August 7, 2006

KUFM / KGPR

T. M. Power

Analyzing the Economic Impact of the Proposed Bitterroot Resort

The proposed Bitterroot Resort on Lolo Peak outside of Missoula is seeking permission to use thousands of acres of public lands so that it can extend the resort to the top of Lolo peak and be able to brag that it has the largest vertical drop of any ski area in North America.

Unfortunately for the developers, the current management rules for the land it would like to incorporate into its four-season resort seek to protect the natural characteristics of the area and, therefore, prohibit such commercial, mechanized developments. Even worse, Lolo Peak, towering over Missoula, has become a symbol of the wild public lands that surround and help define the city. Many residents, both those who now engage in dispersed, non-motorized recreation in the Lolo Peak area and those who simply want to be able to admire the Peak as a symbol of nearby wilderness have been vociferous in their objections to the commitment of this highly visible natural totem to a private, for-profit, venture. The result has been public comments that have run overwhelmingly against the proposed Resort’s use of those public lands.

The resort developers and their political supporters, afraid that the US Forest Service would be swayed by the overwhelming objections currently on the record, have twisted some arms and gotten the decision delayed so that the Resort has more time to convince the public that such a private use of public lands is a good idea. The Resort hopes to do that by publishing an “economic impact” study that will document the broad public benefits to be derived from handing over the Lolo Peak area to the Resort.

There is no doubt that any economic analysis would show that the resort will lead to the creation of hundreds of new jobs. After all, 2,200 homes and condominiums would be built along with a commercial village of upscale shops, a golf course or two, and several restaurants. There would be the impact associated with that construction and then the impact of servicing all of these facilities after they were operational.

But the resort would be dropped into an area of Western Montana that has had no shortage of jobs. Not only is unemployment low, but the Bitterroot Valley has been one of the fastest growing areas in the West, chugging along at 3 to 4 percent per year for almost forty years. In that setting one might wonder how appealing jacking up the growth rate even higher will be to local residents.

The Resort developers warn residents that they cannot take the vitality of the local economy for granted. The growth the local economy, they suggest, has to be continuously supported by public policies that create new job opportunities, just as the proposed Resort does. Actually, many residents may well share that negative view of the local economy. There always seems to be a considerable amount of economic anxiety no matter how much local growth is taking place. The resort developers hope to exploit that fear of the future.

For many residents there is clearly reason for concern. Despite the growth, wages are low. Many of the new jobs that have been created over the last several decades offer few or no benefits and are part-time or seasonal. The cost of housing has been skyrocketing, stressing family budgets, and forcing many to move further and further from town.

The irony, of course, is that the proposed Resort can only make those problems worse. Resorts are notorious for the large numbers of low-paid, part-time, and seasonal jobs they create: bed makers, toilet cleaners, pot washers, servers in restaurants and bars, fast-food cooks, retail clerks, grounds keepers, etc. In addition, destination resorts are also notorious for driving up the cost of housing as the demand for second homes sky-rockets. That forces the low-wage workforce to live at a distance and commute. In Colorado and other Western resort communities, it has also led to the importation of alien workers, some legal, some not.

Western Montana has had plenty of experience with rapid job creation. We have been experiencing that for over thirty years. We know what it has brought: not higher wages or an improved standard of living but simply a larger number of low-paid jobs, a higher cost of living, greater levels of congestion, and an overall degradation of the quality of life.

This is not an attack on economic development and the changes that have been taking place in our communities and economies. It is simply an appeal to abandon once and for all the belief that pure physical and financial growth brings with it an overall improvement in local economic well being. For a few, those who, like the Resort developers, own fixed assets whose value inflates with growth, that may be true. For the majority, more of the same is not an improvement.

This is also not an attack on the proposed Bitterroot Resort. The 3,000 acres of private lands in the Bitterroot Valley and the Lolo Peak foothills owned by the Resort will be developed for residential and recreational purposes. The bone of contention is whether thousands of acres of protected public lands that are currently providing valuable natural services to the residents of the greater Missoula area should be handed over to the Resort to boost the value of those private lands.

Offering hundreds or, even, thousands of low-paid jobs, the in-migration of a large unskilled workforce, higher levels of congestion, and even greater upward pressure on the local cost of living is no compensation for what the community will lose if this transaction is approved.