City of Springdale History On-Line

Barely two months after he was sworn in as mayor, Raymond Norrish attended the groundbreaking ceremonies for the new Avon plant. Among other honored guests were Joseph DeCourcy, Hamilton County Commissioner, and Ohio Governor, James Rhodes. Norrish smiled pleasantly for the cameras and appeared very much at ease with such distinguished company. Mayor Raymond Norrish was gaining confidence.

His father, John W., had served for many years as a public official in the neighboring community of Woodlawn. When Ray Norrish married Chris Utrecht's daughter, Ruth, in 1940 he settled in Springdale. Utrecht was Springdale's first fire chief. After his tour of duty in World War II, Norrish and his family established roots in the historic section of the village. The young man adopted his father-in-law's interest in the volunteer fire department and served for a time as its assistant chief. His family, his volunteer fire-fighting, his membership in the Civic League and his position as a PBX repair foreman for the Cincinnati Suburban Bell Telephone Company kept him very active.

Nevertheless he found time to win election as the village's first treasurer in May 1960 although his opponents questioned his commitment to incorporation and the new village. When council combined the positions of treasurer and clerk, Norrish ran successfully for a council seat. Although he came from a political family and had already demonstrated an ability to survive politically, he had yet to exercise the strong, sometimes opinionated voice that would make him a controversial mayor. Indeed, Norrish won the mayoral election more on the basis of his long-time residency and his genial personality than because of any positions he had taken on the issues. The voters felt that he represented the "old Springdale," a feeling reinforced by the location of his residence.

Those who knew Norrish well recognized the steely determination behind that gentle smile. They remembered his father telling Ray that he would never be accepted by flight school because of his small stature, which simply spurred him on to enlist in the air force, become a pilot, and serve his country in the South Pacific. During his first mayoral race, the local newspapers, not privy to Norrish's grit, doubted his ability to repulse a strong challenge from Neil A. Haller, the Democratic candidate. Haller, who lived in Heritage Hill, seemed the only candidate capable of mobilizing the all-important support of that independent-minded neighborhood. In addition, Norrish faced another candidate, Max Sanks, Jr., running as an independent, who had been part of the close circle fighting for incorporation. Norrish, a Republican, also ran as an independent. He promised fiscal responsibility, and slow but steady growth. His down-to-earth manner and easy charm appealed to Springdale voters who on November 5 elected him mayor in a landslide. He was sworn in for his first full term on January 8, 1964, along with Robert Seifert, clerk, and council members Robert Bryson and Howell Eugene Nell.

For the next twelve years Norrish fought almost constant battles to retain and enlarge the prerogatives of his office through the council, to prevent the encroachment of metropolitan government in any form and to preserve what in the eighties came to be known euphemistically as "family values." He could be a formidable opponent.

If the voters approved the type of government the charter commission recommended, he would be even more formidable. In March 1964 the commission came out for a mayor-council rather than a city manager form of government. Furthermore, the commission under Chairman George McNeal advocated a strong mayor with powers to name police and fire chiefs, the superintendent of public works and the building official. The mayor could also veto ordinances by tabling them for seven days.

On the other hand, five votes from the seven-member council the commission recommended could overturn the mayor's veto if it acted within thirty days. Council had the power, of course, to enact ordinances, contract for services and inquire into the conduct of village officials and employees. Four seats were ward, or district, seats. An individual became a candidate for one of these seats by circulating a petition in the ward in which he or she lived to be signed only by that ward's residents. Three other seats were reserved for at-large candidates. In these instances, the candidates were nominated by petitions where 50 percent of the names came from residents outside the candidate's own district. Elections were to be on a non-partisan basis. Each Springdale resident received a copy of the proposed charter before the election. On November 3, 1964 the voters voiced their approval of this form of government.

During these years, village officials faced other, often unexpected, problems. Heritage Hill residents complained about the presence of a pet lion in their neighborhood. Edna Underwood asked her fellow council members to prohibit bee keeping. James Redden assured her that a forthcoming revamped zoning ordinance prohibited the keeping of "unusual pets, poisonous, or carnivorous animals." In March 1965 Solicitor Weber informed council that the Glenmary Home Missioners demanded compensation for a pig killed by a stray dog. When the incredulous council asked how this could possibly be the village's responsibility, Weber advised that under a nineteenth-century Ohio statute it was indeed the responsibility of a township, and Springdale was now a township.

In addition to pigs, lions and bees, the status of multiflora roses fell under the weeds and hedges ordinance and how to enforce the paint and cleanup ordinances were also the stuff of the bimonthly council meetings. Diminutive former schoolteacher Underwood nagged her "boys" to mind their language and their manners. They in turn benefited from her passion for precision because it forced them to clarify their thoughts as well as their speech. After the council meetings Mrs. Underwood made her way home. On some occasions her fellow council members made their way instead to the historic Century Inn in Woodlawn to discuss the evening's events over a few beers. Soon, however, the proprietor of a Springdale establishment persuaded them that Springdale council members should do their discussing in a Springdale tavern!

