NIMBYism rears its aged head in Berkeley


No college for you!
That's the message California's state Supreme Court sent to aspiring students at UC Berkeley. In a decision released Thursday, the court ruled in favor of local activists who challenged plans to increase enrollment at the most selective campus in the University of California system. Class size will be frozen at 2020-2021 levels, and at least 1500 admitted students will be asked to change their educational plans for next year (some may have their admission rescinded altogether).
The case is a particularly stark example of the "not in my backyard" (NIMBY) movements strangling development in many cities. In interviews, the leader of the campaign against enrollment increases has been clear that he simply does not want more residents — or buildings to house them — in Berkeley.
Subscribe to The Week
Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.
As a matter of both psychology and microeconomics, that makes perfect sense. Homeowners often chose particular neighborhoods or municipalities because they liked conditions at the time of sale. They also want their property values to remain as high as possible. Both attitudes are encouraged by tax policies and cultural habits that push Americans to treat houses as investment goods as well as places of residence.
When they're given veto power over other goals, though, those sentiments are a disaster. By constraining the supply of housing, NIMBYs create an obstacle to social and economic mobility for people who can't afford to live near jobs and other opportunities. Opponents of the Berkeley expansion plan argued that an influx of students would price out current low-income residents, while benefiting disproportionately wealthy students. Even if true, that's a consequence of the zero-sum situation created by the refusal to build, not increasing enrollment as such.
There's an important generational aspect to these tensions, too. Incumbent homeowners tend to be older than new residents or renters. As prices have risen, moreover, the median age of home buyers has also increased. The result is a political economy that benefits the old at the expense of the young. The Berkeley case has attracted national attention because it so vividly reflects that conflict.
You can find a similar pattern for other issues and in other parts of the world, too. Collapsing fertility rates, which may be correlated with rising housing costs, mean a future with many fewer workers relative to retirees. In order to maintain the same level of benefits, those workers will have to pay a higher portion of their income in taxes. It's gerontocracy as political economy.
It's easy to diagnose these pathologies. It's harder to change them so long as voter turnout rates, which are also correlated with homeownership and wealth, differ so much by age. Eventually they'll die, but in the meantime the baby boomer generation and even older Americans who continue to dominate our national life don't have much to worry about. The leader of the anti-enrollment activists in Berkeley? He spends half the year in New Zealand.
Sign up for Today's Best Articles in your inbox
A free daily email with the biggest news stories of the day – and the best features from TheWeek.com
Samuel Goldman is a national correspondent at TheWeek.com. He is also an associate professor of political science at George Washington University, where he is executive director of the John L. Loeb, Jr. Institute for Religious Freedom and director of the Politics & Values Program. He received his Ph.D. from Harvard and was a postdoctoral fellow in Religion, Ethics, & Politics at Princeton University. His books include God's Country: Christian Zionism in America (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2018) and After Nationalism (University of Pennsylvania Press, 2021). In addition to academic research, Goldman's writing has appeared in The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, and many other publications.
-
After Israel's brazen Iran attack, what's next for the region and the world?
TODAY'S BIG QUESTION After decades of saber-rattling, Israel's aerial assault on Iranian military targets has pushed the Middle East to the brink of all-out war
-
7 touring theater productions that are out to bring the joy
The Week Recommends 'Hamilton' and 'Wicked' never die, and neither does ABBA
-
College grads are seeking their first jobs. Is AI in the way?
In The Spotlight Unemployment is rising for young professionals
-
Is Trump's military parade 'just a parade'?
Talking Point Critics see an 'echo of authoritarianism'
-
Is Trump's LA troop deployment about order or authoritarianism?
Talking Points President: 'We're going to have troops everywhere.'
-
Is Trump trying to take over Congress?
Talking Points Separation of powers at stake in Library of Congress fight
-
How could Trump ending a VA mortgage program leave veterans on the streets?
Today's Big Question Vets could face foreclosure as a result of the White House's actions
-
The anger fueling the Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez barnstorming tour
Talking Points The duo is drawing big anti-Trump crowds in red states
-
Why the GOP is nervous about Ken Paxton's Senate run
Today's Big Question A MAGA-establishment battle with John Cornyn will be costly
-
Bombs or talks: What's next in the US-Iran showdown?
Talking Points US gives Tehran a two-month deadline to deal
-
The JFK files: the truth at last?
In The Spotlight More than 64,000 previously classified documents relating the 1963 assassination of John F. Kennedy have been released by the Trump administration