To The Editor:
Since when did the clouds of dust and the crash of demolition on Dillon’s Main Street come to symbolize what was once this city’s proudly displayed slogan, “Quietly Progressive”? That slogan was displayed on billboards prominently erected on Interstate 95 and on major entrances into the city. In time, that same slogan obviously raised enough controversy that these billboards were removed. I think that most of us were simply puzzled by the slogan’s obvious contradiction in terms; as time passed, we decided that “quietly progressive” was a cover up for little, if any, progress at all! The current events on Main Street have raised many questions and concerns in the minds of Dillon’s citizens. The decision by City Council to summarily destroy a section within The Historic District is intolerable for many of us.
Several weeks ago, I read in The Dillon Herald that a representative of Dillon’s Board of Architectural Review (B. A. R.) had appeared before the Dillon City Council and had voiced an earnest plea to save the Dilmar Buildings. I telephoned this B. A. R. representative to thank her for defending the preservation of these buildings, but she regretfully told me she had learned that nothing could be done and that the buildings would be torn down. It then seemed clear to me that City Council had arbitrarily made a decision to change the face of downtown Dillon. Just thinking about all of this really upsets me.
I drove into Dillon early last week and saw the clouds of yellow dust and witnessed the blatant destruction of the first of the three condemned buildings (“M and M Beauty Supplies”). I realized that it was the ONLY one of the three buildings still occupied and that has for many years housed a thriving locally-owned business founded and operated by the McTeer family. The textbook irony of this situation literally hit me between the eyes, and I became more bound and determined to express my concerns in a Letter to the Editor of The Dillon Herald.
Since then, I have read the March 15, 2012 edition of The Dillon Herald with the front page article reporting Allen Watts’ appearance before the Dillon City Council, and I was very grateful to him and was highly impressed with his generous offer to do whatever he could to repair and preserve the Dilmar Buildings, thereby protecting a major segment of the historic center of our city. It was disheartening to learn from the Herald’s account that Mr. Watts’ address to Council was practically dismissed and his words, as those from the B. A. R. representative, had fallen on deaf ears.
What is happening in downtown Florence right now should serve as a case study for the City of Dillon. There are some solutions to the urban problem of a dying Main Street that warrant our City Council’s attention. A basic, respectable solution would be to build up, not tear down. However, the former solution requires more time, more thoughtful and focused planning, and more sweat than the latter. That might be where our city’s problem lies. Tearing down has become the simpler and easier solution. Revitalizing our Main Street requires that those in responsible positions have to take charge and secure our city’s future. If Dillon is dying, then someone or some persons have allowed it to happen; they have “pulled the plug”!
On Tuesday, March 13, the Greater Florence Chamber of Commerce held its annual luncheon, and the guest speaker was Knox White, Mayor of Greenville, S. C. Mayor White spoke about the revitalization of Greenville’s downtown and gave advice on how Florence might do the same. In his address to the Chamber, Mayor White made the following statements: “The downtown is important. Like it or not it is the face of a community and you can’t lose sight of that. When you put things back into downtown and you make things finally work right and you have successes and you build on those successes and then people look at it and say we’re proud of this.” Dillon’s City Council would do well to heed Mayor White’s advice. Dillon City Council would also do well to listen to Dillon County citizens.
In the Herald’s report of Mr. Watts appearing before Council, I felt that Mr. Watts was not shown the respect due a citizen. In fact, I could detect some cynicism and sarcasm in Council’s responses to his questions and concerns. For instance, Mayor Davis felt himself qualified to question Mr. Watts’ evaluation of the buildings’ conditions and, for support, made reference to an unsubstantiated “detailed analysis” that could not be produced for “no one could say who did it or where it came from.” Further in the article, Mayor Davis was also reported to have said, “…he could canvass the community, and it would be 50-50 as to whether to tear it (the building) down.” The glaring problem with that is the Mayor or no one else even thought about canvassing the community in the first place. Did the protest demonstration on Friday, March 16 make the Mayor and Council aware that there are citizens who have hopes and dreams for this city and
would relish the opportunity to express themselves in an open forum? Had I known about the protest, I would have been there, too.
Finally, Councilman Wallace “instructed” Mr. Watts “to keep an eye on council and catch them earlier the next time.” In other words, Wallace told Watts that he came to them too late for any of it to matter. I called The Dillon Herald and asked if Dillon City Council published its agenda in the newspaper as Latta City Council does regularly. I cannot remember having seen their agenda, and apparently neither has Mr. Watts. In response to my question about an announced agenda, I was told that Dillon City Council did not publish its agenda in the Herald but instead posted it on the newspaper’s website—at the last minute. That is not acceptable. That is a real problem. Until that changes, Councilman Wallace’s advice to Mr. Watts was worth absolutely nothing.
Do I think that the Dillon City Council should have given local developer Allen Watts a chance to restore the Dilmar Buildings? Of course! I know of at least one other person who met with Council several years ago and attempted to suggest his ideas for restoring those properties. Council was not encouraging, showing no interest or support. Do I think that Council should have given the Dilmar Buildings a chance? Do I think that the citizens should be given a chance to speak out and express their dreams? The answer to these questions has become so very obvious, so clearly seen through the dust of destruction and “quiet progress”!
For more reasons than one, Tuesday, March 13 was “a terrible, terrible day of Dillon.”
Gerald M. Berry
Dillon, SC