All the reports of the disaster along the Gulf had me thinking, among other things, about the importance of community, of people thinking of themselves as part of a larger whole with responsibilities to each other.
With these thoughts in my head, I read Richard Bogartz letter about Amherst’s NIMBYism (not in my back yard). In Amherst, we have institutionalized NIMBYism, elevating the idea that each part of town should be protected from the burdens of providing for the common good. While specific neighborhood groups may indeed slowly dissolve after a perceived “threat” has either disappeared or taken place, over time a group of people inclined to say “no” to every proposal they themselves didn’t initiate have evolved from the various struggles and stand ready to rush in to help new neighborhood opponents of projects.
These advocates have developed considerable expertise at the skills needed to sway or at least delay local decisions. If all this were a movie, it might be highly entertaining (at least the first or second time). But it’s not a movie; it’s real life, and we all live with the consequences. Even if the proposed project does eventually get built, it costs significantly more than it would have because costs increased during the delay. We all pay for those increased costs; paying for them contributes to the rising cost of living in Amherst and thus to further gentrification.
I’m not suggesting that all projects should be built, or that all the public-spirited reasons are on one side of an issue. I am saying that we seem to have lost our sense of community. Change – of some kind – is inevitable, and often the costs and benefits of the change are not balanced very well. Individuals can hardly be blamed for trying to steer change so that they personally get the benefits, or at least don’t pay much of the costs. It is government’s job to do the balancing. There are facilities we need to have, functions we need to perform, and we don’t have enough space to put them “somewhere else.”
In Amherst we’re currently struggling with two highly charged issues: the Hope Church land where the JPI project is proposed, and the Plum Brook athletic fields. Having heard about the need for new and well-built athletic fields in town for at least a decade and a half, I think we should build them as planned. Outdoor recreation is an important part of a community’s life. I will vote “no” on the referendum.
Having heard for even longer than that about the need for more low-cost housing, for both students and non-students, and believing that a location within walking distance of the University and on a bus route with frequent service is the best place, I would like to see that land used for such housing. While I don’t have any philosophical difficulty with publicly funded subsidized housing, I have a practical one: we don’t have the money. Given the involvement of JPI, we don’t need to spend public money to get that result; we can negotiate with the would-be developer for what kinds of permits or exemptions could be granted.
Amherst cannot afford to keep every unbuilt upon area in someone’s neighborhood open as farmland or a conservation area; we need to make choices. For example, there are parcels of land on the Mt Holyoke Range which are privately owned and subject to development, but which most people probably think are part of the State Park. If we had a choice, which open land would we protect? If we spend impulsively, where will we get the funds when a really important parcel needs saving?
Nor should we seek to block all development of denser forms of housing. If we are “anti-sprawl” we need to build close to destinations and services. The population of students at the University is going up, whether we are glad about it or not. We don’t get a vote on that question. We do have to deal with the consequences. Thinking they will all live “somewhere else” is unrealistic and, it seems to me, doesn’t sound like a community.
One of the unfortunate results of focusing our collective energies on battles for and against specific projects is distraction from the big picture. We can’t even draw that big picture. A group of citizens and staff are working – again – toward developing a Master Plan for Amherst. I wish them luck. How can we have a real plan if we know that no one wants anything built near them? It’s time to think about the community as a whole, not as a loose collection of parts.