Such harmony in Springdale historically did not last long. During the council meeting of May 12, Underwood, chair of the finance committee, read the state auditor's report on the 1964 investigation of the village books. The auditor, while finding no evidence of fraud, found Seifert's methods slipshod and negligent, citing vouchers kept in cardboard boxes, ledgers unposted since July 1962, transactions kept on scratch paper and long delays in the deposit of checks. On May 26, council member Nell asked for a vote of no-confidence and censure which passed unanimously. Seifert told reporters that this was one of three state audits during his clerkship and the first that contained any unfavorable comment. On June 2, council held a special session to allow Seifert to defend himself. With his attorney Carl Rubin at his side, Seifert read a statement and claimed that council had already tried and convicted him in an unfair procedure. Robert Seifert did not seek reelection.

George McNeal won election as Clerk-Treasurer in November.

Seifert's troubles embarrassed the village and humiliated a well-respected man. his genuine love for the village of Springdale led him to spend countless hours collecting information about its history. Perhaps some of his difficulties arose from a lack of organization but some also resulted from his failure to communicate to council his need for clerical assistance in managing an escalating workload. Council made provisions for part-time clerical help for the next clerk.

II

During the 1960s Springdale frequently found itself competing with the neighboring village of Forest Park. The two communities had developed quite differently. While Springdale had a venerable history dating back to 1806, Forest Park was a recent creation and the brainchild of Marvin Warner and Joseph Kanter, two developers who bought a tract of government land in 1954 originally intended for the expansion of the New Deal greenbelt town of Greenhills. In 1956 they completed the first residential area in the town they named Forest Park. When the partners went their separate ways in 1959, Kanter became Forest Park's proprietor. Forest Park grew rapidly under Kanter's guidance. By the time the older community of Springdale began its expansion in the early sixties, it had a ready competitor next door. The relationship between the communities was further complicated by Kanter's interest in developing several properties within Springdale. While the two communities competed on a number of different fronts, they also cooperated on matters of common interest such as a mutual aid agreement between the fire and police units in event of a disaster. They successfully negotiated adjustments to the Springdale-Forest Park boundary line in 1967. When Springdale residents objected to air pollution coming from a Forest Park plant, then Forest Park Mayor Philip White shut down the offending company until it made corrections to its incinerator. The two communities also agreed to share the costs of resurfacing Kenn Road.

The competition between Springdale and Forest Park eased as they developed differently. While Forest Park had to search for commercial and industrial development to bolster its tax base in order to offer services to its residential community, Springdale's problems had more to do with controlling the growth that came its way. Gradually cooperation largely replaced competition.

But competition was only part of the story. The two neighbors also cooperated with each other and as their courses diverged, with Forest Park becoming more of a "bedroom" suburb than Springdale, cooperation tended to outweigh competition. Yet the two communities competed over where to locate a new branch library and Post Office. In 1963, Springdale council discussed the possibility of securing a branch library for the village. Hopes rose when the Hamilton County Public Library announced plans for a new branch in the Forest Park - Springdale area to be built in the first stage of its twenty-five year expansion program. The Springdale Women's Club, the PTA and council lobbied the library board extensively, but the new Parkdale Branch Library went to Forest Park.

Competitive scarcely describes the relationship that emerged in the "great post office war." Springdale had a post office in 1815, but had been without one for at least fifty years. At the time of incorporation a number of different postal zones served the Springdale area including zones 15, 40, 41, and 46, and the Glendale and Hamilton post office branches. Not surprisingly mail arrived erratically or not at all. In April 1961, the village asked its congressman, Donald Clancy, to intercede with postal authorities to create a separate posit office. In July the department granted Springdale the right to use one zone, 46, and a new post office contract station to handle stamps, money orders and parcels. Yet the village was still without mailmen. Local officials felt their growing village deserved its own full-service branch office.

In early 1964 the postal service decided to replace its small branch office on the village square in Glendale with a larger office. When Glendale refused to rezone the parcel of land to the satisfaction of the postal authorities, they began to investigate sites outside of Glendale, including Springdale. A postal supervisor spent several weeks surveying possible sites in Springdale. Council kept close track of the search. By April 1965, council believed that while the postal authorities found the price of Springdale land expensive, they were "not interested in anything outside the village." Postmaster Joseph P. Scanlon and other officials gave "strong indications" that the new building would be on Rt.4 and Northland, a site also preferred by Glendale officials.

Five weeks later Congressman John J. Gilligan announced that the new Glendale-Springdale post office would be in Forest Park. Furious village officials appealed the ruling to Gilligan, Representative Clancy, and Postmaster-General John Gronouski. Even a desperate plea to President Lyndon Johnson fell on deaf ears.

