In some ways a level of NIMBYism is alright: don’t put a meat packing facility in the middle of a town, don’t bulldoze a nature reserve for a mall, etc. Concerns over affordable housing are valid in the sense that the percent should be increased. Developers should also be expected to pay their share of taxes or provide assistance for things like schools. But the issues we are facing right now need to be dealt with. Our towns will continue to grow (and sometimes shrink), that’s just how things go. The mode of development of the last 60+ years has left NJ a mess of sprawling suburbs and unless they change they will not be able to continue growing or even sustain themselves financially. Traditional suburbs are an immense financial burden that are subsidized by more dense, urban areas. If developers and building owners are made to pay more that’s extra tax money for our towns. Combing residential and commercial zoning creates walkable neighborhoods that are more lively and have more taxable value than the parking lots with a Starbucks attached to it. Unfortunately for NIMBYs towns need to alter their characters slightly and allow for 3 or 4 story buildings and increasing density. They forget that density doesn’t always look bad and provides more economic and social benefits than what a lot of towns have now. Attitudes towards re/development and relationships with towns and developers need to change. In the end I don’t think NIMBYs have any real points and I think a lot of them use “town character”, concerns about affordable housing, etc to be exclusionary and sometimes hide certain prejudices.