By Jon McCabe
Journalist Ezra Klein interviewed Senator Brian Schatz (D-HI) recently about the negative impact of NIMBYism (Not-in-My-Back-Yardism) on support for local public goods and services like housing, schools, and yes, libraries. Schatz focused on how NIMBYism in his home state (and nationwide) has exacerbated the shortage of affordable housing to a crisis point. But he warned that NIMBYism shows a troubling pattern affecting public goods in general: a small number of single-minded obstructionists with knowledge of local and state policy processes can game the system to slow-walk and ultimately kill efforts to upgrade vital community services.
I thought of Schatz’s critique as I tuned in to the August 28 Amherst Historical Commission meeting about the Jones Library Board’s plan to reduce project costs inflated by years of NIMBY-driven approval delays. Our usual half-dozen NIMBYs were there in full voice. Their arguments were predictable, but worthy of critique. Here are a couple of examples (other comments were similar).
A retired lawyer, with a decades-long record of obstructing town projects, misconstrued historic preservation grant guidelines as if they are somehow legal project requirements (they are not), and then called upon our Historic Preservation Commission to “show courage” by rejecting key elements of the Library Board’s cost-savings proposals as somehow illegal. This kind of lawyerly sophistry may be part of the trade, but that doesn’t make it any less disingenuous.
We then heard from a retired doctor, with a similar record of obstructionism, that the Library Board was trying to “cram” the project “down the town’s throat.” In reality, 65% of the town voted to support the library project via the referendum process, and by re-electing library trustees and town councilors who support moving Amherst forward by investing in public services. The legitimate issue now is how we can follow through with the plan in the face of inflated construction costs, due largely to relentless NIMBY delay tactics. Let’s not forget that both the library and elementary school projects would be completed by now for millions less, had these same people not stood in the way for the last decade.
What bothers me most about all this political dysfunction are the broader implications. Our experience in Amherst is all too common across the country. At the national and local levels we see political actors (elected and/or self-selected) attempting to undercut democratic processes. In a functioning liberal democracy, the assumption has to be that when your side loses an election or a policy vote, you concede defeat and regroup for the next go-round. This is the hallmark of open and peaceful democratic culture.
Instead, we’ve seen electoral minorities actively undermine elections and policy-making processes rather than accede to the popular majority. (“Electoral minorities” here means voters who lost an election or policy referendum because their cause did not garner enough votes to win, not because they are members of constitutionally protected racial, ethnic or religious minority groups.) Increasingly, people with unpopular political agendas reject electoral defeat and refuse to accept democratic outcomes as if this kind of anti-democratic willfulness somehow shares moral equivalency with our long national struggle to protect individual civil rights. The damage such bad-faith actions cause to basic democratic processes (and to the legacy of actual civil rights activism) should not go unchallenged.
Nationally, we face the prospect of a MAGA minority that may try to overturn the 2024 presidential election (if they lose) as they attempted on January 6, 2020. We can also expect more McConnell-style obstruction by Republicans in Congress via norm- and rule-breaking if Kamala Harris wins in November. Locally, our NIMBY bloc routinely seeks to tie town policy processes in knots regardless of failure to win public favor for their position.
When one of our most strident NIMBY activists in Amherst was asked why he’s blocking the library project despite its overwhelming electoral support, he responded: “I just know this project is wrong for our town.” Of course, we all have our convictions, but we should be honest with ourselves about the danger extremism poses to basic democratic norms–whether the issue is electing the next president or creating a better library.
Jon McCabe is a retired professor, long-time Amherst resident and former Jones Library trustee.
THE AMHERST CURRENT 
One of the problems with this issue and other town issues is they never reach a conclusion. Which helps the NIMBYs and fatigues everyone else. Consider the food waste recycling issue aka “Waste Hauler Reform”. Food waste composting is common place in many parts of New York State but yet in Amherst it has dragged on and on for years. Our Fire Station and DPW Facility are horribly overdue for reconstruction with not even an active planning committee for these projects! Hadley in the last 10 years has completed their Public Safety Building, a new library, a new senior center and they are well engaged on a new DPW Center. And to this comparison I am sure many will scoff and say that they are a smaller town. But do we really believe that? As Robert Moses said “once I build it you can’t tear it down”. But the Library issue has taken far too long while other town building needs are totally ignored. And do Amherst taxpayers have a full picture of what all of these capital projects will do to their tax rate? The new school library, DPW and Fire projects are well over $150M. I fully support the Fire and DPW facilities but the tax impact for all of these projects deserve illumination to see how residents feel and if cheaper options can be found. But for now – what is being done? Yes, the Library won a referendum but that was a long time and if taxpayers knew the full tax impact of these projects one wonders what they would say. How many more years can this go on?
LikeLike
Hi Terry,
Thanks for commenting. Regarding your question about the tax impact of the 4 projects, the capital plan includes only the one tax increase that voters approved last year to pay for the elementary school building project. There are no plans for additional tax increases to cover the other 3 projects.
The funding plan for the 4 projects was developed years ago and has been updated and presented many times in public meetings. Voters had multiple opportunities to learn and ask questions about the tax impact during public presentations throughout 2021, before voting in November 2021 to endorse the library project.
This page on The Amherst Current provides a high-level overview with links to more information on the Town website, including the February 2021 presentation to Town Council about the funding and tax impacts of the 4 building projects: https://theamherstcurrent.org/overview-of-the-four-major-capital-projects-and-the-financing-plan/
The Capital Planning page on the Town provides extensive information, including recordings and presentation from the public presentations during 2021. https://www.amherstma.gov/2276/Capital-Planning
I encourage you and others who are wondering about tax impacts to review these many resources yourselves.
LikeLike
Thank you. I was there too… twisting of what the historical preservation guidelines and programs do, refusal to accept votes by applicable boards and a town-wide referendum.
LikeLike
(1) The town wide referendum was long ago. I worked on the Irvington NY Lord and Burnham Building Library construction in the 1990’s and it did not take as many years as this project has.
(2) There is a “shelf life” for any plebiscite.
(3) And when this vote occurred were voters and taxpayers fully informed about the total financial tax impacts for all pending capital projects?
(4) The tragedy is that if our town listed out all the major capital projects, tallied up the total costs and then worked to economize then we could possibly achieve community consensus and affordability.
(4) But the current strategy of “one project at a time” is only going to make all of these project cost more to the town tax rate.
(5) Unless the strategy is to never address the Fire Station, DPW Facility and Senior Center?
LikeLike
Hi Terry, As I noted in my previous reply, the Town has included the costs for the 4 major building projects (elementary schools, library, DPW, and fire station) in its capital planning and funding strategy. The plans were developed years ago and have been updated and presented to the public many times.
I encourage you to review the many resources provided on the Town’s Capital Planning page on its website: https://www.amherstma.gov/2276/Capital-Planning
LikeLike
Thank you Allison – this is very good information to read and consider. My concern is that many towns create very talented and experienced planning committees years before a building is built and that is not being done here. Another concern is the cost of all of these projects should be more widely and deeply publicized than up until now so taxpayers can opine on their tolerance for these costs. Otherwise one may prepare to build and then lose a referendum vote. But thank you again for your comments and citation of these financial estimates. We are not in any disagreement here.
LikeLiked by 1 person
After reading this article read this one also from the Amherst Current.
LikeLike