Local superintendent named recipient of excellence award
The Springfield City Schools District announced that Superintendent Dr. Robert F. Hill is one of 5 recipients of the Ohio Superintendent Award of Excellence.
The award recognizes outstanding leadership, vision and impact.
Dunbar grad wins prestigious Gates Millennium Scholarship
Hill has served as the district's superintendent since 2015, bringing together initiatives like the 'Leader in Me' leadership framework and the Health Center located at Springfield High School.
The district spoke to Hill's leadership during the city's time in the national spotlight last year.
'Adding to his decisive leadership, Dr. Hill kept student and staff safety at the forefront when the city of Springfield was thrust into the national spotlight as a topic at the 2024 presidential debate.'
Hill will be formally recognized for the achievement during a banquet ceremony in July and will also receive $1,000 to use on a project benefitting the district.
Hill is also a recipient of the Buckeye Association of School Administrators' Exemplary Educational Leadership award and the Warren Russell Leadership award.
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
5 days ago
- Yahoo
Will the west Dayton hospital proposal make it onto the November ballot?
DAYTON, Ohio (WDTN) — The decision to build a new hospital in west Dayton could be in the hands of voters this November. The Clergy Community Coalition held a press conference on Tuesday to announce progress toward reaching their goal. 'We are very pleased to announce that we're turning in 2,800 signatures into the clerk of the commission,' said Bishop Richard Cox, CCC president. It was back to the drawing board after Dayton City Commissioners were split with a 2-2 vote and one abstention just three weeks ago over the imitative to add the hospital petition to the ballot. In just 20 days, the coalition gathered even more signatures from the community, in order to put it on the ballot regardless of the commission's vote. The CCC says it's a step in the right direction, and couldn't have been done without the community's support. 'I think it's a win-win for the city. It would provide adequate health care and alleviate the health care desert that we're now living in,' said Cox. 'It's also a win-win for the city commission because then the politicians that we elected to serve us can still work with us as we pursue this effort.' If the petition goes through the Montgomery County Board of Elections once all the signatures are verified, it will be up to the people of Dayton to make the choice in November. However, the coalition says they still want to work with the commissioners regardless of how they initially voted. 'We're still interested in working with you. We elected you to serve us, and we want to work with you to make sure that the citizens of Dayton in this upcoming election, get the services they need from the people that they have elected,' said Cox. However, if the initiative does pass, there will not be adequate money to immediately build a hospital. The coalition says they plan to go to the state and some potential partners for investment money, although they have not revealed who those partners would be. They also say they are not naive to think the project will happen overnight. But they do have some target goals in mind. 'It's all incremental and it will take time. But our hope would be that we have something standing by 2032,' said Nancy Kiehl, CCC secretary. 2 NEWS reached out to Dayton City Commissioners for comment, with one commissioner replying that he would share a statement once the signatures were verified and in the hands of the board of elections. Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed. Solve the daily Crossword
The Hill
5 days ago
- The Hill
He lost his wife to Trump's immigration crackdown — here's why he still backs Trump
A month after President Trump took office, Brad Bartell's wife, Camila Muñoz, was arrested by ICE. A Peruvian immigrant, she had overstayed a work-study visa years earlier. But after marrying Bartell, she applied for legal status, and her case was under review when they flew to Puerto Rico for their honeymoon. They thought it was safe to travel within U.S. territory while her application was pending. They were wrong. You may have read their story. As they returned, Muñoz was detained under the newly inaugurated Trump's new executive order, which empowered federal agents to arrest and remove anyone lacking documentation, regardless of circumstances. She spent 49 days in a Louisiana detention center while Bartell, back in Wisconsin, scrambled to work with lawyers and prove her ties to the community. 