Connect with us

Rhode Island

CRMC under fire after postponed hearing on Quidnessett Country Club • Rhode Island Current

Published

on

CRMC under fire after postponed hearing on Quidnessett Country Club • Rhode Island Current


The embattled Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council is awash in criticism again — not for a controversial decision, but for the lack of one.

In a Nov. 25 email to the council, also shared on its website, Save the Bay Executive Director Topher Hamblett accused the panel of coastal regulators of “political favoritism and abuse of power.”

A council subcommittee was scheduled to hold a hearing at 4 p.m. Tuesday on Quidnessett Country Club’s application to ease development restrictions for its waterfront property in North Kingstown. But the meeting was cancelled, extending the saga over an illegal seawall built along the club’s shoreline nearly two years ago.

Hamblett alleges the delays are intentional.

Advertisement
Topher Hamblett (Courtesy photo)

“The Council’s months-long series of delays gives the country club an unfair economic advantage over law-abiding coastal landowners and businesses who spend money and time applying for permits to comply with the law,” he wrote in the email. 

“The Council is opening the door for more violations and sending the message that it is better to ask for forgiveness than permission. Additionally, the Council’s lack of consistency and fairness undermines the integrity of Rhode Island’s coastal governance, the protection of our coastal ecosystems and the public’s ability to access the shore.”

In January 2023, the country club built a 600-foot-long stone wall between its golf course and the shoreline — violating existing coastal regulations intended to protect the sensitive coastal marshes that feed into Narragansett Bay. After the rock wall was discovered, with subsequent fines and warnings levied by state and federal regulators, the club sought to retroactively keep its illegal barrier in place.

Quidnessett’s April 12 petition, if approved, would downgrade the water classification from the existing Type 1 “conservation area” to a less stringent Type 2 “low intensity use,” which could — though it doesn’t have to — allow for a permanent structure like a seawall. Under the existing designation, all permanent structures are banned.

A council subcommittee took public comment, but postponed a vote on the water type redesignation at a September meeting, in order to give the country club more time to make its case. The club, through its attorneys, said a permanent barrier is needed to protect the flagship 18-hole golf course against rising sea levels. 

Advertisement

Tuesday’s meeting would have been the next occasion to consider, and potentially make a recommendation on the application. The panel vote would advance the proposal to the full council, which would then review and make its own decision at a later date.

The Council’s months-long series of delays gives the country club an unfair economic advantage over law-abiding coastal landowners and businesses who spend money and time applying for permits to comply with the law.

– Topher Hamblett, executive director for Save the Bay

Advertisement

Meanwhile, the seawall still stands, much to Hamblett’s dismay.

“This has all the appearances of the council wanting to accommodate Quidnessett Country Cub’s request to, in effect, let the wall stand,” Hamblett said in an interview Tuesday. “I think that, left to its own devices, they would do just that.”

Hamblett acknowledged that he did not know why the meeting was cancelled; the council has been plagued by vacancies which have led to a string of postponed meetings and key decisions.

Laura Dwyer, a spokesperson for the CRMC, said in an email late Tuesday that the meeting was postponed due to “scheduling issues.” She did not answer specific questions seeking comment about Hamblett’s letter.

Advertisement

Janice Matthews, vice president of The Jan Companies, which owns the country club, also did not respond to inquiries for comment.

The council’s staff in a Sept. 20 report argued against approving the water type reclassification, stressing the importance of the sensitive salt marshes surrounding the shoreline, along with marine wildlife, which were the very reason why the agency restricted development there in the first place — formally codified under state water type classifications created in the early 1980s.

But the politically appointed council doesn’t have to follow the recommendations of its expert staff; it hasn’t in other high-profile decisions.

Most notably, the council in 2020 approved a contested expansion of Champlin’s Marina on Block Island, against advice of staff, with terms brokered in what the town and conservation groups alleged was a “backroom deal.” The Rhode Island Supreme Court tossed the council’s decision in a 2022 ruling, agreeing with Rhode Island Attorney General Peter Neronha that the council flouted its own public notice requirements.

Quidnessett Country Club built a 600-foot-long rock wall along its shoreline in the winter of 2023, flouting state coastal regulations and obscuring public shoreline access. (Courtesy photo)

A question of accountability 

Hamblett sees parallels between Champlin’s case and Quidnessett, in the council’s actions, and in reactions among top state officials.

“The common denominator between Quidnessett and Champlin’s is there’s been no action from the governor or the General Assembly in terms of accountability,” Hamblett said Tuesday. “We’re concerned we’re going to see that silence continue as it relates to the country club’s accountability to the council.”

Advertisement

Other state officials who were copied on Hamblett’s email, including Gov. Dan McKee, House Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi and Senate President Dominick Ruggerio, had also not responded to him as of midday Tuesday, Hamblett said.

