Richard Underwood, founder of Richards Pizza, dies at 95
The 1947 Colerain High School graduate was a self-made businessman, said his daughter, Karen Underwood Kramer.
"He was always an entrepreneur," she said, adding that's how he paid his way at Miami University, which he left short of graduation after he joined the Naval Reserve during the Korean War.
After leaving the Navy, he opened Underwood Sales, selling used cars on Ohio 4. But it was curiosity that led him to open Richards Pizza in October 1955, said Kramer. He was always curious, and always asking questions.
Underwood built the Main Street location in the 1970s because the people wanted one on the city's west side, she said.
The kernel of the idea for Richards Pizza popped into Underwood's head in Miami, Fla. when he first tried pizza. Then he frequented a pizza restaurant in Cincinnati. Kramer said her dad befriended those selling produce to the restaurants, and learned the mechanics of making pizza.
Then he experimented until he was ready to open his restaurant on Dixie Highway (which closed in the late 1980s) on Oct. 24, 1955.
"He was always interested," she said about her dad. "It's something new, let's find out about it, let's analyze this. I want to know more about this pizza. How do you make this stuff?"
Hamilton Mayor Pat Moeller called Underwood "a restaurant and food icon" and will be missed.
"I remember the Main and D streets location and I worked at the current Main Street location when I was in college," the mayor said. "His Richards steak sandwich puts Hamilton on the 'destination location' map for great local, original food. When former Hamilton residents come back to visit Hamilton, many I know must get a Richards steak sandwich and pizza while they are in town."
It was at the Main and D streets location, where the 513 Bar now operates, the Richards steak sandwich was invented, Kramer said, and they still use the same recipe invented by Underwood.
In addition to opening an iconic Hamilton establishment, Underwood was also named Restauranteur of the Year in Ohio in the mid 1970s.
Kramer said celebration of life will be at Richards Pizza's Main Street location on April 27, "celebrating my dad in the building he built and in the restaurant he founded."
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
a day ago
- Yahoo
Ashton Bentley by Kramer Display Mounting Systems are Now Approved for Express Install for Microsoft Teams Rooms
TEL AVIV, Israel, July 16, 2025 /PRNewswire/ -- Bringing enhanced productivity and ease of use to small-to-medium collaboration spaces, Ashton Bentley Display Mounting Systems from Kramer are now approved by Microsoft for deployment of Express Install for Microsoft Teams Rooms. This approval ensures that Ashton Bentley products meet Microsoft's high standards for enabling fast meeting room completion. As a result, our channel partners can now bundle the display mounts with certified displays and Microsoft Teams Rooms hardware. Ashton Bentley also offers optional AB USB-C connectivity technology as well as meeting room tables for complete room solutions as required. "Requiring no specialist knowledge or tools, the Ashton Bentley range of flexible display mounting solutions enables quick and easy installation of Microsoft Teams Rooms," said Roger McArdell, chief technology director, Ashton Bentley "Working with the Microsoft team, Ashton Bentley has developed solutions to quickly and simply deploy Teams Rooms products." The Ashton Bentley range of flexible display mounting solutions (see embedded image) enables quick and easy installation of Teams Rooms to deliver a full experience for small and medium-sized meeting rooms. With no custom room modifications required, users can get new Teams Rooms up and running quickly, inexpensively and at scale. Ashton Bentley's solution is built on three building blocks that simplify AV system design and deployment to create an efficient and engaging environment for productive collaboration. This includes AV technology for room connectivity that facilitates easy connections between devices, the integration of Display Mounts that provide a secure, stylish yet simple way to deploy displays and AV-enabled collaboration tables that enhance the space's aesthetic while concealing the AV technology and reducing cable clutter. Express Install for Teams Rooms provides a streamlined installation option designed to deliver enhanced meeting experiences to small-to-medium-sized rooms. These systems can be installed by one person in as little as an hour. About Ashton Bentley by Kramer Ashton Bentley by Kramer is a global leader in integrated meeting room solutions, offering a flexible range of products that combine technology, functionality and design. Ashton Bentley provides components and complete meeting room systems that are simple to buy, install, use and maintain, thus removing the complexity normally associated with equipping meeting rooms with technology-integrated tables. Just "walk in and work." About Kramer Kramer audio-visual experiences power creativity, collaboration, and engagement. From AVSM to advanced cloud-based communication, collaboration and control solutions, Kramer creates audio-visual experiences that are more engaging, more inclusive, and more connected than ever before. Headquartered in the heart of Startup Nation - Tel Aviv, Israel with locations around the world, Kramer's audio-visual experts are designing the future of engagement technology. Physical and digital boundaries have blurred. But no matter how hybrid our world becomes, our desire for real, human connection will never cease. View original content to download multimedia: SOURCE Kramer Sign in to access your portfolio
