What happened: Democratic activist and NBA star Stephen Curry wants to block construction of a multifamily housing unit near his $30 million estate in the San Francisco suburbs. Curry and his wife Ayesha expressed “major concerns in terms of both privacy and safety” regarding the proposed development of up to 16 townhouses on a site currently occupied by a single-family home in Atherton, Calif., where an acre of land costs $8 million.
“We hesitate to add to the ‘not in our backyard’ (literally) rhetoric, but we wanted to send a note before today’s meeting,” the celebrity couple wrote in a Jan. 18 letter to the town government. “Safety and privacy for us and our kids continues to be our top priority and one of the biggest reasons we chose Atherton as home.” According to Almanac News, the Currys also said they were “pleased” to learn that the proposed development “would not contribute to very-low or low-income housing quotas required by the state.”
Why it matters: Rich liberals insist the world would be a better place if people like them were in charge of everything and could force ignorant racists to embrace liberal policies such as increasing the availability of affordable housing units, homeless shelters, and wind farms. The Curry situation is one of many examples of how rich liberals immediately abandon their support for these policies when local politicians try to implement them within sight of their illustrious mansions.
The NBC journalist and other wealthy residents of Chain Bridge Road NW—described as one of the “most exclusive and prestigious streets” in Washington, D.C.—fought to block commuter traffic and prevent the construction of sidewalks in their posh neighborhood. Allowing riffraff to traverse their esteemed community on foot, the rich liberals argued, would make it feel more “urban,” a racist euphemism for “black.”
In 2021, Mitchell argued that building sidewalks would ruin the “historic” vibe of the wealthy enclave. It would be wrong (and potentially racist) to let so-called urban pedestrians roam the streets unchecked, she argued, because many of the homes were built by black laborers, presumably for very low wages. “These are homes that were originally built during the Civil War. Mine was built in 1865, as was my next-door neighbor’s, as farm houses by freed slaves,” she said at a meeting of neighborhood commissioners. “This is a historic community.”
The diminutive UC-Berkeley professor and former labor secretary under President Bill Clinton was a vocal proponent of low-income housing until local developers wanted to tear down a dilapidated building in his Berkeley neighborhood and replace it with a multi-family affordable housing project.
Reich and his wealthy liberal neighbors sought to block the low-income development by asking the city’s Landmarks Preservation Commission to designate the dilapidated building, called the Payson House, as a Berkeley landmark. In a letter to the commission, Reich argued that allowing poor people to live in his neighborhood would impose “social costs” on current residents by destroying the “charm of an older era of Berkeley.”
The late Democratic senator (and notorious sex pest who suffered no consequences after killing a woman) was a vocal proponent of renewable energy projects until local leaders proposed construction of a large-scale wind farm in the Nantucket Sound within sight of the Kennedy family compound at Hyannis Port, Mass.
Kennedy expressed concern about the environmental impact of the wind farm and called for further review, as well as new laws and regulations that would delay the project indefinitely. “Our national treasures deserve better,” the senator wrote. “Far more is at stake in the decision than our backyards, and I make no apology for opposing this project now.”
That was in 2003. These days Democratic politicians routinely dismiss the concerns of environmentalist groups in order to expedite the construction of renewable energy projects. Gov. Phil Murphy (D., N.J.), for example, ignored calls to halt development on a massive off-shore wind farm after seven dead whales washed up along the New York-New Jersey coastline.
Jerome Dodson, “Titan of Sustainable Investing”
The former chairman of Parnassus Investments, a “responsible” firm that targets “companies that build wealth for our clients and have a positive impact on society,” was among the wealthy liberals in San Francisco who opposed the construction of a 225-unit homeless shelter on the city’s eastern waterfront, less than a mile from the Parnassus headquarters.
Dodson donated $1,000 to a GoFundMe campaign to finance the legal costs of fighting the proposed homeless shelter in court. (He subsequently made his donation private following a Free Beacon report.) The “titan of sustainable investing” has donated thousands of dollars to Democratic candidates over the years, including Rep. Nancy Pelosi (D., Calif.) and Hillary Clinton.
The GoFundMe organizers wrote that while they “fully support efforts to eliminate the causes of homelessness,” building a homeless shelter near their homes and offices was a bad idea that failed to address their “legitimate concerns about public safety, drug use, and other problems that a large shelter may bring to the community.”
The post Trend Alert: Steph Curry Is Hardly the First Rich Lib to Oppose Liberal Policies in His Own Backyard appeared first on Washington Free Beacon.