This is all true. This is a college town with a highly transient population of people who leave as the semesters come and go. The main corridor of the town struggles to maintain businesses because of the transient student population. The economic boom and bust as the semester starts and ends really destroys a lot of businesses. In my time in this town, I've seen at least a dozen businesses open and close in the main corridor as a result of this.

These same NIMBYs, who are trying to maintain the "character" of the town, are also using that same argument in regards to low-income housing. They do not want low-income housing in the town because that will ruin the "character" of the town. However, the town needs low-income housing so that it has a population of stable workers in order to maintain and shop the businesses on the off-season.

Because of the University, most of the town is very liberal, but it also means that the conservative element in the town is very vocal. I am regularly engaged with struggle sessions with these chuds on our local Facebook page, which, until I decided to get on there they had gone unchallenged.

They had similar complaints about the "historic district" which is really just a series of hundred-year-old homes on a main corridor, a state road, even. When they needed to expand the road to accommodate bus traffic for a new school that was built, which is also something that they vehemently opposed.

These reactionary elements in the town drive me up a fucking wall. So this is just me kind of releasing the valve.

In this case, preserving the character of the town really just means preserving its rural and impoverished elements for the sake of its farm town aesthetic while constantly complaining about the lack of businesses down the main corridor or the fact that there's nothing to do here.