Connect with us

Rhode Island

North Kingstown country club on rocky terrain in quest to keep illegal wall • Rhode Island Current

Published

on

North Kingstown country club on rocky terrain in quest to keep illegal wall • Rhode Island Current


It’s hard to miss the 600-foot-long seawall separating Quidnessett Country Club’s golf course from the salt marshes feeding into Narragansett Bay.

Even larger than the physical barrier is the ideological divide over its presence, showcased during a two-hour-long public hearing before state coastal regulators Tuesday afternoon.

Throngs of pastel-clad country club members descended by busload upon the Rhode Island Department of Administration building to insist the wall, while built without the requisite state permits, was needed to protect not only the iconic 14th hole, but the entire club, including its employees and community beneficiaries. Their impassioned pleas were matched by equal outrage from environmentalists, who blasted the club for knowingly building the illegal structure without permission, jeopardizing sensitive waters and obstructing public access to the shore.

Much of the back-and-forth centered on whether the seawall, constructed illegally in early 2023, should be allowed to stand. But the question before the Rhode Island Resources Management Council is not exactly that.

Advertisement
A Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council subcommittee hearing on Quidnessett Country Club’s request to loosen environmental restrictions in the area of water off its North Kingstown property drew a crowd of club members Tuesday, July 23, 2024.
(Nancy Lavin/Rhode Island Current)

Instead, the council through its Planning and Procedures Subcommittee is reviewing Quidnessett’s April 12 petition seeking to reclassify a quarter-mile section of waters adjacent to the seawall. The existing, Type 1 “conservation area” designation bans permanent structural barriers because of their potential harms to environmentally sensitive waters and wildlife. Downgrading the water designation to the less stringent, Type 2 “low intensity use” could allow for the stone wall, known as a riprap revetment. Coastal regulators “may” allow for stone seawalls in Type 2 waters, but they don’t have to, as Jim Boyd, former deputy director to the CRMC, pointed out.

Build it first, change map later

And reclassifying the waters fails to address what critics consider the most “egregious” element of the whole debacle: that the country club built the seawall first, then sought permission.

“The only reason that the country club has put forth this petition is to cover up for an illegally contracted wall on their property,” Boyd said Tuesday, speaking for the first time as a member of the public since his retirement from the CRMC two years ago.

Attempting to head off potential pleas of ignorance, Boyd referred to a 2012 application by the club seeking to build a less obtrusive sheet pile barrier in the same spot. The project never moved forward after council staff recommended against the permanent barrier in favor of less damaging “nonstructural” shoreline protection.

A decade later, the stone riprap appeared, seemingly out of thin air. Work on the seawall began in January 2023, following a December storm that caused “significant damage” near the 14th hole, Patti Doyle, a spokesperson for the country club, said in an email on Tuesday night.

Advertisement
People play golf at Quidnessnett Country Club in North Kingstown on Tuesday, July 23, 2024. (Janine L. Weisman/Rhode Island Current)

Six months later, CRMC and Save the Bay each separately caught wind of the illegal structure.

“I was in complete disbelief,” Mike Jarbeau, Narragansett baykeeper for Save the Bay, said in an interview prior to the Tuesday hearing. “It’s such an egregious violation, such blatant disregard for regulations, that I didn’t believe it at first. I thought, ‘There’s just no way.’”

But there it was, visible from a mile-and-a-half away in Narragansett Bay, Boyd said.

The CRMC in August issued a series of violation notices against the club, demanding they remove the seawall and levying $30,000 in fines. 

Eight months later, the club through its attorney Jennifer Cervenka — who formerly served as chair of the CRMC’s appointed council — submitted a petition asking for the water reclassification.

The April 12 petition points to increased residential development and recreational use in the area, including the Bayview Rehabilitation at Scalabrini nursing home directly north of it, as reason why the waters should be reclassified. 

Advertisement

“Without the flexibility afforded for shoreline protection areas abutting Type 2 Waters, the QCC will certainly lose a critical piece of its historic, 18-hole golf course and result in devastating losses to both its business and members, as well as the thousands of individuals, businesses, and associations across the State that use QCC for professional golf tournaments, charity events, fundraisers, weddings, proms and countless other engagements,” Cervenka wrote in the letter.

Representatives from the club’s 1,000 members and 100-person payroll repeated this exact phrasing in comments to the CRMC Tuesday. 

“I think the perception of country clubs is that they are a very privileged place,” said Peter Chwaliszewski, the club’s head golf professional. “But there’s a lot of employees here that rely on it to provide for their families.”

It’s such an egregious violation, such blatant disregard for regulations, that I didn’t believe it at first. I thought, ‘There’s just no way.’

Advertisement

– Mike Jarbeau, Narragansett baykeeper for Save the Bay

Changing the design of the 14th hole to move it away from the rising waters, as Boyd suggested, was out of the question to many club members, who praised the unique design by world-renowned golf course architect Geoffrey Cornish.

“It’s a historic landmark,” said Jeffrey Gladstone, a 30-year club member. 

