Beware of Boosters

Troubled Telluride hotel development serves as a reminder that there is no such thing as a "can't lose" proposition

By Curmudgeon

This from today's New York Times. A major Telluride ski resort development is in trouble... yet again. [Wasn't Telluride offered up as an example of how gondolas are a can't lose proposition for building ski resort business?].

Now, that noted, I'm not saying that because this monster development at Telluride has failed repeatedly that the proposed Malan's basin mini-resort must fail as well. The point I want to make is that there are, in such matters, no sure things. There are no "can't lose" propositions. And what Ogden city ought to be doing, when it's asked to participate in something the golf course/gondola/Malan's Basin project, to devote public assets to supporting such, is to take a long, hard look at the evidence, and to decide if city involvement is or would be a prudent risk for the city government to take with public property and resources. And there is always risk. And when three separate projects -- golf course real estate development, gondola/gondola systems, Malan's ski resort --- must succeed for it all to work out, the risks are multiplied significantly.

What I guess it all boils down to is: "Beware of boosters." When a Mayor and his pet Chamber of Commerce and crony developers are screaming "this can't lose!" and "Ogden will be the new Aspen if you just give us what we want" and that those who refuse to meekly roll over are "against progress" or "idiots" --- recall Lift Ogden's Mr. Ed Allen saying at Mr. Peterson's first gondola/resort "panel show" at WSU when Allen realized people were asking questions and looking skeptical about the practicality of the plans, "they're all idiots up here" --- well, when all that starts to gear up and the bandwagon begins to roll and the Chamber's tub-thumpers begin thumping tubs, the smart thing to do is get a tight hold on the city's wallet, and start asking hard questions, and demanding that assertions be backed with fact, illustration and example [aka evidence] so that a reasonable judgment about the risk involved can be made, and the city can then make a reasoned judgment about whether committing city resources would be a prudent thing to do. I suspect the original investors in the Telluride white elephant, and subsequent ones, were all promised "this can't lose." But it did. Even with a gondola....