An incensed Mayor Norrish cited the loss of the post office as one of the biggest blows ever to hit the village. Postal officials gave higher land costs and taxes as the reasons for not choosing Springdale, all of which Norrish refuted. Norrish and council saw the influential hand of Joseph Kanter pulling the strings in the postal department's about-face. Suspicions notwithstanding, no amount of pleading could change the outcome.

In 1962, drainage problems at Kanter's building sites on the west side of Kenn Road in Springdale created more tensions. Springdale repeatedly threatened court action. Finally, Kanter promised to have the problem solved by September 1963. Six months later, Mayor Donald English of Forest Park advised the Springdale council that his village would be willing to "help" correct the Kenn Road drainage problem. After another six months, Forest Park agreed to pay three hundred of the estimated three thousand dollar costs. Three years later the problems still existed.

Finally, Springdale and Forest Park locked horns over the annexation of 340 acres of land on Springdale's west side. Located along the proposed route of I-275 West, the annexation would have pushed Springdale's boundaries to Hamilton Avenue and would have also have given Springdale a choice piece of commercial, business and industrial land. The Hamilton County Commissioners rejected Springdale's bid on December 16, 1964 by a vote of 3 to 0. Joseph DeCourcy, the president of the board, argued such an annexation would create a panhandle effect between Forest Park and Butler County. Springdale requested a rehearing but was turned down again on January 26. An irate Mayor Norrish announced a referendum on the question on the May ballot. Not only did the people who owned the land in that area have historic affiliations with Springdale and a desire to become part of the village, but Springdale was in a better financial position to offer them services. Furthermore, Norrish pointed out, anyone who looked at a map of Hamilton County could see just how little county commissioners cared about creating panhandles.

Although voters approved the annexation on May 5, the results were later contested causing the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court to void the election on the grounds that neither a general nor a primary election had been held in the township on that date. The voters reversed their decision in another referendum held in November. In July 1967, Forest Park annexed the land.

III

In the 1960s, Springdale's tax duplicates increased at a pace other communities could only envy. In his report for 1965, Norrish announced a total revenue of $35 million, up approximately $6 million from the previous year, and an increase of $13 million in two years. Still, growth was expensive and seven months later, council was faced with the prospect of cutting services and improvements by 13 percent in order to produce a balanced budget for 1967. Norrish told the Millcreek Valley News that Springdale faced either additional taxes or a curtailment of services. Since no one relished the thought of either option, the alternative of an earnings tax became very alluring.

At this point, Robert W. Holmes of Avon and Henry Bond, vice president of the Lord Baltimore Press Plant, came up with a plan to persuade several Springdale firms to tax themselves voluntarily in order to maintain police and fire services. If successful, the council could avert, at least temporarily, imposing an increase in property taxes or the imposition of an earnings tax. On September 14 Norrish reported that Springdale industry had donated eighteen thousand dollars and council voted to defer action on the earnings tax. Additionally, voters in November turned down a charter revision which was necessary to allow council to pass an earnings tax without a direct vote of the people. The village borrowed the sixty thousand dollars to build its municipal garage on Northland Boulevard which was dedicated October 19, 1967.

In the following years one community after another around Springdale passed an earnings tax. When the bill authorizing the passage of county-wide earning taxes was introduced in the Ohio legislature, Springdale officials were forced to face the issue again. Under the Sealy Bill municipalities would share in the revenues which were based on the population ratios creating a major financial burden for Springdale which depended more on its extensive industrial and commercial complex than on its relatively small residential base. Council felt the attraction of an earnings tax but the electorate did not. On February 26, 1969 council decided to try again in a special charter revision election scheduled for May 9. The village newspaper, the Community Messenger, explained the risks of waiting to place the earnings tax issue directly on the ballot in the November election. The Sealy Bill might pass in the meantime. Supporting both the charter revision and an earnings tax, the paper stressed the changing needs and responsibilities of village government, pointing out that twenty years before two-lane highways handled traffic adequately, but no more. In addition, Springdale's youth, of which 44 percent were under the age of nineteen, required recreational facilities. The paper asked why Springdale residents, who worked outside the village, should pay taxes to other municipalities while their own community collected nothing from non-residents employed in Springdale?

The charter amendment passed on May 9 and on May 21, 1969 council gave an earnings tax ordinance its first reading. The ordinance provided for a half-percent tax which became effective July 1. That rate continued only until council passed an ordinance on November 16, 1969 raising it to 1 percent effective January 1, 1970. Officials hoped the village's earnings tax, expected to bring $120,000 in 1970, would allow Springdale to add two new patrolmen, increase the salaries of village employees and develop Chamberlain park. Springdale officially became a city on February 12, 1971. The official 1970 federal census showed 8,127 persons living within its 4.3-mile boundaries. It had more than doubled in size since incorporation.

