Opinion: It’s a Wonderful Life — Chestnut Hill Adapts

Who hasn’t seen Frank Capra’s 1946 classic drama of life in Bedford Falls at Christmastime, when one local man questions the value of his life an gets a “vision” of how the town would have been without him.  Filmed immediately after the war this morality play is just dripping in only slightly veiled social commentary, economic revision, all wrapped up in character-laden Main Street USA. 

The cast of characters, major and minor, all come through recognizing the value of dedicated individualism over controlling  money and power in the person of “Mr. Potter”, who we are led to believe owns and controls property and outcomes from his dark office where he plots and plans and opportunism reigns supreme.

Challenged by younger brash new idealism he pounces on an error to erase even that competition and turn the tide away from the reforms and broader equal opportunity of the new day.

Chestnut Hill might just have been the closest thing to Beford Falls within this city, where it had its own tight-knit home town like community association that until the last few years was as democratic and inclusive as one might find anywhere. Sure, there are plenty of folks of substance in the Hill, but no one of them ran everything, and under the terms of one of the most professional sets of by-laws one might image, the community board was quite inclusive in both design and function - - so much so that city officials often said it was a model that other communities might follow for allowing citizen participation with an even-handed approach.

But things have changed. That democratic and influential organization and its separate but parallel business association, parking foundation no longer exist as self-regulating little democracies with the parallel purpose being the general betterment of Chestnut Hill. Now they are controlled by the influence and direction of Chestnut Hill’s own “Mr. Potter” who has somehow been able to convince the majority of citizens to accept his “vision” without question and leave behind that participating democracy that sometimes slowed the process (but by intent) of development.

Strangely, the track record of the new King of the Hill is less than stellar. It seems the nature of development priorities and respect for the community has bounced from floor to ceiling in a very short period of time. Economic reversals that are not part of the larger business cycle may be of his doing, but folks seem to have very short memories and walk around with blinders on.  I was told just the other evening at a holiday event that those with the most money always run the town the way they want, but I challenge that it should be made that easy.

It is well known that you can buy Philadelphia politicians fairly easily but not always. Many city council persons and other city and state officials have served time and a few of them are doing that presently.

I would conclude that desperation on the part of both businesses and residents brought about a willingness to return to 19th Century thinking and practice. No doubt some clever local politics, internal appointments, selected employment, and questionable voting practices in the associations changed how the local boards have done their oversight.

So Chestnut Hill moves away from that “Greene County Towne” that the activist community types of the 1950s created to prevent it from becoming just another marginal city business strip with narrow ownership.  The mega-complex that is coming will likely be a major step in a different direction.  The gamble, as in “It’s a Wonderful Life” is that Chestnut Hill’s Mr. Potter won’t use the newfound power to eliminate any such thing as competition and oversight. 

Jim Foster

Editor