McKee and Ruggerio did not immediately respond to inquiries from Rhode Island Current for comment on Tuesday.

Shekarchi was not available for comment due to being away for the holiday, Larry Berman, a spokesperson, said in an email on Tuesday.

One exception: Neronha, whose office has already critiqued Quidnessett for flouting state coastal regulations.

“With each public hearing that is canceled, CRMC continues to demonstrate why it cannot be trusted with environmental oversight,” Neronha said in a statement on Tuesday. “Normally, when a person or entity breaks the law, there are consequences. Here, Quidnessett Country Club decided that the rules don’t apply to them, acting in total disregard of laws designed to protect our coast, and thus far, getting away with it.”

Advertisement

Earlier this year, Neronha joined Save the Bay to call for eliminating the politically appointed council, and reshaping the agency as an administrative department akin to the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management. Legislation outlining these changes was introduced but stalled in the last two legislative sessions.

“The time for CRMC reform was long ago, but we must continue the fight to place decision-making power into the hands of those who wish to protect and preserve our most treasured natural resources,” he said. “Because each day that passes without consequences for Quidnessett is another day of environmental justice delayed and denied.”

Hamblett said Save the Bay plans to push for a similar bill in the upcoming 2025 session, hoping that public attention — including 300 pages of written comment submitted to the CRMC — on Quidnessett might build support among lawmakers.

“We need top elected officials to be paying attention to our coastal agency,” Hamblett said. 

The CRMC rescheduled its hearing on Quidnessett to Dec. 10. If the water reclassification is granted, the club must then apply for a permit to build any kind of permanent structure along the shoreline.

Advertisement

Updated to include a response from the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES.

Advertisement



Source link

Rhode Island

Pulled funding creates a bike path to nowhere. Let’s hope RI fixes it.

Published

on

Pulled funding creates a bike path to nowhere. Let’s hope RI fixes it.


play

I’ve long thought bike paths are among Rhode Island’s premier attractions, up there with the beaches, the mansions and the bay.

We like to knock government, but credit where it’s due, the state has done an amazing job building out an incredible pedaling network.

Advertisement

It’s clearly a priority.

At least I thought it was.

But they’ve just dropped the ball on what should have been a beautiful new stretch.

The plan was to finish a mile-long connector from the East Providence end of the Henderson Bridge all the way to the East Bay Bike Path.

There was even $25 million set aside to get it done.

Advertisement

Except WPRI recently reported that it’s now been canceled.

The main fault lies with the Trump administration, which is no friend of bike paths, and moved to kill that $25 million.

But it gets complicated, as government funding always does.

To try to rescue that money, the state DOT reportedly worked with the administration to refunnel it into a road project. Specifically, the $25 million will now be spent helping upgrade the mile-long highway between the Henderson Bridge and North Broadway in East Providence, turning it into a more pleasant boulevard.

Advertisement

That totally sounds worthy.

But it’s insane to throw away the bike path plan.

Especially for a particular reason in this case.

They’d already put a ton of money into starting it.

When state planners designed the new Henderson Bridge between the East Side and East Providence, they included a bike path.

Advertisement

It’s a beauty – well protected from traffic by a barrier, a great asset for safely riding over the Seekonk River.

The plan was to continue it another mile or so along East Providence’s Waterfront Drive, ultimately connecting with the East Bay Bike Path, which runs all the way to Bristol. Which, by the way, is one of the nicest bike paths you’ll find anywhere.

But alas, that connector plan has been canceled.

Advertisement

So the expensive stretch over the Henderson Bridge to East Providence is now a bike path to nowhere. Once the bridge ends, the path on it continues a few hundred yards or so and then, just … ends.

Too bad.

We were so close.

Most of the stories on the issue have been about the complex negotiation to rescue the $25 million by rerouting it to that nearby highway-to-boulevard project. But I don’t want to get lost in the weeds of that bureaucratic process here because it loses sight of the heart of this story.

Which is that an amazing new addition to one of the nation’s best state bike path systems has just been scrapped.

Advertisement

You can knock the Rhode Island government for blowing a lot of things.

The PawSox.

The Washington Bridge.

But they’ve done great with bike paths.

And especially, linking many of them together.

Advertisement

Example: not too many years ago, Providence bikers had to risk dicey traffic on the East Side to get to the more pleasant paths in India Point Park and on the 195 bridge to the East Bay Path.

But the state fixed that by adding an amazing connector that starts behind the Salvation Army building and beautifully winds along the water of the Seekonk River for a mile or so.

That makes a huge difference – and no doubt has avoided some bike-car accidents.

We were close to a comparable stretch on the other side of the river – that’s what the $25 million would have done.

But it’s now apparently dead.

Advertisement

Online commenters aren’t happy about it.

