But, there is some truth to that viewpoint, as NIMBYs can hold government's feet to the fire and make sure they follow their own rules, and protest things that really are negatives for a community.
But there is that flip side that most every planner (and developer) has experienced, which is that irrational opposition to ANY change at all, regardless.
That's why I thought a recent post by Scott Doyon on the Placeshakers website was pretty good on this topic. Read his post here.
Some quotes from Scott, to get you warmed up to the topic:
"Early on, NIMBY action centered around large, substantive initiatives with no shortage of arguable downsides. Nuclear plants. Landfills. Toxic industry. Projects universally loathed no matter where you went."
"But then a funny thing happened.
Somewhere along the way, NIMBYs began applying these new organizational tools and techniques not just to projects presenting some level of threat but to any project offering the prospect of change. Which is to say, any project at all."
"If you’re really about community improvement and not just about snark (and I admittedly teeter between the two), you have to examine not just the what but the why. Why have NIMBYs increasingly developed an opposition to everything?
The answer has little to do with development. It has to do with trust."
OK, go read it and let's get some discussion going.
I thought of this past/present (or Jekyll/Hyde) personality difference of the NIMBYs before, and I have to say that despite that I tend to come down on the side of contemporary planners 90% of the time, I disagree that the issue is a lack of trust that has converted 'community minded' NIMBYs of the past into the 'oppose everything' NIMBYs of today. It would be easy to simplify the issue into right and wrong but the similarity between the past and the present is that planners are trying to supplant their judgement for the judgement of the community.
ReplyDeleteOf course we think we're right! Who doesn't? But the whole point of democracy is to allow the people to make decisions for themselves, even when leaders and experts think they're wrong. All we can do as planners is present the most convincing argument to the public using what tools we have at our disposal, then trust the public to weigh the arguments.
I realize that's not an easy thing to do, but we should try to remember that the same practices are 'NIMBYism' when we disagree and 'public participation' when we agree.
NIMBYs are a special interest group and therefore should be treated as such. They are one stakeholder whose opinion should be considered amongst the larger goals and objectives of the community and other stakeholders. You may weigh their opinion heavier than other stakeholders but ultimately their desires should not subvert the course of the community they reside in.
ReplyDelete