The Birth of Jackson Township, Ohio and the Question of Incorporation
Settlers arrived in the area that is now Jackson Township about 1806, with Stark County itself being established February 13, 1808 and organized in January 1809. There is no exact record of these settlers due to their nomadic existence. Jackson Township, first a part of Plain Township, and later a part of Lawrence Township, was officially organized as Jackson Township April 1, 1815. Structured less than three months after Andrew Jackson’s victory at New Orleans, the origin of its name is obvious. Mills played an important part in the early history of the township. Schools and churches quickly followed, and by the 1820’s taverns, inns and general stores opened for business. Early industries included farming and gristmills. The township was linked to budding major cities in Ohio by rail and by the Ohio and Erie Canal, with remnants of the canal’s lock system still remaining and the towpath now used by walkers and hikers. The 1.5-mile stretch of canal that lies within Jackson Township is part of the restoration effort of the Ohio and Erie Canal Corridor Coalition, an organization that hopes to create a recreational path along the canal from Cleveland to Zoar.
The township remained a rural area until the end of World War II, when new allotments were built to provide accommodation for the housing needs of returning veterans and their families. Still, the real change in the nature of the township came in the late 1960’s when Belden Village Mall was built next to the Everhard Road exit of I-77. In the years between 1970 and 1995, the population of Jackson Township grew by more than 50 percent, from about 20,000 to over 33,000 residents.
Jackson Township had a reputation of being the favored township of the county, referred to by many as the “Garden Spot” of Stark County. The surface was rolling with an abundance of fertile soil, typical of an agricultural community with farmers producing ample crops. The township also contained many natural resources such as gravel, natural gas, and oil. In the 1930’s, natural gas wells were located throughout the township, bringing much wealth to the area. It would not be until the return of World War II veterans and their families did the township become to transform from an agrarian to a suburbanizing area.
The importance of education was realized early on by the citizens of Jackson Township. The first schools in the township were taught in small log-like cabin homes built at the geographic center of the township as early as 1816. By 1829, the township had five one-room structures, which would slowly grow as the township became more centralized. The small few that were afforded the opportunity of a high school education were obligated to attend to city high schools, for the township itself lacked schooling beyond the eight grade. As a result, large sums of money for tuition were paid to the city boards of education. With the demand for a high school education increasing coupled with rising tuition costs, the need for a new educational system for the township was sought after.
In 1929, voters approved a bond issue of $80,000 to begin construction of a centralized school to be completed by 1930. Five years later, the new building would be enlarged with six new classrooms, a larger cafeteria and home economics laboratory, and an agricultural workshop to maintain enough room for the slowly swelling population of Jackson Township. With the opening of the Jackson High School in September 1930, many believed the new building was large enough to accommodate all children in the township indefinitely. Overcrowding would become a problem very quickly modeling the modern problem of today due to an ever-growing township. The current Jackson Local School District has the second highest average administration salary and the second highest overall ranking from the Cleveland Plain Dealer. These two examples provide a good reason why the local schools are so popular.
Another education system sprung up in 1946 that would present a further extension of education unaware to many residents in Stark County. Kent State in Stark County saw an unprecedented surge in enrollment due to the GI Bill with soldiers returning home from World War II. In order to accommodate the large number of people seeking a college education during the postwar years, Kent State created the Canton branch of the university and located it in the McKinley High School building on Market Street. From the beginning, this new branch was intended to be more than simply an expanded version of the existing extension program. This new campus enabled students to take day and night classes that satisfied requirements for the initial two years of the baccalaureate degrees at the Kent campus. The Kent State University Canton campus would come to an end in 1950 due to state budget cuts, but with little fault of their own. The campus raised its enrollment nearly 100 percent in its short existence and offered hope outside of the mills and factories. It would also play a vital role in the growing population of Jackson Township.
By 1953, a growing demand for elementary school teachers throughout Ohio led to a birth of the Kent State Stark County program. During the last year of World War II, the State of Ohio expedited the teacher hiring process by creating the Emergency Cadet Teacher Program, enabling the state to issue “Cadet” teaching certificates to anyone who had completed an intensive two-year college program consisting of education classes, traditional college courses, and one semester of field experience. Although the Cadet certificate had to be renewed after four years, it gave the recipients an opportunity to actually start teaching while they finished the balance of their bachelor’s degree requirements.
Not until 1966 did the State of Ohio finally recognize the growing student population and attempt to remedy the problem, authorizing the creation of a Kent State branch. Fierce competition between Massillon and Canton would ensue for the site, with North Canton in particular choosing the accessibility and the geographically central location near the highway, Interstate 77. The land was owned by the Frank and Wyles families, who agreed to sell the farmland to the University for $600,000, which was raised by local businesses and taxpayers. Groundbreaking for the first building began January 7, 1966. This new campus, closely located to the highway, coupled with the building of Belden Village Mall in 1970, began the tidal wave of population that would slowly develop in Jackson Township. The official opening was the fall semester of 1967, a dedication attended by Kent State University President Robert White, U.S. Senator Frank Lausche, and Ohio Governor James A. Rhodes.
