" Some years ago, in the pre-Pleasant days, a young married couple (not sure of their names - maybe Ben and Tonya?) from Cornell Hotel School was brought in to manage the Inn for the college. Like some of the other managers of that period, the Inn was not very successful under their charge, and they did not last too long. Many months after they were out of Aurora, I had a chance encounter with them. They told me point blank that during the time they were in their jobs at the Inn, they were explicitly instructed by Wells College management, - I believe Ryerson herself - to discourage the local people from patronizing the Inn. I want to emphasize that Ben and Tonya told me this many months after they were gone from Aurora. In fact, the day after they told me this, they were on their way to Texas to start new jobs. I can not see why they would bother to make this up. So even at that time, Ryerson carried a disdainful attitude towards the people who live here. And then everyone wonders why the old Inn failed. That's why. That attitude endures even more strongly with Rowland running Wells today. I believe that the destruction of the town/gown relationship began with Ryerson. And I wonder why. Prior to her administration, I never had the sense that village and the college were adversaries. Far from it. I miss those happier times for our community. "

" Some years ago, in the pre-Pleasant days, a young married couple (not sure of their names - maybe Ben and Tonya?) from Cornell Hotel School was brought in to manage the Inn for the college. Like some of the other managers of that period, the Inn was not very successful under their charge, and they did not last too long. Many months after they were out of Aurora, I had a chance encounter with them. They told me point blank that during the time they were in their jobs at the Inn, they were explicitly instructed by Wells College management, - I believe Ryerson herself - to discourage the local people from patronizing the Inn. I want to emphasize that Ben and Tonya told me this many months after they were gone from Aurora. In fact, the day after they told me this, they were on their way to Texas to start new jobs. I can not see why they would bother to make this up. So even at that time, Ryerson carried a disdainful attitude towards the people who live here. And then everyone wonders why the old Inn failed. That's why. That attitude endures even more strongly with Rowland running Wells today. I believe that the destruction of the town/gown relationship began with Ryerson. And I wonder why. Prior to her administration, I never had the sense that village and the college were adversaries. Far from it. I miss those happier times for our community. "

" I would hope you are telling Bill also. It is one thing to say it here. But talk with him also. Face to Face Come on Aurora "

" Mr. Dugan would do well to look beyond his boastful view down Main Street and instead take a look 3 miles up Sherwood Rd to where he was born and raised -- and remember his roots are in this same "seedy" little area where his family members drank at the Fargo (maybe he did too) back before Pleasant made it all so lovely and perfect. "

" Guy opens his piece bragging about his second floor office bay window and its glorious view then gripes about Aurora being seedy -- do I detect a touch of money-based snobbism? Hmmmmmm. Then he goes on to complain about the traffic probelm (caused by Pleasant and her construction plus the extra tourists) then goes on to do a reverse on himself and say we just have to live with dangerous overloaded speeding garbage trucks from NYC. Where was he trying to go with this piece other than to insult people and meander back and forth with an inconsistent POV? "

" Dear Saddened, you wrote: "I look forward to watching Wells squander the millions from Pleasant." My reply: Don't blink or you'll miss it. Wells wastes more than that on useless, unnecesary, often counter-productive projects put forth by President Ryerson's money-grubbing consultant cronies all the time. It won't take long. "

" I can't begin to enumerate the number of items in Mr. Dugan's "thinkpiece" that are simply wrong, wrongheaded, or are foolish fabrications. It's insulting, to say the least, to say that Aurora was ever seedy... but what really brought my ire up was his claim that local trade can't support local businesses. This is quite simply a crock, and Mr. Dugan should know better. I've lived here all my life and know--as anyone with the slightest business acumen knows--why the Inn had failed a few years back; it failed because it was badly mismanaged and no longer bothered to try to please its customer base. THAT is what killed the Inn. That's what kills ANY business, Mr. Dugan. And Pleasant Rowland's badly misguided attempt to turn the Inn into a tourist destination is every bit as sure to fail. In fact, you sir, have it exactly backwards: for any business to succeed in Aurora it MUST take local customers into account *first and foremost.* Trying to build an economic base relying on *tourism* and tourist dollars in a place like Aurora--a tiny village with little or no amenities--is foolish and empty-headed to say the least. The nearest appreciably-sized cities are at least an hour to an hour and a half away. There's no reason, beyond some nice scenery and a phony-snooty meal at a phony-snooty Inn for anyone to *come* to Aurora. The people Mr. Dugan sees frequenting the village are not great enough in number to sustain it, and the truth of this is clearly borne out by the fact that not ONE of these re-made businesses (the Inn, Fargo, Pizzaurora, Dories, etc) has yet turned a profit; all are still deep in the red. Now it's all well and good to have tourists coming in... great, have that. But locals must come first in a place that offers only *limited* appeal to tourists. That's simple economic fact. And Aurora will learn it the hard way if it must---but it will learn it, one way or the other. "