Forbes
2 days ago
- Forbes
Trump, And Future Presidents, Will Battle The Fed Until It Reforms
Flags fly over the Federal Reserve Building in Washington, D.C. (Photo by) Getty Images President Trump's war against the Federal Reserve isn't unusual, historically. Until our central bank changes its ways, future presidents will also have their battles. It's no surprise that President Trump's intense fight with Fed boss Jerome Powell is generally portrayed as the short-sighted White House bully-battling the heroic head of a crucial, independent institution that's attempting to do what's right to stop inflation. If Trump takes Powell's scalp, most observers warn, terrible things will unfold because of the ballooning national debt. This narrative is wrong. Presidents going head to head with our central bank isn't that unusual. Presidents Reagan, Bush 41 and Clinton had occasional beefs with Fed bosses. It's unrealistic to think that commanders-in-chief wouldn't be sensitive to the Fed's slowing the economy. The Federal Reserve brings this on itself because of its long-time philosophy that prosperity causes inflation, and the cure for that is depressing economic activity. The real cure for monetary inflation is keeping the dollar's value steady, instead of letting it go up and down like a yo-yo. For a variety of reasons the best barometer for stability is the price of gold, and the second best is a broad index of commodities. When the price of gold fluctuates, it's not the real value of gold fluctuating, but the value of the dollar. When the Fed puts itself in the position of guiding the economy, it shouldn't be surprised when presidents get involved. The current spat between the White House and the Federal Reserve, rowdy though it may appear, is somewhat mild compared to fights in the past. During WWII, the Fed agreed to keep both short- and long-term interest rates low to help the government finance the war against Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. But the rate-fixing persisted after the conflict. When the Korean War got underway, the Fed said it was going to stop the fix because inflation would skyrocket. President Harry Truman and his Treasury Department vigorously fought the move. Truman felt it was high interest rates after WWI that had depressed the economy, thereby bankrupting his new haberdashery. The issue was personal. The fight got ugly. Finally, an agreement was reached. Fed independence was reaffirmed and interest rates were allowed to rise. However, the head of the Fed was, in effect, fired and a Treasury Department official put in his place. The expectation was that the official, William McChesney Martin, would continue the low-rate policy. Instead, Martin, who would serve as Fed chairman for 19 years, raised them. Years later when Martin ran into Truman, the former president hissed at him, 'Traitor!' In 1965 Martin got into an ugly battle with President Lyndon B. Johnson. Martin wanted to raise rates because he feared the inflationary effects of Johnson's massive domestic spending and the huge Vietnam War outlays. When Martin wouldn't bend, Johnson ordered him and others to his Texas ranch. Johnson, a large man, got so angry he took Martin by the lapels and threw him against the wall. Martin eventually caved. In the early 1970s, President Nixon, who had taken the U.S. off the gold standard and imposed nationwide price and wage controls, wanted Fed chair Arthur Burns to pursue an easy-money policy to help Nixon win reelection. To make Burns more compliant, Nixon aides planted untrue stories about Burns' wanting a big salary increase while other wages had been frozen. Burns caved and a hideous inflation ensued. In these cases, the Fed was right and the presidents were wrong. But this hasn't always been so. For instance, Reagan had a valid point regarding Paul Volcker's tight-money policy in the mid-1980s. And in his fight with the central bank, Trump is also right. The Fed is playing anti-Trump politics. Hopefully, the president and his team will start making the valid case that the Fed's operating philosophy is profoundly wrong. If keeping the dollar stable and trustworthy were to become the Fed's goal in the future, then it would no longer try to manipulate the economy—and presidents would no longer have a reason to fight it.