Advertisement

The club, including the 18-hole, par 72 golf course, opened in 1960. It does not have any official state or federal historic designations.

Golf carts are parked at the Quidnessett Country Club in North Kingstown. (Janine L. Weisman/Rhode Island Current)

U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, AG step in

But the waters beside it are no less important, with both state and federal environmental designations indicating their value. The illegal rock wall has also caught the eye of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, which in May issued its own violation notice with a corresponding fine of up to $200,000.

The pending petition review for water reclassification has saved the club from forking over any cash on its state or federal fines, for now. But Jeff Willis, executive director of the CRMC, said in an interview after the hearing that agency administrators denied the club’s request for extra time, instead requiring it to come up with a restoration plan for the shoreline by Friday.

The Rhode Island Office of the Attorney General may also get in on the action, having already issued a letter to the CRMC urging it to reject the club’s request and crack down on the illegal action.

“Ruling otherwise would only serve to reward the QCC for illegally constructing first and asking for permission later, and would incentivize other shoreline property owners to do the same” Attorney General Peter Neronha wrote in his June 28 letter.

The CRMC subcommittee is expected to revisit the country club’s request by early September, at which time council staff will have prepared a report with recommended action, Willis said.

Advertisement

If the water type change is approved, the club will apply for the requisite permit to address the pending enforcement against the wall, Doyle said.

GET THE MORNING HEADLINES DELIVERED TO YOUR INBOX

Advertisement



Source link

Rhode Island

Medical school at URI won’t ensure primary care docs for RI | Opinion

Published

on

Medical school at URI won’t ensure primary care docs for RI | Opinion


play

Advertisement
  • Rhode Island is currently experiencing a significant shortage of primary care physicians.
  • Opening a new medical school at URI is not seen as a timely or effective solution to the crisis.
  • Even with more medical school graduates, there is no guarantee they will choose primary care or stay in the state.
  • Better solutions include increasing pay, offering loan repayment, and reducing administrative burdens for doctors.

The doctor is not in, and there’s not one on the way either. Many Rhode Islanders are well aware that the state is facing a harrowing shortage of primary care physicians. As native Rhode Islanders and physicians invested in quality accessible primary care for our community, we are dedicated to working towards policies to support our state.

A medical school at the University of Rhode Island is not the solution to solve the primary care crisis. A medical school at URI would not provide a timely solution, would likely not achieve the target outcome of increasing the number of primary care physicians in the state, and would likely not address the underlying issue of getting doctors to stay. Instead, resources should be allocated now to supporting primary care in ways that would make sustainable change.

Lack of access to primary care is hurting patients now. A medical school at URI would not be a short- or long-term solution. In addition to the time needed to engineer an accredited medical school, it takes seven years to produce an inexperienced primary care physician. Once trained, there still must be an incentive to stay in Rhode Island. Patients do not have access to necessary care for acute and chronic conditions. The burden on our health care system, impacting ER wait times and hospital capacity, impacts everyone. We cannot afford to wait another decade for a solution.

More physicians does not equal more physicians in primary care or in Rhode Island. If the aim is to produce more physicians from URI’s medical school, this will certainly occur, but we should not delude ourselves into believing it will fix primary care. It’s not due to lack of opportunities. In 2019, the National Resident Matching Program offered a record number of primary care positions, yet the percentage filled by students graduating from MD-granting medical schools in the United States was a new low. Of 8,116 internal medical positions that were offered, just 41.5% were filled by U.S. students; most residency spots went to foreign-trained and U.S.-trained osteopathic physicians.

As medical schools across the country look to debt reduction as a means of encouraging students to enter primary care specialties, their goals have fallen far short. In 2018, The New York University School of Medicine offered full-tuition scholarships to every medical student, regardless of merit or need. In 2024, only 14% of NYU’s graduating seniors entered primary care, lower than the national average of 30%.

Advertisement

There must be an incentive to stay in Rhode Island (or at least not a disadvantage). Our efforts must shift to recruiting and maintaining physicians in primary care. Inequitable reimbursement from commercial insurers between Rhode Island and neighboring states (leading to significantly lower salaries than if you lived here and traveled to Attleboro to care for patients), the lack of loan repayment(average medical student debt is $250,000, forcing the choice between meaning and money), and the ongoing administrative burdens are amongst the drivers away from primary care. Rhode Island needs to get on par with surrounding states to prevent physicians from going elsewhere.

The motivations behind opening a medical school are well intended in terms of wanting to increase the number of primary care providers by enabling local talent to train close to home. Training more people in Rhode Island will not keep them here; it will invest significant resources without addressing the root of the issue. Until there are comparable salaries between Rhode Island and our neighbors, until loan repayment is improved and the administrative burdens are reduced, primary care in the state will forever be fighting an uphill battle. Both providers and patients suffer the consequences.