'It was tough,' he told me. 'I was missing a piece … [There was] a lot of extra stress.' And yet, Bartell doesn't regret his vote for Trump and still supports the president. That may seem baffling. Why keep supporting a politician whose policies disrupted your own marriage? But that kind of critique assumes there's only one 'right' reason to vote for someone — and it's usually not the one people like Bartell have in mind. For years, the press has seized on such contradictions in Trump supporters' lives. These voters are often portrayed as punchlines: too loyal, too misled, or too blind to see how their preferred policies come back to bite them. Sometimes, the claim is that their support stems from spite. One recent Hill opinion column argued that 'Trump voters are okay with suffering, as long as other people hurt more.' By 'other people,' the author meant Black Americans — citing white farmers who supposedly don't mind the sting that tariffs put upon them because of the perceived harm to Black farmers. There was no polling, no quotes, no evidence — just conjecture and sweeping generalizations to assume the worst motives. In my conversations with Trump-supporting white farmers, they have acknowledged the pain caused by tariffs but said they understood Trump's reasoning: to hold countries accountable for unfair trade practices. Many also appreciated the subsidies they received to offset the impact. Bartell has heard similar assumptions about Trump supporters. 'If you support Trump, it makes you racist — or a lot of other nasty things,' he said. 'But you can't really understand somebody you don't know personally.' Bartell doesn't see himself as voting against his own interests. 'Of course you aren't going to agree all of the time with the way things are done,' he said. 'But Trump is taking action, which is better than nothing.' He believes the immigration system was broken long before Trump. His wife's detention raised questions for him — but not so much about the man in the White House. The idea that voters should cast their ballots based solely on immediate personal gain is not only simplistic but it is also inconsistently applied. When a billionaire supports a Democrat who wants to raise taxes, he is praised as principled and civic-minded. When a working-class Trump voter backs a policy that might hurt him personally, he is mocked. Why is one seen as virtuous and the other as foolish? And this goes far beyond immigration. Trump's proposed 'One Big Beautiful Bill' includes cuts to Medicaid, threatening coverage for many Americans—including some of his own voters. In rural areas, where hospitals depend on Medicaid, Trump supporters could lose access to care and safety-net programs. These cases are often used as proof that voters don't know what's good for them. But maybe they reflect something else entirely. 'Self-interest' isn't objective or universal. Some voters care more about law and order, cultural preservation, or a sense of national purpose than they do about how government can directly improve their personal situation. Is that really less rational than voting to raise your own taxes for the greater good? That's how Bartell sees it. For him, Trump's immigration crackdown brought short-term pain for himself and his wife — but it didn't invalidate the broader reasons he supports the former president or his immigration policies. Bartell told me that even during the hardest moments, no friends or family challenged his political views. 'They may not have agreed entirely,' he said, 'but there was no challenge in mature conversations.' And he's not alone. Other Trump supporters have stood by him despite being caught in the consequences of his policies. One headline read, 'Detained in immigration raids, MAGA mom still has faith in Trump's mass deportation plan.' Another: 'Husband refuses to take down Trump flags after wife detained by ICE.' These stories rarely get beyond a surface-level analysis, because the details complicate the caricature. Mocking these voters sends a message that only some values matter, and only certain types of sacrifice are valid. Muñoz is home now, and life has returned to something closer to normal. But the experience hasn't shaken Bartell's support for Trump. 'Humans are complex,' he said. 'Everyone's reasons and situations [for supporting a candidate or policy] will be different.' He's right. And if we took that complexity seriously, we might begin to understand each other a little better.
