Could Liberal NIMBYs Be Getting in the Way of Climate Action?
and generally just getting in the way of progress
Hello friends!
Welcome to quite a few new subscribers who found their way to me via the fantastic
who writes the Substack and is the host of the Live Like the World is Dying podcast. I had the pleasure of talking with Margaret for the podcast that was published last week where I really lean into my anarchist-PTA-mom brand. You can listen to the episode wherever you get your podcasts. I’ve loved connecting with Margaret on all things anarchism and preparedness and she does some amazing things.Now. Onto what’s been on my mind for quite a while.
Portland, Oregon, where I live, has gotten a bad rap in the last few years. Because of this, I’m often confronted with concerned questions about the state of our community when I run into family friends while visiting my hometown, Spokane, WA.
The concerned raised eyebrows and pitied “how is Portland?” question could be due to any number of narratives perpetuated about the city over the last few years which began during the pandemic and then the longest-running racial justice protests in the wake of George Floyd’s murder. And since then, there’s the continued narrative around the homelessness and the fentanyl crises. While a lot of the concerns seem to be expressed by folks outside the city, there seems to be an increasing level of complaints by people inside the city as well. I get it, I do. I see the changes that have happened in the city and it is worrisome and we badly need to address the root causes to the challenges we’re seeing. But I wonder if in this so-called liberal bastion of a city how much of the in-town uproar has to do with a NIMBY approach to city management. NIMBY meaning “not in my back yard.” And I wonder if the approach to managing all of these city crises are getting in the way of any city progress including climate action.
Now listen, I’m not going to say that any of the things I mentioned before are not major issues in our city. There are many people who don’t have homes, there’s a mental health crisis, and yes, fentanyl overdoses are on the rise. It is a sad and scary crisis that as one wonderful person in this much-circulated Fox News clip of Seattle folks mocking the reporter/Fox News itself says, “crime is a social issue that can be solved by giving people their basic needs.” (As an aside: I have watched this clip so many times, I love these beautiful people interviewed so much, especially green raincoat person!). But the narratives seem to make Portland (and Seattle as it seems) out to be the only cities in the U.S. that’s dealing with these issues. According to the National Alliance to End Homelessness’ 2023 State of Homelessness Report, homelessness has been consistently on the rise across the entire country since 2017 and Oregon is just one of the many states with issues and fentanyl/opioid overdose rates have been increasing everywhere.
But the narratives aren’t just coming from outside the city. They’re coming internally, from our local people and local media and I wonder if our approach among many liberal locals is counterproductive. One of those being complaining about it in the media without promoting any kind of real change. Last spring, Willamette Week published this story about Portland Public School’s drop in enrollment giving voice to a sect of parents with a whole hell of a lot of entitlement. And recently I saw a Portland local news story all about a Michigan couple who had a bad trip in Portland and vowed never to go back (I’m sorry, what?! How is this news?).
This all was in my head when I came across this recent NPR article about how the progressive urban planning model of a 15-minute city—designing communities so all needs are met within a 15-minute walk—is a great climate solution if only conspiracy theorists and NIMBYs wouldn’t get in the way of it.
Before I get into the 15-minute city, let’s talk for a minute about what NIMBY means. While a NIMBY can span the political spectrum, the overarching approach to a not-in-my-backyard type is to oppose most policies that would affect their way of life. They’re often White and privileged. Speaking from a liberal parent perspective, these are the folks who put up the Black Lives Matter signs in their yard, yet vocally speak out against making school district changes that would affect their kids, changes that often mean making Whiter schools more diverse. They’re the ones who love the idea of public transportation, but don’t want it to affect how they currently move about the city. They’re the ones that are concerned about homelessness, but don't want any kind of shelter or treatment center anywhere near where they live, work, or play.
So let’s get back to the 15-minute city. It’s a really amazing urban planning movement that is looking to change urban zoning laws in favor of more density so that most community amenities can be available close to home. When viewed through a climate justice lens, it would also include elements of providing affordable housing and culturally-specific community supports. Of course, there are some truly ridiculous conspiracy theories about this, particularly that a 15-minute city means that people’s movements would be controlled within that radius. But outside of those outlandish theories, there are the NIMBYs who oppose density in their communities.
And the challenge is that NIMBYs have an inordinate amount of power in our local communities. And while not every neighborhood association is alike, the stereotypical formal neighborhood organizing group often tends to express NIMBY tendencies.
Take this 2021 report by the Louisiana Fair Housing Action Center which found that neighborhood associations in New Orleans consistently led the city’s lack of investment in affordable housing. And, in a majority Black city, neighborhood associations were predominantly White and, therefore, represented perspectives from mostly White communities. And in Portland, until recently neighborhood associations had an inordinate amount of power as they had a direct line of contact with the Office of Community & Civic Life which was designated into city code. Given that associations were primarily made up of homeowners versus renters, this also meant that representatives were Whiter and wealthier. The change to the code in 2019 designated “all Portlanders” as the constituency to Civic Life with the hopes that there would be more affinity group voices standing up for the needs of all Portlanders. For me, this also meant a move toward disempowering the NIMBYs.
Now, I’m not saying that NIMBYs and generally Whiter, wealthier people don’t already have more access to power and will always find a way to make themselves heard. But this is one way to acknowledge the need to listen to a wider set of perspectives. Also in Portland, we’re in the long overdue process of shifting the way our city government works where we’re moving to a representative city council model (which basically every other city in the United States has) as well as a ranked-choice voting system. These are huge local moves to favor a wider set of voices which is exciting.
When it comes to climate justice solutions, I’m hoping that this model will also devalue the voice of the NIMBY. Of course, time will tell.
But one thing I think we all, especially those of us privileged White folks, is asking ourselves whether we’re taking NIMBY stances every once in a while. In the parenting world, are you making your school choice for your kid based on what’s good for your kid or what’s good for all kids? (i.e. moving our kids to a “good” school based on test scores often perpetuates segregation and shifts funding to Whiter, wealthier schools). With the issue of homelessness, do you really want to get to the root causes of the homelessness and mental health crisis or do you just not want to see it near you? With the issue of climate, do you want to overhaul our cities so they’re more justice-oriented and are set up to combat climate change or do you just want to make changes that are convenient for you?
To be clear, I have NIMBY tendencies myself, which, I believe is a product of existing within the White, privileged mainstream. I have moments where I wonder if I want my kid to live somewhere he occasionally sees a person shooting up and I really do love my single-family home neighborhood and wonder how much density growth I’d like to see. But I’m aware of those thoughts and take a beat to shift them. When we see a houseless person, I can talk to my kid about how we need to move toward a society that protects and helps all people and talk about how we can get involved in that solution. When I recognize the thoughts about my neighborhood, I think about how amazing it would be to have everything I need within a 15-minute walk while also living in an economically and racially diverse community of vibrancy and care and love.
With that, it only takes a shift of the mind to think more creatively about whether we can move beyond not-in-my-backyard to YES-in-my-backyard.
Update: An earlier version of the story (and ones sent to inboxes) described NIMBY as “not in my neighborhood” rather than “Not in My Back Yard.” This error can be due to a brain fart on behalf of the author :). Thanks to good readers like you for the correction.