Here is a fascinating article about how my hometown has redeveloped over the past few years. Here's a bit of it:
Following the meeting, DiBerardinis and [Department of Community and Economic Development Secretary Dennis] Yablonsky toured Ridgway and met with business owners and others in the tourism field. Yablonsky said that the governor has made it very clear that economic growth will not just be about Philadelphia and Pittsburgh, but will also help out the smaller communities throughout the state. Just under $10 million has been given to get programs started.
"We want to know what's working and what isn't working," he asked.
Steve Kronenwetter, owner of Wapiti Woods in Benezette, said that he hasn't had much [local] support in this business.
"I haven't had a visit from anyone. I have had a lot of help from the state and from my bank. I wouldn't have been able to survive my first year without the state and my bank."
Interesting. Over the years, it has occurred to many folks that very little happens anymore without at least some form of government support. Even restaurants. That is certainly an interesting development.
At the same time, things occasionally do happen on their own.
Business owners Dick Garrard and Lou Smith echoed the problems with getting local assistance. Garrard said he went to the Progress Fund for help in relocating his existing business. He needed $140,000 to complete the project. The interest they wanted was 8 3/4 percent and needed to be paid in 10 years.
"He wanted my life insurance policy and my house," Garrard said. "The mafia would do better. The state wouldn't give me a damn thing. This is where I am coming from."
"We were turned down at every single door we knocked on," Smith said. "We were going to build a 40-bed lodge and were will to put up half the money." They ended up with only 20 beds at Scottish Heights.
I am sure that was a frustrating experience. But 20 beds is nothing to sneeze at. Is it so bad to test the market with that first? And if it's successful move to 40 beds? Or 100? And is it such a terrible thing to expect private enterprises to provide more than half of the funding for projects meant to generate private profits?
I know most of the people mentioned in this essay. Good folks across the board. But it does appear to me that they are operating in a strange sort of universe. The "independent woodsman" was never quite as independent as rural communities have liked to imagine over the years. But there did appear to be at least some kind of value in maintaining a degree of skepticism about outside control.
Whether that was a broad truth, a useful fiction or a dangerous illusion, it does appear to be fading into the background as local communities get more and more sophisticated about attracting development dollars. And politicians find more creative ways to buy rural votes.
Is that a good thing or a bad thing?
Comments