On a Reddit string, “Toadscoper” accused the state of being “complicit” with the feds in rerouting the money from bikes to cars.

And there was this fascinating post from FineLobster 5322, who apparently is a disappointed planner who worked on the project: “Mind you money has already been spent on phase one so rejecting it at this point is wasting money and also against the public interest … but what do I know? I only worked on the project as an engineer … I didn’t get into this to build more highways. I do it … to give back to communities and give them more access to their environment.”

Wow. One can imagine the state planning team is devastated. That’s not a small consideration. Good people go into government to make life better in Rhode Island, and it’s a bad play to take the spirit out of the job by first assigning a great human-scale project and then, after a ton of work, trashing it.

A poster named Homosapiens simply said, “We just accept this?”

Advertisement

Hopefully not.

The first stretch of the path over the Henderson Bridge is done, money already sunk.

What a shame to leave that as a path to nowhere.

It doesn’t have to happen.

Between Governor McKee and our Washington delegation, there’s got to be a way to get this done.

Advertisement

There’s got to be.

mpatinki@providencejournal.com



Source link

Continue Reading

Rhode Island

2 dead, 1 seriously hurt after crash on I-95 South in Warwick

Published

on

2 dead, 1 seriously hurt after crash on I-95 South in Warwick


WARWICK, R.I. (WPRI) — Two people are dead and another person seriously hurt after a crash involving two vehicles on the highway in Warwick Saturday.

Rhode Island State Police said the crash happened around 1:34 p.m. on the ramp from Route 113 West to I-95 South.

According to police, a Hyundai SUV that was driving in the middle lane of the highway started to drift to the right, crossed the first lane, and then crossed onto the on-ramp lane. The car struck the guardrail twice before driving through the grass median.

The Hyundai then struck the driver’s side of a Mercedes SUV that was on the ramp, causing the Mercedes to roll over and come to a rest. The impact sent the Hyundai over the guardrail and down an embankment.

Advertisement

The driver of the Hyundai, a 73-year-old man, and his passenger, a 69-year-old woman, were both pronounced dead at the hospital.

A woman who was in the Mercedes was rushed to Rhode Island Hospital in critical condition.

State police said all lanes of traffic were reopened by 4:30 p.m.

The investigation remains ongoing.

Download the WPRI 12 and Pinpoint Weather 12 apps to get breaking news and weather alerts.

Advertisement

Watch 12 News Now on WPRI.com or with the free WPRI 12+ TV app.

Follow us on social media:

 

 



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Rhode Island

Judge rejects DOJ push for Rhode Island voter information

Published

on

Judge rejects DOJ push for Rhode Island voter information


A federal judge on Friday tossed the Department of Justice’s (DOJ) lawsuit aiming to force Rhode Island to hand over its voter information as part of the Trump administration’s push to acquire voter data from several states.

Rhode Island U.S. District Court Judge Mary McElroy wrote that federal law does not allow the DOJ “to conduct the kind of fishing expedition it seeks here,” siding with Rhode Island election officials. She added that the DOJ did not provide evidence to suggest that Rhode Island violated election law.

Advertisement

McElroy, a Trump appointee, wrote that she sided with the similar decision in Oregon. That decision ruled that the DOJ was not entitled to unredacted voter registration lists.

“Absent from the demand are any factual allegations suggesting that Rhode Island may be violating the list maintenance requirements,” she said in her ruling.

Rhode Island Secretary of State Gregg Amore (D) praised McElroy’s decision. He said in a statement that the Trump administration “seems to have no problem taking actions that are clear Constitutional overreaches, regularly meddling in responsibilities that are the rights of the states.”

“Today’s decision affirms our position: the United States Department of Justice has no legal right to – or need for – the personally-identifiable information in our voter file,” he said. “Voter list maintenance is a responsibility entrusted to the states, and I remain confident in the steps we take here in Rhode Island to keep our list as accurate as possible.”

The Hill reached out to the DOJ for comment.

Advertisement

The DOJ called for the voter lists as it investigated Rhode Island’s compliance with the National Voter Registration Act of 1993, which allowed Americans to register to vote when they apply for a driver’s license.

The DOJ sued at least 30 states, as well as Washington, D.C., in December demanding their respective voter data. This data includes birth dates, names and partial Social Security numbers.

At least 12 states have given or said they will give the DOJ their voter registration lists, according to a tracker operated by the Brennan Center for Justice.

The department stated after it lost a similar suit against Massachusetts earlier this month that it had “sweeping powers” to access the voter data and that, if states fail to comply, courts have a “limited, albeit vital, role” in directing election officers on behalf of the administration to produce the records. The DOJ cited the Civil Rights Act as being intended to unearth alleged election law violations.

Copyright 2026 Nexstar Media Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

Advertisement



Source link

Continue Reading
Advertisement

Trending