As his diligence in monitoring the Sealy Bill proved, Norrish was a fervent opponent of metropolitan government who fought any encroachment upon Springdale's revenues or prerogatives. In 1969 he attacked a proposed study of a Hamilton County-City of Cincinnati merger as a threat to "home rule government and the American Way of Life." In 1970 he expressed fears of legislation pending before the general assembly to abolish mayoral courts, "another encroachment on village revenues." The mayor worked in close association with the Hamilton County Municipal League, an association of suburban mayors, to halt this or any other curtailment of local government.

Springdale also began an expansive public improvement program during the Norrish years, including the building of a $60,000 municipal garage on Northland Boulevard. In 1968, council worked unsuccessfully to win voter support for a municipal swimming pool which was the first phase of a multi-million dollar municipal community center and recreational complex. Nevertheless, on August 26, 1970, Springdale council approved an ordinance for a $5 million capital improvement program to fund a new municipal building, a community and recreation center and major street improvements. Plans for the community center included rooms for social events, crafts and hobbies, tennis and an outdoor basketball court which converted to an ice rink in the winter. On May 4, 1971 Springdale citizens went to the polls to vote on a charter revision amending the city's debt limitation to allow the city to budget the money required for its ambitious program. Although officials tried to explain that this was not a tax increase, the voters rejected the amendment by a single vote, 699-698.

The Finance and Capital Improvements Committee faced the prospect of cutting back its program, and in July, council approved an ordinance to place still another revised debt limitation provision on the ballot for November. This time the voters approved it by 1458 to 824. On Memorial Day 1972, Springdale officially dedicated the first phase of its new recreation complex which included the main building, gymnasium, offices, pool area and horseshoe pits. In June 1972 council awarded the contract for Phase II of the recreation center. This phase included six ball fields, tennis courts and a picnic and tot area.

Plans moved steadily ahead on the municipal center. On February 21, 1973 council authorized the construction contract for the building on Lawnview Avenue. The city government moved into its new home in the fall of 1974.

IV

Bitter political infighting marred the achievements of the Norrish years. The November 1969 election left several members of council with frayed nerves which was reflected in the minutes of the first post-election council meeting. "Tempers Flare" announced the Millcreek Valley News in its report of the November 19 council meeting that lasted from Wednesday night until the early hours on Thursday morning. The controversy arose over an ordinance to amend the earnings tax introduced by outgoing council member Howell Eugene Nell, who was defeated by John Shellenberger.

Nell's ordinance redefined certain aspects of the office of the clerk, requiring that all of the clerk's appointments be approved by the council. At the same time, the ordinance placed the ultimate responsibility for the administration and collection of the earnings tax on the clerk. Shellenberger called it the last act of a "lame duck council," but Max Cooper agreed it was necessary to protect the village from cronyism. After heated discussion council passed the amendment to the earnings tax ordinance despite McNeal's protestations. Shellenberger cast the lone dissenting vote.

At its first meeting following the December 1 swearing-in ceremony, the new council elected Shellenberger as its president. Sniping between the mayor and various combinations of council members continued for the next fourteen months. Then open hostilities flared when on March 24, 1971, Norrish wrote a letter to council officially requesting Shellenberger's removal as president on grounds that Shellenberger was incompetent to conduct mayor's court properly during the mayor's absence. Norrish insisted that Shellenberger's criticism of the conduct of the Springdale police during its investigation of a recent notorious case, plus his friendship with the defendant in that case, proved he could not act impartially. When council met in special session on March 31, Shellenberger read an impassioned forty-five minute speech in which he quoted Martin Niemoeller, John Donne and Thomas Jefferson on the right to free speech and a fair trial. Norrish sat in silence as council approved the motion of Harold Carl to reject the mayor's letter. Fred Yingling who had abstained from the previous vote, then moved to investigate the actions of both Norrish and Shellenberger. This motion passed by a vote of four to two.

With the mayor up for re-election in November, no one was surprised when others entered the race. Shellenberger announced his intention in early May. Shortly thereafter, another council member, Alfred Voelkel, announced his intent to run. . In July, Norrish asked the voters to "stay with Ray on election day." Accusations of police incompetence, and counter charges of loss of police morale, marked this bitter struggle. Voelkel called for "up-to-date" leadership and a restoration of public confidence in the office of mayor. Norrish promised the maximum police, ambulance, fire and road maintenance services he had provided throughout his eight-year administration. Posters plastered every available surface as the candidates slugged it out through summer and fall. The defacing of campaign signs became so commonplace that council asked the Millcreek Valley News to warn perpetrators that they could be charged with trespassing and the destruction of private property.

Norrish asked the council to suspend its investigation until after the November election, stating his charges were made before he became a candidate for office, and did not want them to be interpreted as a political maneuver. On October 20, Max Cooper made a motion to drop the probe. The motion received three votes in favor with two abstentions and one nay, so no ruling could be made.

