David Michael Miller
When neighborhood residents protest a new project or development, they often get labeled NIMBYs, aka Not In My Backyard. I’ve used the term myself as a shorthand for folks who don’t like the smells from a barbecue joint wafting toward their window, or for people who are mad that a new apartment building might block their lakeview.
Increasingly, however, I’ve seen the NIMBY label weaponized as a blanket term for all neighborhood activism. Under this overly simplistic narrative, concerns ranging from the trivial to the serious get lumped together. Any community opposition, no matter the issue, is written off as stubborn interference.
We desperately need to add some nuance to this discussion. I’ve created a three-question test to gauge the severity of a neighborhood’s concerns. I’ll be using the proposal to site F-35 jets at Truax as a test case, as it is a timely issue. But I feel these questions could be applied to other developments and proposals. Full disclosure: I live on the north side but my particular neighborhood is not an area projected to see a significant noise increase.
Is it likely that this project would create a significant financial hardship for the people in the neighborhood?
Having one’s house classified as “not fit for residential use” due to excessive noise seems like it might have a sizable impact on property values. The military’s own study on the impact of the F-35s finds that more than 1,000 homes could be affected this way. For most homeowners, their house is their primary investment. Their house isn’t just a place to live. It’s a retirement plan, it’s the money they’ll pass on to their kids, and it’s an emergency line of credit. If their house loses value, it can be a potentially unrecoverable loss. Renters are less tied to their homes. But with Madison’s persistent affordable housing crisis, having to move from an apartment can still be a major disruption to a family.
The socioeconomic background of the neighborhood also matters. Major projects usually have some form of trade-off, with somebody suffering a loss. Rarely are the wealthy and well-positioned asked to make that sacrifice. Low-income communities, most often communities of color, are asked to sacrifice for the “greater good.” Our city’s racial disparities weren’t created in a vacuum. They were created by deliberate decisions around public policy and urban planning. We should be wary of new projects that widen these disparities.
Will this project disproportionately impact people with disabilities?
I once lived in a neighborhood where a construction project made the sidewalk inaccessible for months. As an able-bodied adult, I just walked on the street or the grass. For someone in a wheelchair or a walker, it was a far greater burden.
Similarly, adults without disabilities who live near the airport might have no issues with F-35 noise, particularly if they have jobs that keep them out of the neighborhood during most of the flights. However, children with emotional, cognitive or behavioral disabilities may have a very different experience. If they live in the neighborhood, they probably go to one of the three elementary schools that will see increased noise levels. Many children need extra time to refocus after a distraction. The noise may only last two minutes but the disruption to the class is going to last far longer. Now, think about the impact of multiple flights a day, multiple days a week.
How much of a voice does this community normally have in our local political process?
Certain neighborhoods have a loud voice in our community — think of the Schenk-Atwood-Starkweather-Yahara area or Monroe Street. They have strong, politically active neighborhood associations. Many residents have positional power and connections to city leaders or the media. This doesn’t mean that we should tune them out simply because they have privilege. On many occasions, these neighborhoods bring up valid, important issues.
However, when a neighborhood or constituency that we don’t hear as often steps up to the stage, I think it is vitally important to listen to them. If folks from outside the loud neighborhoods are packing school gyms and community centers, it is truly important to them too. That’s not to say that neighborhoods never get fired up over the wrong thing — lots of affordable housing developments face opposition rooted in some ugly, racist anxiety. But, by and large, if you’ve got new folks showing up to city council committees and school board meetings, it’s worth paying attention to.
These three questions aren’t perfect, but I think we need to take a step back to honor Madison’s history of community activism, rather than to lament it. You might still use the term NIMBY, just please don’t use it in my neighborhood.
Alan Talaga co-writes the Off the Square cartoon with Jon Lyons.
