Regional Op-Ed | Jim Hurley: The Glitter of Growth?

Published on Mar 3, 2008 - 7:55:55 AM

By: Jim Hurley, Nevada City

The Meeting:

The room was packed. Not just the usual riffraff, but luminaries of every hue and sheen. You couldn't swing a dead cat without hitting an elected official. They came from Truckee, Nevada City, Grass Valley and the County Board of Supervisors. It was one of the periodic joint meetings held in order to coordinate county and city business. Usually these meetings attract crowds numbering in the tens. This one boasted an audience numbering in the hundreds.

We all came to hear if we got our money's worth ($50,000) from the San Francisco consulting firm of Seifel Inc. Not surprisingly, we learned that Nevada County should look more like San Francisco. We need to shift the area away from tourism, we were told, and "expand the capacity of Nevada County to engage in business attraction," in the areas of construction, financing, health care services and information services to the tune of $300,000. "Whew," some of us were saying, not only is that a lot of money to be spending when money is in short supply, but we haven't agreed that it is a good idea to begin with.

Sustainable Growth--Oxymoron?

It seemed that we were skipping a step: What is the ultimate objective and is it worth it? As presented by Supervisor Owens at the meeting, the objective was not just growth but "sustainable growth," a phrase beloved of economists.

Now I'm not an economist. I'm a retired physics professor, and from that perspective, "sustainable growth" is an oxymoron, if for no other reason than you will eventually run out of molecules. Of course, long before that, a community planner will tell you that sooner or later you will use up the local quality of life necessary to sustain that growth. And biological scientists, who know a thing or two about growth, will tell you that growth, for the sake of growth, is the ideology of the cancer cell.

Growth not for everyone:

Not everyone at the workshop foresaw the inevitability of relentless growth. Mayor Sally Harris of Nevada City, for example, spoke of the topographical constraints in Nevada City and so they must jealously husband their limited space to make the best possible use of the opportunities available to them. And in an interview, Mayor Mark Johnson of Grass Valley emphasized the need to preserve Grass Valley's traditions in all future growth plans, and that tourism and quality-of-life issues should be the top draw for economic development. "I think the (report) minimized that approach," Johnson said.

Given the lay of the land in Nevada County, and the fast-approaching build-out population, we might all look more carefully on how we continue to fill the county. For example, consider the 400 new jobs promised if the Idaho-Maryland mine is reopened. Is that a good investment for us, 400 jobs? We are promised that 200 of those jobs will be local and the rest will come from outside the county. A bit misleading. If 200 jobs are filled from within the county, where do those jobs come from? This is a zero-sum game. If someone quits their job clerking at the local Safeway to take a job with the mine, who is to fill the abandoned Safeway job? Ours is a mobile society. If 200 local jobs are abandoned, 200 new job seekers will move to the county to fill them. So, do we want to invite 400 families from the valley to come up to Nevada County to fill the new job openings? Maybe it would be better to expend our energy in fostering the quality of life of those already here.

The Glitter of Growth:

There is a seductive nature to the promise of growth. More opportunities for all, more tax dollars for cities and county. That chafing sound you here is city and county administrators rubbing their hands together over the prospect of new tax dollars. Who would argue with more money for services and infrastructure?

No matter where you look throughout California you find the consequences of growth. There is nothing sinister about it. It is capitalism at its finest. It is a natural economic force. It feeds on itself; the more growth, the more need for growth. And the need to control local government is as much a part of its business plan as cash flow. It is not happenstance that ours is a 5/0 Board of Supervisors. It is that board that is responsible for the Seifel report. They lament that the County grew by only 534 people last year. But the same report revealed that crime diminished during the same time period. (Moral: If they don't come, we won't mug them.)

The following statement from an op-ed is way over the top, but it illustrates the overpowering nature of the growth addiction: "Sixty-five percent of the economy is construction - so do you want a depression like that in 1932 or not? I lived during the Depression days. The National Recover Act and Works Progress Administration were all governmental construction projects to get the economy going again and took seven to 10 years to get rolling. I don't want my great-grandchildren to go through that again. We fought World War II and won for a great free America. Let's get at it right." Say what? We fought WW II to keep America safe for the construction industry?