In November, voters "stayed with Ray," but only by a 137-vote margin. Norrish received 1096 votes to Voelkel's 959, with Shellenberger finishing far behind with 348. Although victorious, Norrish won with a minority of the vote, and he now faced a hostile council for the next two years.

Other council members felt voters' wrath. Incumbents Underwood and Reuscher lost their at-large seats. Voelkel had not contested his, running instead for mayor. When council met in special session on December 1, 1971 several new faces sat around the table. Doyle Webster had ousted George McNeal as clerk. Raymond Johnson and Vernon French, two newcomers, and Joseph Boggs joined Shellenberger, Cooper, Yingling and Carl. Shellenberger refused to allow his name to be entered into nomination for president of council. Instead, Yingling nominated Carl who was selected.

At this point Shellenberger unleashed his attack on the mayor. Under the Springdale charter, the mayor appoints members of the planning commission who are then confirmed by the council. Shellenberger moved to strike the name of Benn Beckham from the mayor's resolution while confirming Charles Lindner and Marie Burbank. Beckham, though a long-time member of the planning commission, had not acted "in the public interest," and Shellenberger accused Beckham of leading the village into numerous court cases while he allowed Springdale to be turned into a village with "a gas station on every corner." Council approved Shellenberger's resolution by a four to two vote and one abstention. Norrish then withdrew his own resolution and vetoed the council's resolution which had confirmed Lindner and Burbank. The mayor refused to submit a new list of names until council agreed to confirm the entire slate instead of individual nominees.

The impasse left the planning commission with only four members, an inadequate number with which to conduct business. Beckham appeared at the next council meeting to defend himself against Shellenberger's charges. Shellenberger admitted he had expressed only a personal opinion that had not been intended to reflect the feelings of council. Norrish read a letter which praised the first planning commission, to which Beckham had belonged, for preserving the village's industrial zone.

Both sides took their case to the press. Carl issued a statement to the MCVN on December 6 describing a letter he had written to Norrish officially requesting a new list of candidates. Norrish replied by accusing Carl, Shellenberger and Yingling of attacking Beckham because the latter had served as Norrish's campaign manager. Opposition to Beckham could only be interpreted as a "political grudge." The impasse continued through January as council refused to accept Beckham, and Norrish refused to submit alternative names. Finally, the council and the mayor resolved the issue and at a special meeting on January 26, 1972 council approved three members to the planning commission. On February 16 council expressed its appreciation to Benn Beckham, Jr., and to Marie Burbank for their years of service.

The battle moved to new ground in February 1972 when Norrish asked council for a full-time assistant. Council was willing to comply because many members felt the city had grown too large to have only a part-time administrator. Some members also hoped an assistant would dilute the powers of the strong-minded mayor. In the months that followed, however, Norrish and council wrangled over who would control the hiring of the assistant.

Finally council members moved to end its feud with the mayor permanently by drawing up a long-discussed ordinance to amend the charter and change Springdale from a mayoral to a city-manager form of government.

During this time, the political wrangling became intertwined with a case in which Springdale Police Officer Corder was accused of serious misconduct. A departmental hearing was held on April 7, 1973 and the officer was placed on probation for six months, suspended four days without pay and reduced in grade and salary. On April 24 after an investigation of a second relatively minor misdeed, Norrish fired him. Corder appealed his dismissal to the Springdale Civil Service Commission which ordered the officer reinstated on the grounds that dismissal was too harsh a punishment for the second offense, and that he had already paid for his first transgression. Norrish then appealed to the Hamilton County Common Pleas Court to overrule the civil service decision. Subsequently, Corder alleged that his fellow officers acted improperly in discussing the case with the press. The attention given the case in the local papers embarrassed the city and raised questions about the integrity of the police department and the judgment exercised by the administration.

On August 15, 1973 Carl read a statement in response to comments attributed to Norrish in the Cincinnati Post of August 9 in which Norrish claimed the city-manager charter amendment was a move orchestrated by Carl in retaliation for the firing of Corder. The furious council reacted by passing the ordinance unanimously and the city-manager amendment was placed on the November ballot. Council also demanded a public investigation of the Corder matter. Norrish proceeded to veto various council resolutions intended to facilitate its investigation. On September 12 council held a special meeting to override the vetoes and form an investigative committee composed of Johnson, French and Yingling. At this point Corder himself eased some of the tensions by resigning August 19 for "personal reasons." A month later, Weber informed council that the Corder appeal had been dismissed on his own motion.

After a heated campaign, the voters rejected the city-manager charter amendment on November 5 by only 113 votes. They also showed their displeasure once again with council. Five council members did not return either because they chose not to run or because they were defeated. The mayor was not up for reelection, so the electorate did not have the opportunity to pass judgment on his performance. Still the city-manager charter amendment vote had been close. Somewhat chastened, Norrish and the council were in a more conciliatory mood for the next two years. On January 16, 1974 council passed a revised ordinance regarding the administrative assistant's position. On June 19 it was announced that Cecil Osborn, a young professional city manager serving as an assistant in the neighboring community of Wyoming, was hired.

