Journalist Ezra Klein interviewed Sen. Brian Schatz of Hawaii recently about the negative impact of Not-in-My-Back-Yardism regarding support for local public goods/services such as housing, schools, and yes, libraries. Schatz focused on how NIMBYism in his home state (and nationwide) has exacerbated the shortage of affordable housing to a crisis point. But he warned that NIMBYism shows a troubling pattern affecting public goods in general: A small number of single-minded obstructionists with knowledge of local and state policy processes can game the system to slow-walk and ultimately kill efforts to upgrade vital community services.

I thought of Schatz’s critique as I tuned in to the Aug. 28 Amherst Historical Commission meeting about the Jones Library board’s plan to reduce project costs inflated by years of NIMBY-driven approval delays. Our usual half-dozen NIMBYs were there in full voice. Their arguments were predictable, but worthy of critique. Here are a couple of examples (other comments were similar).

One resident deliberately misconstrued historic preservation grant guidelines as if they were somehow legal project requirements (they are not), and then called upon our Historic Preservation Commission to “show courage” by rejecting key elements of the library board’s cost-savings proposals as somehow illegal. This kind of lawyerly sophistry may be part of the trade, but that doesn’t make it any less disingenuous.

We then heard from another resident that the library board was trying to “cram” the project “down the town’s throat.” In reality, 65% of the town voted to support the library project via the referendum process, and by reelecting library trustees and town councilors who support moving Amherst forward by investing in public services.

The legitimate issue now is how we can follow through with the plan in the face of inflated construction costs, due largely to relentless NIMBY delay tactics. Let’s not forget that both the library and elementary school projects would be completed by now for millions less had these same people not stood in the way for the last decade.

What bothers me most about all this political dysfunction are the broader implications. Our experience in Amherst is all too common across the country. At the national and local levels we see political actors (elected or self-selected) attempting to undercut democratic processes. In a functioning liberal democracy, the assumption has to be that when your side loses an election or a policy vote, you concede defeat and regroup for the next go-round. This is the hallmark of open and peaceful democratic culture.

Instead, we’ve seen electoral minorities actively undermine elections and policy-making processes rather than accede to the popular majority. (“Electoral minorities” here means voters who lost an election or policy referendum because their cause did not garner enough votes to win, not because they are members of constitutionally protected racial, ethnic or religious minority groups.) Increasingly, people with unpopular political agendas reject electoral defeat and refuse to accept democratic outcomes as if this kind of anti-democratic willfulness somehow shares moral equivalency with our long national struggle to protect individual civil rights. The damage such bad-faith actions cause to basic democratic processes (and to the legacy of actual civil rights activism) should not go unchallenged.

Nationally, we face the prospect of a MAGA minority that may try to overturn the 2024 presidential election (if they lose) as they attempted on Jan. 6, 2020. We can also expect more McConnell-style obstruction by Republicans in Congress via norm- and rule-breaking if Kamala Harris wins in November. Locally, our NIMBY bloc routinely seeks to tie town policy processes in knots regardless of failure to win public favor for their position.

When one of our most strident NIMBY activists in Amherst was asked why he’s blocking the library project despite its overwhelming electoral support, he responded: “I just know this project is wrong for our town.” Of course, we all have our convictions, but we should be honest with ourselves about the danger extremism poses to basic democratic norms — whether the issue is electing the next president or creating a better library.

Jon McCabe is a retired professor, longtime Amherst resident and former Jones Library trustee.