As commerce, education and convenient transportation access began to boom in Stark County, including Jackson Township, the attraction of unsettled land outside the busy cities also began to boom. This mass exodus of residents, and later commerce and employers, is commonly known as urban sprawl. Although many definitions of sprawl exist, a vital element of most definitions and of most people’s perception of sprawl is the spreading out of a city and its suburbs over more and more rural land at the fringe of an urban area. This involves the conversion of open, rural space into developed land over time. From the standpoint of urban planning institutions, the style of that conversion can sometimes be more important than the amount of the conversion. Organizations whose chief concerns involve urban planning goals may tend to emphasize qualitative attributes of sprawl such as attractiveness, pedestrian-friendliness and compactness.
But for those who are most concerned about the effect of sprawl on the natural environment and agricultural resources, the more important overall measure of sprawl is the actual amount of land that has been urbanized. Knowing the actual square miles of urban sprawl provides a key indicator of the threat to the natural environment, to the nation’s agricultural productivity and to the quality of life of people who live in cities and in the small towns and farms that are near cities. Population growth trends show no sign of abating any time soon as Americans continue to move out to new homes and shopping centers on the fringes of metropolitan areas.
Beginning in 1940, urban development changed drastically because of federal programs designed to encourage construction of new housing, and because of new legislation related to housing and the growth of cities. Among these programs, the FHA Mortgage Guarantee enabled many families to build a comfortable house for less than $10,000. However, many could not afford the down payment of 20% required by banks or loan companies. The FHA intervened and guaranteed the banks and loan centers that they were free from risk if a borrower failed to meet the monthly mortgage. In exchange for this guarantee, the banks accepted 10% as an acceptable down payment from prospective homebuyers.
A population shift was occurring with many of the inner-city areas losing population to the suburbs. Returning veterans looked to the suburbs to raise their families, thanks in part to GI loans that provided low-interest mortgages. The two-car family became common in these outlying neighborhoods without public transportation, as the bread winner took one car to work while the other served for errands, satisfying their children’s extracurricular needs, and making trips to the neighboring shopping center. This boom would make up the basis of urban sprawl, which is made up mostly of hosing. While the past and present suburban model may seem natural to most Americans, it appears quite odd when viewed n global context. There is not another nation in the world that houses citizens as we do, and few could afford to. Nevertheless, the proliferation of large-lot single-family housing has begun around the world, despite our awareness of its negative social and environmental consequences.
Professional planners and policy experts have recognized the controversial side effects of urban sprawl for over thirty years. However, most Americans are oblivious to these issues and are more concerned when word of a large new apartment complex, a landfill, or a roadway threatens the sanctity of their neighborhood. Communities that have experienced rapid rates of sprawl find themselves overwhelmed by the fiscal responsibilities of providing public water, sewage, access roads, and police and fire service to new residents. Unfortunately, the anticipated tax revenue from the new inhabitants does not adequately cover these costs. When faced with these fiscal concerns, local governments are faced with the option of raising property taxes or making use of growth management tools such as minimum lot sizes, frontage requirements, and bans on multifamily dwellings. However, the American disposition against higher taxes leaves growth management as the popular alternative.
Despite the fact that Ohio has remained one of the nation’s premier agricultural states, the average farm size has increased while the number of family owned farms has continued to decline and all but disappeared from the urban counties. Sprawl is no longer confined to main traffic arteries reaching out from major population centers, now encroaching on once-open countryside far removed from the cities. Once urban development begins to creep into a previously rural area, property valuations tend to rise, triggering a hike in taxes for farmers who are already struggling to maintain their operations in the face of sagging commodity prices and stiff global competition. Those who are able to persist must tolerate growing traffic congestion and complaints from transported urbanites about the dust and the odors caused by their operations. The question is raised of why would any farmer want to continue work for a return of $2,000 to $3,000 per acre when a real estate developer will pay him or her $20,000 to $30,000 per acre? The response is quite simple.
With the practice of farmers accepting generous buyouts from farmland and other problems already mentioned in this paper, the debate rages on whether urban sprawl is a problem. “According to recent market research, most ordinary Americans, though still favoring detached, single-family homes, are increasing fed up with the congestion and sprawling commercial development that too often come as part of the package. Today’s consumers say that they are particularly annoyed by commercial strips and that in principle they would prefer neighborhoods clustered around a downtown or village center.” This evidence is some proof that Americans want to be in quiet, private neighborhoods, yet do not want the commercial aspect that usually accompanies suburbanization. “The prospect of everyone owning their own home evokes a nightmare imageâÂ?¦destroying farmland and forests, leading to increased car dependency and excessive energy and resource consumption continuing ecological damage. Neither the market nor the environment can support everyone in fulfilling this ‘American Dream.'”
