ULV Earth Day events are MIA

Emergency alerts lacking speed

Code of Ethics

Alexandra Lozano:
Media coverage of candidates is splitting parties

Alexandra Lozano archives

Tom Anderson
Editor in Chief

Question: Do people who knowingly and willingly move in next door to an airport, auto racing track, railroad line, factory or any other bothersome place, have the right to whine and complain about the noise, traffic and other ill effects, especially to the point that the adjacent business is eventually run out of the neighborhood?

Increasingly, and unfortunately, the answer appears to be yes.

For those still unfamiliar with the acronym NIMBY (“not in my backyard”), it basically is used to describe residents of an area who jump on the “kick-and-scream-until-you-get-your-way” bandwagon whenever a threat, real or perceived, to the area’s serenity, safety, cleanliness or overall quality of life emerges.

The main problem I have with the growing specter of NIMBYism (aside from the fact that NIMBYs conveniently ignore the fact that many of them chose to live next to something obnoxious) is that they are selfishly ignoring the benefits their noisy neighbors would bring or already do bring others.

Case in point: Mark and Karin Rivard, a Northern California couple who moved in next door to Altamont Speedway two years ago (the track opened way back in 1966), have petitioned local officials to impose a ban on both drifting (the hugely popular form of motorsport that originated in Japan) and overnight camping on speedway property.

Just so we’re clear here: People who chose to live next door to a race track are now telling the owners of said track how to run their business.

If the bans are upheld, many area speed freaks will no doubt resort to getting their high on public roads, putting the lives of themselves and the public in danger. But as long as the Rivards themselves aren’t at risk, they are, presumably, perfectly okay with that.

Oh, and it gets better. The Rivards actually bought the lot they now live on in 1999, around which time Mr. Rivard constructed a motocross track for himself on the property. The family eventually built its house on the lot and moved in back in 2005.

Long story short: Marky Mark seems to have no problem with getting his own gas-powered kicks in the neighborhood, but he doesn’t want anyone else coming to the speedway next door to get theirs. Gee, that seems perfectly fair…

Closer to home and arguably more damaging in the grand scheme of things is the debate over the route of the proposed Phase II extension of the Metropolitan Transit Authority’s Expo Light Rail Line to Santa Monica (even though Phase I, which will only reach Culver City, won’t be done until decade’s end at the earliest).

The MTA wants the extension to follow the existing rail right of way pretty much verbatim, but a small but loud group of homeowners in the ritzy neighborhood of Cheviot Hills want the line routed around the right of way, which skirts the south side of the neighborhood, down the center of Venice and Sepulveda boulevards before rejoining the preexisting route.

Yes, I know, the homeowners cite reasons like safety and putting the line through areas that could get higher ridership for their making a stink, but not everyone in the L.A. Basin is naïve enough to assume those are their real motivations.

Oh goodness gracious, great balls o’ fire no.

The real reason is that they don’t want the status quo they know and love to be disrupted with all the noise, vibration and an influx of “those people” they assume would result. Sure, they know routing the line around Cheviot Hills would add to the project’s cost and to the travel time, but who cares about the rest of the region?

It is this selfish unwillingness to compromise and cooperate that is setting a bad example for future generations, and will ultimately prove our civilization’s undoing.

Tom Anderson, a senior journalism major, is editor in chief of the Campus Times. He can be reached by e-mail at tanderson1@ulv.edu.