Key decisions for small towns

Matt Pearl

I’ve begun to wonder if people in my generation — and I’m on the tail end of the group known as Generation X —possess some sort of false nostalgia: I wonder if we have a longing for the good ol’ days of our parents and grandparents, days in which we never lived.

The golden times of small-town life, the bustle of the downtown filled with folks on a Saturday night: I love the sight of it in my mind’s eye.

But it is a scene I have never witnessed, a view that I possess thanks to the written descriptions of the past and the eyewitness reports of the generations preceding me.

Just once, I want to go back. I want to see one of our little towns on a summer night, the way things looked in 1947, or even 1965 would do. It’s a longing I have that is not based upon memory, for I have recollections dating back most of the nearly 38 years of my life, and they basically match the scene today.

Can we get it back?

That’s the question that remains in our minds. Is the phenomenon that has emptied small-town businesses and wrought havoc on the brick buildings of yesteryear merely a long-term recession, or is it erosion?

When we look at history, urban and rural population dynamics follow a sort of natural curve.

Our nation’s original identity was exclusively rural, and then the great cities of the East grew from modest settlements by the Europeans.

The Native Americans, incidentally, had lived well for countless generations never having urbanized to any extent — perhaps they knew something we have yet to learn.

Western European-descended settlers moved across the American landscape, establishing rural settlements, a few of which gave rise to great cities as well. But the American West has always presented rural living opportunities for those who choose not to seek the cities.

What is next for us?

History seems to assert that our towns will either grow and urbanize, or may die out entirely. And this is a phenomenon that truly saddens me.

For years, I have wondered about the ability of our little towns to maintain their current sizes and commercial offerings.

I could live with the notion of King City; for example, not growing significantly over the next 25 years if I knew that in the same time span, the town could retain is population around 1,000.

With 1,00 people, a town can keep its grocery store, its school, its gas stations, its banks, and the bulk of its business services. We have seen this to be true, and indeed, in some aspect, we have seen some growth.

When folks are deciding where they want to live —particularly young folks who are bringing up families and buying property — things like restaurants and retail offerings play a part as well.

I wish that in the remainder of this column I had an answer to give to you, a solution that would maintain or grow our small towns.

The entire issue boils down to people: if they want to be here badly enough, they’ll find a way.

Perhaps the greater responsibility for those of us who remain is to continue promoting good opportunities for the people who do want to live here.

I am ill-trained and ill-equipped to help industries or real estate opportunities spring out of the earth — my business is reporting and, in this small forum each week, offering editorial remarks upon subjects pertinent to my readers and their lives.

But we have some important decisions to make in the years to come, and, to some extent, some waiting to do.

None of us can say for sure what effect the next few decades will have on rural America, but our complacency will do little to help the cause.