New data shows Charlestown is still unaffordable

You need an annual income of $216,356 to afford a median-priced single-family home

HousingWorksRI factbooks - CLICK HERE.

And there's this from GoLocal with a slightly higher median home price:

Researchers Discover What Reading for Pleasure May Be Doing to Your Brain

If you love to read, reading will love you back

By University of Cambridge

EDITOR'S NOTE: My favorite recent new
book read for pleasure. - Will Collette

Reading for pleasure may do far more than provide entertainment. A scientific review published in Psychological Medicine links the habit to better mental health, stronger cognitive abilities, and a lower risk of dementia. Research also suggests that reading is associated with measurable differences in brain structure, although scientists are still investigating whether reading directly causes these changes.

Researchers from the University of Cambridge and The Queen’s Reading Room examined evidence spanning childhood through old age. Their findings suggest that reading for enjoyment, whether alone or with others, may support brain health in several ways, with some benefits potentially appearing after just a few minutes.

Reading Early in Life Is Linked to Better Brain Development

Some of the strongest evidence comes from a study involving more than 10,000 young people. Children who began reading for pleasure at an early age tended to perform better on tests of attention, memory, and executive function, the mental abilities involved in planning, decision-making, and controlling behavior. They also showed stronger academic performance, fewer mental health problems, healthier sleep habits, and less screen time.

Reading is closely associated with literacy development, but its relationship with learning extends to mathematics. Both activities rely on overlapping cognitive processes, including working memory, language comprehension, and executive control. Despite these potential advantages, surveys indicate that recreational reading among children and teenagers has fallen to its lowest recorded levels, particularly among adolescent boys and children from disadvantaged backgrounds.

Reading may also provide psychological benefits throughout adulthood. Surveys associate reading for enjoyment with lower stress, greater relaxation, stronger empathy, and more openness to different perspectives. In one survey, nearly two in five adults (38%) identified reading as their preferred way to unwind.

A neuroscience study commissioned by The Queen’s Reading Room in 2024 reported that just five minutes of reading fiction could reduce stress by up to 20%. The research also identified improvements in concentration and problem-solving, alongside reduced feelings of loneliness. These results suggest that even brief reading sessions may offer benefits, although the size and persistence of those effects require further investigation.

Head-to-head comparison of three mRNA vaccines reveals differences in their stability in human blood

mRNA vaccine development to fight cancer

By Olivia Newton-John Cancer Research Institute

Edited by Sadie Harley, reviewed by Robert Egan

Photo by Spencer Davis on Unsplash

A study by Australian researchers compared three mRNA-LNP vaccine platforms in human blood samples, generating findings that could advance cancer treatment and vaccine design.

mRNA-lipid nanoparticles (LNPs) transformed the way that vaccines are delivered to humans when they became widely used during the COVID-19 pandemic.

mRNA-LNPs are tiny parcels, ~800 times smaller than the width of a human hair, made of fatty acids (lipids) and containing cargo (messenger RNA) that needs to be delivered inside the body to generate a treatment response (for example, immunity to a virus).

Today, researchers around the world are investigating mRNA-LNPs as candidates for "cancer vaccines" that would deliver mRNA cargo to boost the patient's immune system and empower it to kill cancer more effectively.

CVS workers protest in Wakefield against unsafe working conditions

“We’re SICK of CVS Executives!” As flu season hits, Rhode Island pharmacy professionals protest unsafe working conditions at CVS

Steve Ahlquist

As flu season develops, members of The Pharmacy Guild/IAM working at CVS Pharmacies in Rhode Island protested on October 23 outside the Wakefield CVS over unsafe working conditions. The action comes as CVS has repeatedly ignored frontline pharmacy professionals and refused to bargain in good faith over a first union contract.

Here’s the video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=185siOaKnDM

“We’re here because we’re sick of CVS executives putting profits over people,” said Chris Eggeman, a Pharmacist at the Wakefield CVS. “We’re sick of our professional concerns being ignored while pharmacy professionals are expected to keep up with overwhelming workloads and too few resources. We’re sick of CVS executives trying to bust the union by failing to bargain in good faith and illegally withholding raises we’re entitled to.