The Hill
6 days ago
- The Hill
The rescission package is a chance to get serious about cutting spending
Senate passage of the $9 billion rescissions package compiled by the Trump administration marks the first reduction in federal spending since the Tea Party era. Over a decade ago, fiscal conservatives led by my former boss, the late Sen. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.), forced the first year-to-year reduction ($150 billion) in federal spending since the end of the Korean War. Between fiscal years 2012 and 2013, Coburn and his colleagues added on an earmark moratorium that saved $140 billion over 10 years and an additional $725 billion in savings from consolidating duplicative programs through Government Accountability Office recommendations. That brought the tally to over $1 trillion. The Trump administration was right to aspire to eclipse that total and cut spending by more than $2 trillion, but it still has a long way to go. In fact, if the clock were to stop today, the Trump administration and Republican Party would have to defend expanding the administrative state by $75 billion. The recently passed budget reconciliation bill directs $45 billion to the Immigration and Customs Enforcement agency's detention budget and nearly $30 billion to ICE's enforcement and deportation operations over the next four years. The bill directs an additional $46.5 billion to border security infrastructure, which is more of a fixed cost than an agency expansion. Congress and the administration do deserve credit and praise for slowing the growth rate of Medicaid by $1 trillion over 10 years. But that win does not reverse the progressive left's quest to expand the administrative state. Supporters of spending more on immigration enforcement have a strong case that spending $75 billion to grow a federal agency will more than pay for itself over time. According to the Federation for American Immigration Reform, illegal immigration and 'open borders' costs American taxpayers $150.7 billion annually. Most of these costs (about $70 billion) are imposed on state and local communities through K-12 education expenses, while $22 billion goes to medical expenses. The Manhattan Institute estimated that the surge of 8.7 million illegal immigrants would cost $1.15 trillion over the lifetime of the new illegal immigrants. They conclude, 'Mass deportations would significantly reduce the national debt over the long run, but a policy of selective legalization, coupled with mass deportations, would be even more fiscally beneficial, reducing the debt by about $1.9 trillion.' The plan in the 'big, beautiful' bill is both well-intentioned and well-conceived, but no Congress can guarantee a future Congress or administration will ensure the plan is well executed. If history is any guide, these funds could become a permanent expansion of a bureaucracy rather than a prudent surge designed to address an emergency. The uncertainty about whether a plan could be spectacularly successful or wasteful underscores the urgent need for Congress to take serious steps to reduce our unsustainable debt and deficits. The Senate rescissions package only saves $9 billion, leaving Trump's second-term administrative state expansion at around $65 billion. Even that modest package faced serious headwinds in the Senate. Some Republican senators balked at proposed cuts to the Corporation for Public Broadcasting. Others are expressed concerns about cuts to life-saving humanitarian assistance. In moments like this, I am often asked, 'What would Coburn do?' I suspect his colleagues who served with him, who will determine the fate of this package in the House, were asking the same question. Coburn was an unapologetic supporter of the President's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief or PEPFAR. He said the program is 'not an earmark; it is a policy that's proven, that's worked.' But Coburn was also not afraid of insisting that funds go to those who had contracted HIV instead of those wanting to help people with HIV. In 2008, he was vilified for placing a hold on PEPFAR reauthorization until he could be assured that 55 percent of PEPFAR funds be spent on treatment rather than overhead. But that distinction was critical. I suspect Coburn would remind his colleagues that the 'E' in PEPFAR stands for 'emergency.' The program was never meant to be an open-ended entitlement to be funded in perpetuity. Today, he would be working with his colleagues to continue life-saving humanitarian assistance that advances American national interests, while eliminating spending that advances faddish ideological agendas and bloated bureaucracy. All sides should agree that our foreign aid process, which has funded fraud and terrorism, needs a dramatical overhaul. The administration has said that if Congress passes this rescissions package it will send more. This a chance for Congress to assure taxpayers that instead of expanding federal agencies, they want to expand Americans' personal agency and their ability to pursue happiness on their terms, with their own resources and talents. Some progress toward that goal would be better than no progress.