While many were convinced that Norrish had hired himself a political lackey, Osborn exhibited an objectivity and determination that soon proved his doubters wrong. Osborn was very much his own man. In November 1977 the voters approved a charter amendment to create the post of a non-partisan city administrator which formally recognized Osborn's assumption of the day-to-day administrative operations of the city under the supervision of the mayor.

Springdale's experience reflected some of the inherent difficulties of non-partisan suburban politics. The middle-class professionals who shaped Springdale's charter from the beginning hoped to eliminate politics all together from municipal government. Their reasoning, perhaps unrealistic, was that non-partisan government hindered corruption, factionalism and the selfish individual who might be interested in public office only to further political ambition. With non-partisan government, Springdale would attract citizens who served only out of a sense of civic responsibility.

But public office entailed hours of service for little pay and little appreciation. Therefore citizens who did serve felt perfectly justified in basing their decisions on what they as individuals felt was best for Springdale rather than altering their viewpoint to fit the desires of the voters. If they were not reelected, at least they had done their duty.

On the other hand, the voters elected candidates whom they assumed to have the same values. The test of this trust came after the election and usually depended on how the elected official responded to a specific issue of concern to the individual citizen, for example, whether an apartment complex should be built in his or her single-family neighborhood. Of course, the voter's opinions on zoning for apartment complexes might be completely different if the complex was proposed for another neighborhood. This specific "issue-by-issue" approach gave the elected official very little latitude and led to a rapid turnover.

For a time, the mayor was protected from this volatility. Norrish became a master politician adept at keeping council off center. He retained the trust of the voters for so many years because his rhetoric reinforced their own personal values in regard to family, police and fire protection, crime and personal morality. Voters judged him a decent man who was on their side. On the other hand council members were judged issue by issue.

Eventually both mayor and council lost the support of the citizens. Apathy became the norm and fewer people were willing to make the sacrifices called for by municipal office. Public indifference or even hostility made civic responsibility unrewarding. Even as the city rejected the city-manager form of government, it moved towards greater professionalization in government. Perhaps salaried administrators would be more businesslike. Although Springdale certainly reflected a pattern of suburban politics that was not unusual, its particular circumstances intensified the factionalism and subsequent apathy. The political infighting of the Norrish years reflected the general air of malaise and powerlessness that affected the city as it sought, sometimes unsuccessfully, to control its own development.

V

In the first years after incorporation Springdale's leaders fought to protect and control prime industrial land while encouraging its development. During the Norrish years, attention focused more on controlling the number of apartment buildings in the village as well as the type of commercial establishments developed. The community seemed constantly at odds, torn between the demands of the developers and the desires of the residents. The residents feared apartments would bring in a transient, undesirable population which would place burdens on public services and lower standards of the community. Many equated apartment dwellers with the poor, minorities or singles, and wished to preserve a homogeneous community of suburban single-family homes.

Furthermore, the village found that incorporation alone did not make it the absolute master of its destiny. Time and time again, Springdale's residents made their voices heard on zoning matters but even when their elected officials responded, disgruntled developers and landowners frequently found a friend in the Hamilton County judicial system. The results were frustration, suspicion, and eventually, apathy. In addition, opposition to a particular development tended to emanate from the residents in a particular neighborhood, and not from the village as an entity. Residents who felt their own property values threatened became active until the crisis passed, then they became passive again. Voices demanding closer attention to the total or long-range impact of development were few and far between.

This pattern was reflected as early as 1965 when Robert Laughlin and Arthur Lewis bid to build 143 apartments on the twenty-acre Seinsheimer tract north of I-275 and Chesterdale Road. As the village's first apartment complex, many were concerned about its impact. For their part, the developers argued that the topography of the land made it unsuitable for single-family homes, and that the multiple-dwelling units they planned would attract "executive-type" tenants. was led the opposition at the public hearing. Opposition was led by the Heritage Hill Civic Association, which as one of Springdale's first subdivisions had a long history of activism. Early county zoning laws had created a neighborhood that was wedged in the northeastern section of Springdale between Sharonville and the industrial park, and cut off from "traditional" Springdale by I-275 and the Tri-County commercial district. A sense of isolation as well as problems with the developer, who declared bankruptcy before the completion of the subdivision, helped make Heritage Hills a force to be heard. Seventy-five people attended the public hearing on April 14, 1965. According to the association spokesperson, a tally of 99-13 opposed the zoning change, and were concerned about overcrowding of schools, the decline of property values and traffic pressures on Chesterdale Road. Despite this opposition, council approved the Laughlin-Lewis rezoning request two weeks later. On May 26, a newly formed group, the Springdale Action Commission, appeared with a petition containing 728 signatures from residents of Heritage Hill and its neighbors, Springdale Terrace and Royal Oaks. The petitioners pointed out that the charter allowed for a referendum on an ordinance upon the petition of 10 percent of the total voters who had voted in the preceding general election.

