-green-party-withdraws-support-of-issue-2/