In contrast to the negativity expressed by many towards urban sprawl, opposing viewpoints do exist. “What is disturbing about the crusade against urban sprawl is that anti-sprawl activists portray their agenda of ‘smart-growth’ initiates as ‘pro-suburban’ to receptive voters concerned about improving the quality of life in their communities. In reality, urban sprawl policies are profoundly anti-suburban. In cities such as Portland, Oregon, where aggressive anti-sprawl policies have been implanted, government planners have deliberately tried to increase traffic congestion, not diminish it, and have tried to force people to live in smaller houses in more crowded urban-like neighborhoods. To these activists, suburbs are the cause of sprawl, and the only way to stop sprawl is to dissuade people from moving to the suburbs. The campaign against urban sprawl is perilously close to a campaign against the American Dream.” In my opinion, this stance seems to reek of conspiracy theorist rhetoric that unjustly upsets suburban America into believing that those pushing for environmental protection from sprawl are anti-American are trying to take away their constitutional right to life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness. Property ownership free from governmental intervention has superceded the right of the less fortunate to green space.
The United States has become a predominately suburban nation, but not a very happy one. Today more than three quarters of the America people live in the metropolitan areas, and more than two-thirds of those live in suburbs. The problem does not lie in the idea that sensible person can no longer believe in the justification of deforestation or the turning farmland and other rural land into additional suburbs. “The problem is that the suburbs we build are fostering an unhealthy way of lifeâÂ?¦there is a strong connection between the ills we exhibit as a people and the suburban ‘communities’ (to use a much abused word) that we inhabit.” With many still believing that farmland is the basis of a healthy local economy while providing critical environmental benefits, the threat urban sprawl poses for American farming is fast becoming an immediate death wish for the majority of small family-owned farms. Since 1950, agricultural acreage has fallen by 15 percent, while production has risen more than 105 percent. As evident by these statistics, the technological boom has also caused job losses outside the technology sector as well.
With advantages and disadvantages of urban sprawl presented, the focus will shift to the question of incorporation of Jackson Township. An aggressive annexation attempt by neighboring cities is the most serious threat to Jackson if they choose to remain as a township. The possibility of paying higher property and city taxes and receiving fewer services is also a fear of those who oppose incorporation. Supporters of incorporation initially point out the end of annexation attempts by neighboring cities. Though the township is fairly large, support for incorporation is found throughout as the residents and boosters seek to increase local control of planning and development. Incorporation supporters argue that other potential benefits would be local control of a budget; local representatives on a city council; control and coordination over fire, police and other municipal services. While strong opposition to incorporation was certainly voiced by the Jackson community in 1998, it seems clear that urbanization is considered immanent for the area and it is certain that many of the existing landholders and businessmen will actively seek to capitalize on the rapid growth of the township and the goldmine that exists in the commercial sector of Belden Village.
So, the question that will end this paper is, Should Jackson Township incorporate as the city of Jackson Park (the proposed named in the 1998 incorporation attempt)? With the township always in danger of losing land to the annexation epidemic, will incorporation be the ultimate answer? Frequently the land annexed by an adjourning municipality is the most highly developed in the township, depriving the township of much of its limited tax base and adding difficulty to maintain adequate local services in the remaining area. Another issue raised is that once incorporation is finalized and the threat of annexation is extinguished, what happens with the services previously provided the state that are now in the hands of the new city? Does incorporation equate to increased local control, new sewers, sidewalks, and full-time police and fire protection? With the recent failure of the Jackson police levy resulting in layoffs of all part-time officers, fear is in the air once again.
Further Research and Works cited:
Carlisle, John. National Center for Public Policy Research, April 1999.
Duany, Andres, Elizabeth Plater-Zyberk, and Jeff Speck. Suburban Nation: The Rise of Sprawl and the Decline of the American Dream. New York: North Point Press, 2000.
Geib, Elmer Earnest. A Survey of Jackson Township High School, Stark County, Ohio, and an Evaluation in Light of the Ohio High School Standards. Columbus, OH: The Ohio State University Masters Thesis, 1940.
Heald, Edward Thorton. The Stark County Story. Canton, OH: Stark County Historical Society, 1958.
Howe, Robert T. Ohio: Our State. Cincinnati: Roblen Publishing Company, 1997.
Knepper, George W. Ohio and Its People. Kent, OH: The Kent State University Press, 1997.
Langdon, Philip. A Better Place to Live: Reshaping the American Suburb. New York: Harper Perennial Publishers, 1994.
Longman, Phillip J. US News & World Report, 27 April 1998.
O’Bryant, Michael ed., The Ohio Almanac: An Encyclopedia of Indispensable Information about the Buckeye Universe. Wilmington, OH: Orange Frazer Press, 1997.
Smith, Kathleen. Rebuilding Community in America. Berkeley, CA: Shared Living Resource Center, 1995
Williams, Donald C. Urban Sprawl. Santa Barbara, CA: ABC-CLIO, 2000.