Yahoo
6 days ago
- Yahoo
Trump's big bill is powering his mass deportations. Congress is starting to ask questions
WASHINGTON (AP) — President Donald Trump's border czar Tom Homan visited Capitol Hill just weeks after Inauguration Day, with other administration officials and a singular message: They needed money for the White House's border security and mass deportation agenda. By summer, Congress delivered. The Republican Party's big bill of tax breaks and spending cuts that Trump signed into law July 4 included what's arguably the biggest boost of funds yet to the Department of Homeland Security — nearly $170 billion, almost double its annual budget. The staggering sum is powering the nation's sweeping new Immigration and Customs Enforcement operations, delivering gripping scenes of people being pulled off city streets and from job sites across the nation — the cornerstone of Trump's promise for the largest domestic deportation operation in American history. Homeland Security confirmed over the weekend ICE is working to set up detention sites at certain military bases. 'We're getting them out at record numbers,' Trump said at the White House bill signing ceremony. 'We have an obligation to, and we're doing it.' Money flows, and so do questions The crush of new money is setting off alarms in Congress and beyond, raising questions from lawmakers in both major political parties who are expected to provide oversight. The bill text provided general funding categories — almost $30 billion for ICE officers, $45 billion for detention facilities, $10 billion for the office of Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem — but few policy details or directives. Homeland Security recently announced $50,000 ICE hiring bonuses. And it's not just the big bill's fresh infusion of funds fueling the president's agenda of 1 million deportations a year. In the months since Trump took office, his administration has been shifting as much as $1 billion from the Federal Emergency Management Agency and other accounts to pay for immigration enforcement and deportation operations, lawmakers said. 'Your agency is out of control,' Sen. Chris Murphy, D-Conn., told Noem during a Senate committee hearing in the spring. The senator warned that Homeland Security would 'go broke' by July. Noem quickly responded that she always lives within her budget. But Murphy said later in a letter to Homeland Security, objecting to its repurposing funds, that ICE was being directed to spend at an 'indefensible and unsustainable rate to build a mass deportation army,' often without approval from Congress. This past week, the new Republican chairman of the House Homeland Security Committee, Rep. Andrew Garbarino of New York, along with a subcommittee chairman, Rep. Michael Guest of Mississippi, requested a briefing from Noem on the border security components of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, or OBBBA, which included $46 billion over the next four years for Trump's long-sought U.S.-Mexico border wall. 'We write today to understand how the Department plans to outlay this funding to deliver a strong and secure homeland for years to come,' the GOP lawmakers said in a letter to the homeland security secretary, noting border apprehensions are at record lows. 'We respectfully request that you provide Committee staff with a briefing on the Department's plan to disburse OBBBA funding," they wrote, seeking a response by Aug. 22. DHS Assistant Secretary Tricia McLaughlin said in a statement to The Associated Press the department is in daily discussions with the committee 'to honor all briefing requests including the spend plan for the funds allocated" through the new law. 'ICE is indeed pursuing all available options to expand bedspace capacity,' she said. 'This process does include housing detainees at certain military bases, including Fort Bliss.' Deportations move deep into communities All together, it's what observers on and off Capitol Hill see as a fundamental shift in immigration policy — enabling DHS to reach far beyond the U.S. southern border and deep into communities to conduct raids and stand up detention facilities as holding camps for immigrants. The Defense Department, the Internal Revenue Service and other agencies are being enlisted in what Kathleen Bush-Joseph, an analyst at the Migration Policy Institute, calls a 'whole of government' approach. 'They're orienting this huge shift,' Bush-Joseph said, as deportation enforcement moves "inward." The flood of cash comes when Americans' views on immigration are shifting. Polling showed 79% of U.S. adults say immigration is a 'good thing' for the country, having jumped substantially from 64% a year ago, according to Gallup. Only about 2 in 10 U.S. adults say immigration is a bad thing right now. At the same time, Trump's approval rating on immigration has slipped. According to a July AP-NORC poll, 43% of U.S. adults said they approved of his handling of immigration, down slightly from 49% in March. Americans are watching images of often masked officers arresting college students, people at Home Depot lots, parents, workers and a Tunisian musician. Stories abound of people being whisked off to detention facilities, often without allegations of wrongdoing beyond being unauthorized to remain in the U.S. A new era of detention centers Detention centers are being stood up, from 'Alligator Alcatraz' in Florida to the repurposed federal prison at Leavenworth, Kansas, and the proposed new 'Speedway Slammer' in Indiana. Flights are ferrying migrants not just home or to El Salvador's notorious mega-prison but far away to Africa and beyond. Homan has insisted in recent interviews those being detained and deported are the 'worst of the worst,' and he dismissed as 'garbage' the reports showing many of those being removed have not committed violations beyond their irregular immigration status. 'There's no safe haven here,' Homan said recently outside the White House. 'We're going to do exactly what President Trump has promised the American people he'd do.' Back in February, Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina, the Republican chairman of the Budget Committee, emerged from their private meeting saying Trump administration officials were 'begging for money.' As Graham got to work, Republican Sen. Rand Paul of Kentucky, the chairman of the Homeland Security and Governmental Affairs Committee and a leading deficit hawk, proposed an alternative border package, at $39 billion, a fraction of the size. But Paul's proposal was quickly dismissed. He was among a handful of GOP lawmakers who joined all Democrats in voting against the final tax and spending cuts bill.