Dr. Kelly McGarry is the director of the General Internal Medicine Residency at Rhode Island Hospital. Dr. Maria Iannotti is a first-year resident, a Rhode Islander intent on practicing primary care in Rhode Island.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Rhode Island

Truckers ordered to pay own legal bills from failed RI toll lawsuit

Published

on

Truckers ordered to pay own legal bills from failed RI toll lawsuit


play

The trucking industry will have to pay its own legal bills for the unsuccessful eight-year-old lawsuit it brought to stop Rhode Island’s truck toll system, a federal judge ruled Friday, March 27.

The American Trucking Associations was seeking $21 million in attorneys fees and other costs from the state, but a decision from U.S. District Judge John McConnell Jr. says the truckers lost the case and will have to pick up the tab.

Advertisement

The state had previously filed a counterclaim for reimbursement of $9 million in legal bills, but an earlier recommendation from U.S. Magistrate Judge Patricia Sullivan had already thrown cold water on that possibility.

McConnell ordered American Trucking Associations to pay Rhode Island $199,281, a tiny fraction of the amount the state spent defending the network of tolls on tractor trailers.

Settling the lawyer tab may finally bring an end to a court fight that bounced back and forth through the federal judiciary since the toll system launched and the truckers brought suit in 2018.

As it stands, the state’s truck toll network has been mothballed since 2022 when a since-overturned judge’s ruling temporarily ruled it unconstitutional.

Advertisement

The Rhode Island Department of Transportation said it hopes to relaunch the tolls around March 2027.

The court costs fight hinged on which side could claim legal “prevailing party” status as the winner of the lawsuit.

The trucking industry claimed that it had won because the First Circuit Court of Appeals ruled an in-state trucker discount mechanism, known as caps, in the original truck toll system was unconstitutional.

But Rhode Island argued that it is the winner because the appeals court had ruled that the larger system and broad concept of truck tolls is constitutional and can relaunch with the discounts stripped out.

“The Court determines that ATA has vastly overstated the benefit, if any, that they have received from the ultimate resolution of their challenge to the RhodeWorks program,” McConnell wrote.

Advertisement

The truckers “failed to obtain any practical benefit from the First Circuit’s severance of the [in-state toll] caps,” he went on. “Specifically, the evidence from this dispute confirmed that the lack of daily caps will result in ATA paying a higher amount in daily tolls and that it does not receive any tangible financial benefit from their elimination.”

In her December analysis of the legal fees question, Sullivan had concluded that the Trucking Associations’ outside counsel had overbilled and overstaffed the case.

But she had recommended that the industry be reimbursed $2.7 million for its bills, while McConnell’s ruling gives it nothing.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Rhode Island

Think you’re middle class in Rhode Island? Here’s the income range

Published

on

Think you’re middle class in Rhode Island? Here’s the income range


play

Your household can earn more than $160,000 a year and still be considered part of the “middle class” in Rhode Island, according to a recent study by SmartAsset.

Rhode Island is the state with the 17th-highest income range for households to be considered middle class, based on SmartAsset’s analysis using 2024 income data from the U.S. Census Bureau. The Pew Research Center defines the middle class as households earning roughly two-thirds to twice the national median household income.

Advertisement

According to a 2022 Gallup survey, about half of U.S. adults consider themselves middle class, with 38% identifying as “middle class” and 14% as “upper-middle class.” Higher-income Americans and college graduates were most likely to identify with the “middle class” or “upper-middle class,” while lower-income Americans and those without a college education generally identified as “working class” or “lower class.”

Here’s how much money your household would need to bring in annually to be considered middle class in Rhode Island.

How much money would you need to make to be considered middle class in RI?

In Rhode Island, households would need to earn between $55,669 and $167,008 annually to be considered middle class, according to SmartAsset. The Ocean State has the 17th-highest income range in the country for middle-class households.

The state’s median household income is $83,504.

Advertisement

How do other New England states compare?

Rhode Island has the fourth-highest income range for middle-class households in New England. Here’s what households would have to earn in neighboring states:

  1. Massachusetts (#1 nationally) – $69,885 to $209,656 annually; median household income of $104,828
  2. New Hampshire (#6 nationally) – $66,521 to $199,564 annually; median household income of $99,782
  3. Connecticut (#10 nationally) – $64,033 to $192,098 annually; median household income of $96,049
  4. Rhode Island (#17 nationally) – $55,669 to $167,008 annually; median household income of $83,504
  5. Vermont (#19 nationally) – $55,153 to $165,460 annually; median household income of $82,730
  6. Maine (#30 nationally) – $50,961 to $152,884 annually; median household income of $76,442

Which state has the highest middle-class income range?

Massachusetts ranks as the state with the highest income range to be considered middle class, according to SmartAsset. Households there would need to earn between $69,900 and $209,656 annually. The state’s median household income is $104,828.

Which state has the lowest middle-class income range?

Mississippi ranks last for the income range needed to be considered middle class, according to SmartAsset. Households there would need to earn between $39,418 and $118,254 annually. The state’s median household income is $59,127.



Source link

Advertisement
Continue Reading

Trending