Quick Update from Kentucky

I’m in Kentucky for a week, so don’t expect any Berlin news this week. Just kidding, the Reporter has a stringer filling in, and I’m hoping to make some calls to continue on stories I started earlier.

I wanted to mention something I noticed on the drive down here: there are tons of old mining towns in West Virginia that look similar and worse than Berlin, except they have a four lane interstate running right through them. A number of people have said they think a highway would change Berlin, supposedly for the better; after driving past numerous downtowns that mirror Berlin I’m even less convinced. People on the highway, it seems, see these towns as way stations, not destinations. It takes more than an interstate to turn a community around. Berlin could build itself as a destination, but it isn’t the asphalt and four lanes that would do it.

Have a good week. I’ll probably check in again, but it will be from afar. It’s going to be 75 degrees and sunny all week. Nice.

5 thoughts on “Quick Update from Kentucky

  1. Berlin cannot become a “destination” with a loud biomass plant in its downtown. Eric, you seem to keep missing this important point. Probably because you are too busy slurping up the BS being spouted out by Danderson, Grenier & Rozek.

  2. Perhaps babbling Bob was caught in a weak moment, but Bob clearly stated he has his doubts about either biomass project moving forward at this council session. I would expect Bob to say that of Clean Power but not of Laidlaw. With both his contact with PSNH and tenacity for the Laidlaw project, such a sudden change in mood caught a few of us off guard. Perhaps the BS is starting to be limited to Grenier. Even Rozek is beginning to admit his preference wouldn’t be to have the boiler there…but it’s there so… “Discovery” in closed session and/or with attorney input can sometimes do wonders…

    1. Berliner —

      I didn’t miss that point, I’m just not convinced of it. Thanks for commenting.

      Jon —

      Councilor Danderson told me when I interviewed him for the council race that he doesn’t really agree with the concept of independent power producers, so such a comment doesn’t surprise me.

      Thanks for commenting.


  3. Eric,

    I know you cannot admit this because it would upset your good friends (Grenier, Rozek & Danderson) but doesn’t your gut tell you that having a biomass plant in the middle of the City won’t be real conducive to tourism development efforts? Open your mind for a minute and think of the possibilities of this City without heavy industry in the downtown area. Doesn’t that seem like a wonderful opportunity to you? I know you don’t have children but if you did and if you lived on the East side of Berlin would you want your child to grow up in the shadow of a biomass plant? Do you like recreating in the woods or do you enjoy hiking through miles of clear cuts? If you try hard enough, I think you might begin to realize that the City of Berlin (and Coos County for that matter) is much better off without Laidlaw than it will be with it.

    Now that I’m off my soap box I’d love to hear why you believe a biomass plant in downtown Berlin is such a great idea for this City. The Pros of the plant do not even come close to outweighing the Cons. There are only 2 benefits; 40 jobs and some added tax revenue. That is not enough for me to welcome Laidlaw to my community with open arms.

    What do you say my friend? Do you have an opinion or are you simply convinced that Grenier in his infinite wisdom knows what is best for the City and therefore we should all capitulate to this car salesman while he tries to sell us a lemon?

    1. Berliner —

      Thanks for your thoughtful comments.

      I see a bright future for Berlin with or without a biomass plant in the center of the city. Berlin’s future isn’t dependent on the success or failure of the Laidlaw proposal, or, for that matter, the Clean Power Development proposal. It is dependent on the city’s ability to diversify its economy after a century of relying on one industry. Today no single project can turn the city around, and no single project can bring it down.

      Would 40 jobs help? Yes. Would 100 logging and trucking jobs help? Yes. Would cleaning up the mill site and transforming it into a productive space provide benefits? Yes. Will it be the key that turns Berlin’s future around? No.

      Berlin’s future, in my mind, is a ship in mid-turn. Even if both biomass plants get built they won’t create as many jobs as the federal prison. A river-walk and cheap steam to the Cascade mill in two years won’t do as much to revitalize the city as the millions of dollars being spent to rehabilitate whole neighborhoods. The ATV park is one part of Berlin’s future, the college is another. Main Street retail shops and the state prison fill another niche. The future of Berlin is in the mix, not one industry, and that mix is still growing and developing. Someday soon Berlin may have a truly diverse economy, but the ship has to keep turning to make that happen.

      A biomass plant won’t jeopardize this new path. A redeveloped mill site won’t close the prison. It won’t close the ATV park. It won’t stop the educational opportunities at WMCC, and it won’t reverse the rehabilitation the city’s neighborhoods are undergoing.

      Are there legitimate concerns? Absolutely. If loggers strip the forest bare in order to feed the biomass plants it would threaten recreational tourism, a key portion of the city’s future. If either company is out to make a quick buck off Berlin instead of follow through on its commitment that would be a problem. But those concerns are not the same as to whether Berlin can survive with a biomass plant in its downtown.

      Berlin can survive no matter what. Berlin residents have seen hard times, and better times are on the horizon. The biomass plants, should they be built or should they fail, are simply a bump along Berlin’s journey. They are one more possibility, one possible slice of Berlin’s future economic base.

      The truth of it is I don’t exactly agree with either side. Mayor Grenier and Councilor Danderson seem to think this project will be Berlin’s savior. It won’t. But opponents seem to think it will be Berlin’s undoing. It won’t. It may or may not happen, and whether it does or not Berlin will have to continue to spread its economic tentacles for a sustainable future.

      I understand the argument of both, but I agree with neither. The project won’t save the city, but it also won’t end all possibilities for other development. I know it’s in the center of town, but what do the Main Street people always say? A city’s face is it’s Main Street. Energy might be better spent supporting growth there than fighting development elsewhere.

      Instead, energy has been squandered in this debate. People spend hours protesting this one project, while other projects, like Rumorz Boutique, fail. What if opponents of Laidlaw became vocal supports of Main Street? What would that do? What if supporters of Laidlaw became active opponents of slumlords? What would Berlin turn into then? I understand the ideological divide, but I lament the lost possibilities. Berlin will succeed or fail based on its overall economic diversity, which is far more encompassing than one project. A biomass plant on the mill site matters little in the long run.

      If the SEC does their job the project will either be well-run or will never get off the ground—either works fine for me. Berlin’s future is based on more than just this one project, and this one project doesn’t have the ability to end the city’s rise.

      Again, I do appreciate your comments and the thoughtful discussion.


Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s