" It is unclear why Mr. Dugan bothered to move into our little Village if it was so 'seedy' back then. Maybe he should have gone somewhere else. It is not too late for him to move. His house can add to the growing number of For Sale signs in the Village - more than I have ever seen. It is sad to lose neighbors but then we already lost our Village to greed. I look forward to wathcing Wells squander the millions from Pleasant. The businesses will be neglected and the villagers will be invited back, not shunned as we are now by the outside management. "

" I found it most interesting to read the annual giving edition of the Express and find my name there... I have not given a penny to Wells since they announced the co-ed decision in Oct '04. I find it extremely disingenuous of the administration that prior to The Decision, they could not justify the hiring of new professors, breaking ground on the new science building, making improvements to the Schwartz Center. Like men were going to be the cavalry come to the rescue **snort**. And has been pointed out, how is Wells now going to compete against hundreds of other small liberal arts colleges? Come to Pleasantville and live in a dollhouse? While I appreciate the thoughts behind what Pleasant did, she went way too far with remaking Aurora into her own image. The revitalization of Aurora should have been a partnership, not a one-woman show. And I, too, resent the characterization of Aurora as being "sad and seedy." "

" Aurora has never been "seedy". This piece is insulting, foolish, and wrong. Aurora has been a beautiful little town - a friendly, tight-knit community. The ugliness in Aurora started shortly after the arrival of Pleasant Rowland. Now it is neighbor vs neighbor, friendships are destroyed, you are either on one side or the other, and your standing in the community depends on who you support. The "gleaming" downtown we now have will never replace the warm glow that made this village special in the first place. The moral to this story? There are many. Try these : Money can't buy happiness. Beauty is only skin deep. If it sounds too good to be true, it probably is. Don't trust cows bearing "gifts". "

" Not only did Wells buy Lyon House and intentionally let it rot for three years, they bought it out from under Koeep, who was on the verge of buying it. So, who's the villian here as far as Koepp and her friends are concerned? Wells? Rowland? No! The Hollands. That doesn't make sense. Why is no one pointing the finger at Rowland in all this? The only thing seedy in Aurora are Rowland's values. "

" Get a grip -- Wells hasn't even broken even for the costs of adding male students -- loss of women who left (and others who won't come), loss of a niche market (and if they couldn't compete in the niche, how do they expect to compete against the huge pool of co-ed schools?), costs of re-doing physical spaces, costs of hiring new personnel, costs of re-writing just about every document the college ever put out, and most of all -- the enormous loss of revenue from disgusted alums -- alums who were the bread and butter which kept Wells going through years of mismanagement and not bothering (they have had ONE marketing campaign in the history of the school -- it was successful, but they didn't follow through -- so add "inept" to "mismanaged.") When Pleasant wanted work done on the buildings which her Foundation jointly owns with Wells, she would have the college pay -- because they can have the work done tax-free as a not-for-profit educational institution. Then Pleasant would give a "donation" to Wells in the same amount. That way she could write it off on her taxes and Wells could make it look like they were still getting lots of alumnae "donations" -- but they aren't. Pleasant's work on the jointly owned businesses just artificially inflate the numbers. They did the same thing with the controversial purchase of Lyon House -- the college was claiming it "had" to go co-ed for financial reasons -- and at the same time shelled out $185,000 for a house they have admitted repeatedly in public they have no use for? That's because Pleasant wanted it bought, had them buy it and gave a donation of the same amount to cover it. Don't believe me? Have your investigative reporters check it out. A recent purusal of the alumnae publication The Express shows that they are still listing alums as donors who have not only stopped giving, but who have also removed Wells from their wills. One well-to-do alumna I know has also encouraged her classmates to cease giving -- and many have followed her suggestion. So don't kid yourself into thinking that adding male students to Wells has done anything to "increase ... revenues coming into Wells." That's sheer bunk. There are also plenty of villagers who take deep offense at your statement that without Pleasant they were a seedy, sad little village. Without Pleaant, they were independent and free to choose their own destinies. Whatever they were, it was who they chose to be -- not the phoney dollhouse facade village forced on them by an arrogant outsider. Puh-leeeeze - why not move to Stepford, it's even more idyllic there.... "