Laughlin's lawyer attacked the validity of the petition asserting that it did not comply with the state code which required the filing of a certified copy with the clerk before it was circulated. The petitioners, on the other hand, argued that it conformed to the requirements of the village charter. Norrish moved to table the question, pending legal opinion. The attorneys for Laughlin filed a mandamus action with the Ohio Supreme Court, which allowed the highest court as a matter of right to hear the case when first argued. On June 23 council decided to take no action on the petition for a referendum. The petitioners filed suit. But the Ohio Supreme Court disallowed the petition, and Laughlin built the Springdale Greens apartments..

Despite fears that single-family residential neighborhoods would be hemmed-in by multiple-family units, the Laughlin project opened the floodgates to numerous other developments. Finally, in 1967, the request to build "The Colony at Springdale," a 432-unit complex on a portion of the Maple Knoll tract south of the village, brought the villagers' discontent out in the open. Concerned about the rapid expansion of the village, councilman Joseph Boggs,suggested the planning commission develop a master plan,and let land-use professionals advise about specific zoning situations while developing suitable land-use plans. With a master plan in hand, Springdale's position would hold more weight when developers challenged a zoning ordinance in court. On November 22 council tabled the rezoning ordinance on the Colony development until it could receive expert advice. After some controversy between council and the planning commission over who to hire, council authorized Dalton and Dalton of Cleveland to study the land left in the village to draw up a master plan for its use.

In the meantime, Max Cooper, vice-chair of the village planning commission, received an opinion on the Colony rezoning from Ernest Combs, the executive director of the Hamilton County Regional Planning Commission. Combs had serious reservations about the site plan, and also felt that it represented spot rezoning that would harm the resale of the single-family homes on Cameron Springs Drive. In addition, Springdale had a disproportionate number of apartments to single-family houses. In 1967, Combs reported, Springdale issued more multi-family building permits than any other Hamilton County jurisdiction with the exceptions of Forest Park and Cincinnati. Paying little heed to Combs's opinions, council approved the $7.5 million complex after Multicon, the developer, submitted new plans that reduced the number of units by 42 percent while allocating more space for office buildings. Boggs asked when the apartment construction would stop but his opposition voice was in the minority.

Laughlin returned to the planning commission in 1968 with a proposal to add 144 new units to the existing Springdale Greens unit, making a total of 390 apartments. Once again citizens expressed concerns about existing apartment density, traffic flow and the tax burden of additional services. On the advise of Dalton and Dalton, who said the multiple-dwellings would still equal no more than 25 percent of total housing units after the apartments were completed, council approved the zoning change by a four to three vote. Boggs, Shellenberger and Voelkel voted against the plan. This time the Heritage Hill Civic Association could not muster the support needed to influence council. In a last-ditch effort to halt the development, Richard Brillhart, president of the association, asked Mayor Norrish to veto the ordinance. Norrish refused, stating the plans had been approved by the planning commission and recommended by the master planner. He pointed out that the land in question, squeezed as it was between the existing apartments and I-275 had little value for other uses. Norrish noted that apartments provided more taxes than inexpensive single family residences, and finally, that any type of development in that area would increase traffic flow.

When Joseph Kanter requested a zoning change from single-family to multiple dwelling to build 480 apartments on land bounded by I-275, Rt. 4, and the Springdale Knolls subdivision, a large number of Springdale residents appeared in council chambers bearing a petition containing 381 names. The opponents claimed that approval would bring the ratio of available housing for apartments from 25 to 40 percent while the regional planning commission recommended only 10 percent. In the end, council unanimously rejected Kanter's request.

Kanter reappeared before the planning commission on October 6, 1969 with revised plans and the blessings of Dalton and Dalton in hand. This time, the project included a motel, an office building and ninety-five apartments, and the planning commission recommended the project to council. At the public hearing on December 17, council tabled the matter for three months after residents voiced considerable opposition. Kanter returned in March 1970, and council rejected him again. Two years later, on April 19, 1972, council passed Kanter's request for townhouses despite questions concerning density, sewage, drainage and traffic problems on Glensprings and sixty Springdale who residents had appeared to voice opposition. Council member Harold Carl voted in favor of the development despite his personal dislike of it because, he felt, the courts would ignore the decision-making powers of council anyway. It would not be the last time those views were heard in council chambers.