The Collateral Damage:

But if you are one of those who came to Nevada County for its small town-rural nature, the glitter of growth is a fatal attraction. No matter where you look throughout California you find the results of the growth industry. The problem with looking to growth as the never-ending solution to current problems is that that approach recognizes only financial capital and fails to recognize the value of social capital. In his book Bowling Alone, Professor Robert Putnam has meticulously examined every imaginable gauge to measure the history of social interaction, both in this country and abroad. The title, Bowling Alone, refers not to individuals bowling alone but the decline in league bowling and the rise of informal groups (friends, family, workmates, etc.) bowling together. Bowling alone is a metaphor, and a specific instance, of the recent decline in what he, and other social and political scientists, refer to as "social capital," which is defined as, "the collective value of all 'social networks' and the inclinations that arise from these networks to do things for each other."

If we lose that social capital, who is to fight for those who prefer the elemental pleasures that come from a strong sense of community, a place which inspired a local Nevada Union student to speak of our social network: "I enjoy living in a safe, friendly community where most people know and look after each other. I wouldn't trade my experience growing up in this small community for anything."

"The [solution], dear Brutus, is not in our stars, but in ourselves:"

In the past, advocates on the limited growth side of the political spectrum have been accused of having a "drawbridge mentality." But we all face drawbridges in our lives. Take your family for example. You don't plan to sustain growth in the size of your family. You set a goal, an optimal family size compatible with your income and aspirations.

Nevada County is a family of peoples. Let us set a goal that will allow us to maximize our quality of life within that community. That doesn't mean we have to abandon economic growth. Peter Van Zant, in his thoughtful review of the Seifel report, cited the Public Policy Institute of California:

The majority of job growth comes from within:

- More than 62% of California job growth from 1993 through 2002 came from newly formed firms within the State.

- Another 37% of job growth came from expansion of existing firms.

- Less than 1% of job gains came from business moving in.

Peter went on to point out that "Self employment (entrepreneurship) is out-pacing the growth of wage employment in California." And, more broadly speaking, "Entrepreneurs and their small enterprises are responsible for almost all the economic growth in the United States," said Ronald Reagan.

As these entrepreneurs grow, so will their need for a workforce. That means more local jobs and, again this is a zero sum game, those jobs will result in a population growth. We should welcome this growth. Come and do as we have done. Find an existing parcel or home and build a life in this rural-small town community. We accept you gladly, but we ask you to come more deliberately through a turnstile than flock across a drawbridge. Do not come here as a land speculator and expect to make a killing at the expense of our quality of life.

If times were really desperate, we might be inclined to take desperate measures. But how bad is it? "It's a lean year, but we won't have to tap into our reserves," said Rick Haffey, the County Executive Officer. And property tax revenue is even increasing, albeit more slowly. So we are a long way from desperate.

(An item in a recent Sunday New York Times caught my attention and may help to explain why things are not quite so bad here in our demographically challenged county. Many have warned of the dangers of a large aging population. "We already are among the state's oldest counties," mourned a recent editorial. In the New York Times article, headlined "Once Immune, Utah Is Feeling Economic Dip," the reporter explains that the prior source of growth in Utah "in the types of jobs that grew, especially construction and manufacturing," were due to the high birth rate-Utah is the youngest state in the nation. But that economy built on growth has now gone sour. On the other hand things are not quite so bad in other areas. "Retirees," the reporter went on, "who have flocked to places like Montana and Idaho [and Nevada County] are likely to have [pension,] interest and investment income to spend no matter what happens, while wage earners, who dominate Utah's economy could suffer a downturn." Makes me proud to be among the elders of our society. I regret that I have but one senior-life to give to my County in its time of need.)

When the going gets tough, the tough go shopping? If we must shop let us shop locally. Rather than shifting away from tourism and "expand our capacity to attract outside industry," let us look within ourselves and try to do better with the entrepreneurial spirit we already have in place. And why would we disparage tourism. The tourist is the anti-burglar. He comes to us, thrusts his money upon us, and stealthfully slips back from whence he came. He requires neither services nor is he a burden to our infrastructure, the perfect guest. My name is Jim Hurley, and I approve of these tourists.

In the upcoming election for local candidates, ask them this question: What is your ambition for growth for your constituency? Do you favor building on our local small town-rural nature, or do you prefer economic growth through actively soliciting growth? And, if you favor supporting local entrepreneurship, how would you foster that support?

In the interest of fostering civil and issue-oriented discourse, YubaNet does not publish reader comments identified by anonymous Internet "handles" (fake user ID names like "farfromthinkin"). Your full and real name will be published with your comment. Your email address will not be shown, unless you specifically "uncheck" the box 'Hide my email.' By submitting a comment you consent to our rules.