It is possible for Nobel Prize winners and excellent teachers to coexist in the same institution. To the extent that the UCs of academia undervalue teaching as something that gets done at 'lesser' schools, they are cheating their teachers, their students, and the public. To demand that teaching gets respect on an academic level, whether it is performed at elite institutions or more humble venues, can only be interpreted as anti-intellectual if you define intellectualism as something done amongst intellectuals. But, if you want to create future intellectuals, if you want to pass on the answers that you have, then teaching becomes an integral part of the intellectual agenda. Without teaching, there will be no future intellectuals.
Teaching is the opposite of anti-intellectualism.
For this reason, it is more than a little puzzling that elite institutions like UC are so dismissive of teaching. This is valuable intellectual work. It isn't hard to find examples of how universities like Cal dismiss teaching as non-intellectual work. Many of these courses are introductory-level, many of them mandatory parts of a school's undergraduate program. The irony is that the teachers in these classes are doing some of the most innovative work on campus.