Nothing, however, demoralized Springdale more than the refusal of the courts to uphold the expressed desires of the residents in the Schottenstein Department Store case. And, once again, the village planner's own opinion was used against it in court. On January 22, 1969, 125 Springdale residents appeared at the public hearing on a request to rezone a 26.5-acre tract of the Ricking property from office to retail in order to build a discount department store. Most of the 125 opposed the rezoning, and a petition containing 500 signatures was presented. Officials recognized they could not enforce the existing residential zoning and had hoped to rezone the tract "office" in order to create a buffer between Tri-County to the east and the residential area to the west. At the public hearing, residents also expressed irritation at the traffic problems on Kemper Road. For the first time, residents and officials spoke of fears that Springdale's commercial development had reached the saturation point. Council rejected the rezoning unanimously, which was followed with new court action.

Springdale began a thirty-month battle through the courts in an effort to make its decision stick. Only when the Ohio Supreme Court refused to hear Springdale's appeal, on the grounds the case involved no constitutional issue did the village give up its fight. Hamilton County's plans to float a $3 mill bond issue for building the store was especially galling to council, and on September 15, 1971 it passed a resolution protesting the use of public funds for the project. The resolution served only to express its rage.

In the meantime, Brune-Harpeneau-Torbeck proposed a plan it named Century XXI for the 143-acre Glenmary Missioners site. This was the largest development ever considered in Springdale. The Missioners, who no longer needed the large expanse of land, expected to use the proceeds from the sale to expand their missionary work. Initially, in October 1969, Springdale denied the $27 million development because it called for high density apartments. But the village approved Century XXI when the developers returned with a revised mixed-use plan. After this council expedited the project as much as possible, considering it a tremendous advantage to have the property developed as a diverse, totally controlled unit.

Working with Century XXI's developers highlighted some serious liabilities in the zoning code with regard to this type of sophisticated multi-purpose, long-term project. Under the existing zoning code, the developers needed parts of the Glenmary plot rezoned office, some general business, and some industrial. Furthermore, the developer, working on a long-term schedule, found it expensive and difficult to provide the planning commission and council with the detailed plats and plans for parts of the project not expected to be completed for five more years. As a result, council began to consider legislation to use planned unit developments (PUD) as a means of handling similar projects in the future. A large-scale, unified land development which allowed for a mix of land uses and/or dwelling types, and provided an area of common open space. The PUD permitted greater administrative flexibility, and enhances the bargaining power between the municipality and the developer, strengthening the city's site plan review function and control over the tempo and sequence of development.

Springdale had been disillusioned by the effectiveness of planners and master plans. Dalton and Dalton was hired in 1968-69 because of uneasiness about over development ,and in the hopes that a professional opinion would buttress the village's position in the courts. That was not to be the case. On June 1, 1974 Charles Lindner, former mayor and president of the planning commission, expressed the opinion that the "Master Plan did not reflect the thinking of the present or past Planning Commission." Lindner's statement came at a public hearing on the request for the rezoning of the land to be developed for inexpensive single-family homes on small lots, and such rezoning was in accordance with the master plan. Numerous speakers, including the mayor pointed out this was exactly the type of zoning, proposed earlier by Hamilton County, that had threatened to inundate Springdale with low-tax producing properties and ultimately led to incorporation originally.

In a legal opinion to council, Paul Weber argued that while the residents south of Kemper Road wished to have the property preserved as a "bird sanctuary," but Springdale was in the center of the greatest expansion area Hamilton County has ever known, and that it was impossible to stop it. Weber's opinion seemed to indicate that council could only hope to obtain "reasonable" development and that efforts at anything more were futile.

Springdale officials were tired of hearing such advice, and sensing the public mood, chose to go on the offensive. Mayor Norrish asked "Why be defeatist?" The city should hold fast to its zoning requirements through court action if necessary.

To win in court this time, Springdale needed to strengthen its position and the first order of business involved revising the current zoning code, which had last been revised in 1970. Council member Keith De Green drafted still another revised code designed to facilitate interpretation, update procedures in processing building permit applications and, most importantly, buttress the city's power in areas of weakness. The city also began to hire planning consultants to report on the most advantageous use of particular undeveloped sites, again part of the new "offensive" strategy.

While council's new thinking reflected a responsiveness to its electorate, the problems of development simply did not disappear. Regardless of the makeup of the planning commission, city council, or the person who held the mayor's office, Springdale continued to face frustrations of development while enjoying the comfortable fiscal position that development provided.

V

In November 1975 the Springdale voters cleaned house. For twelve years they had supported Norrish loyally, forgiven him his errors and praised his accomplishments. In 1975 Raymond P. Johnson, president of the council, challenged him in the mayoral race. Johnson, the 44-year-old father of nine children and a seventeen-year resident of Springdale, was a Proctor and Gamble engineer. He ran on the platform that Springdale needed a change, a new leadership to keep pace with the city's rapid commercial and industrial growth. The voters agreed, and Johnson defeated Norrish by 318 votes.

Norrish eventually returned to public service as a member of the planning commission. He now had more time to exercise his passion for golf and to research the history of his beloved community. When Norrish died of cancer in 1987, Springdale mourned his passing. Even those who clashed with him in his numerous political battles were always susceptible to his charm.