“We have a message for CEO David Joyner and other CVS executives: bargain in good faith, and promptly settle a first contract that gives pharmacy professionals the resources we need.”

“I am a member of the bargaining committee. We’re here because we’re sick of CVS executives putting profits over people,” said Chris Desrochers, Pharmacy technician at the Wakefield CVS and a member of the Pharmacy Guild. “We’re sick of our professional concerns being ignored while pharmacy professionals are expected to keep up with overwhelming workloads with too few resources. Pharmacy professionals take our responsibilities seriously and work hard to support our patients and our pharmacies. But staffing is stretched, and workloads keep growing. Pharmacy professionals need the time, staffing, and resources to do their jobs well and meet the high standards they set for themselves.

“That’s why we’ve been speaking up about working conditions. CVS executives need to listen to the people who do this work every day and address our concerns.

Bonnita Van Slyke AND Ruth Platner should NOT be re-elected

The CCA’s Toxic Twins need to be retired from Charlestown politics

By Will Collette

Like I said, conjoined twins

The Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA) paints itself as Charlestown’s savior and cites Town Council member Bonnita Van Slyke and Planning Commission commissar Ruth Platner as the real heroes. 

These conjoined toxic twins have been almost inseparable for the past ten years, though Platner is the dominant partner while Van Slyke’s served as Platner’s puppet.

Both are up for re-election on November 3 and hopefully both will lose their seats.

The CCA’s decade-long rule over Charlestown, ended in 2022 when they were trounced by the slate of candidates under the Charlestown Residents United (CRU), was marked by corrupt land deals, financial mismanagement, seemingly endless fake threats to the town’s existence, town government secrecy and cover-ups, and constant rancor.

Platner and her dog’s body Van Slyke were at the heart of just about all of Charlestown’s CCA-inflicted wounds.

This duo has been the driving force behind the CCA policies that voters finally repudiated in 2022. I compiled a list of articles (below, near the bottom) that gives you more detail on all the myriad reasons why the CCA, and Van Slyke and Platner in particular have been bad for Charlestown. 

I'm voting YES on Charlestown Question 7

But today, as many of you ponder early voting or mail-in ballot decisions or as you pore over contradictory mailers, here’s another reason to reject the CCA and its leaders Platner and Van Slyke.

That’s the CCA’s urgent plea to voters to reject Charlestown Question 7 which would change the staggered term of office for members of the Planning Commission from 6 years to 4. You might ask, “Who cares?”

Here’s why. Ever since Ruth Platner was named to the Planning Commission in 1997, she has campaigned to block virtually all home building in Charlestown. When she elbowed the respected late Bob Rohm out of the Planning Commission chair, she turned the Planning Commission into the place where projects go to die.

She did it by using the clock to kill projects. Now she desperately wants to maintain the six-year terms, explaining that “Long, staggered terms let the same commissioners review a large development through from start to finish” urging voters to vote NO to Charlestown Question 7. Naturally, I'm voting YES.

Platner expects commissioners to ponder development projects for as long as six years. No wonder so many projects go nowhere when the funding or investment disappears as Platner talks projects to death.

As one Planning Commission observer once told me, it’s remarkable that Platner and her Planning sidekick Frances Topping can talk for three hours straight at Commission meetings and say nothing.

Under Platner, any project applicant could look forward to years of hell and an ultimate denial, unless they acceded to Platner’s demands on matters as trivial as the color of roof shingles or switch plates on electrical outlets. It helped if the applicant made a substantial donation to one of Platner’s favored charities, such as the Charlestown Land Trust.

By 2000, Platner’s policies succeeded in causing Charlestown population to stagnate and, as she admits in the town Comprehensive Plan, even to decline, a pattern that continues today. She covered that up by cooking Census data to make the claim that growth in Charlestown actually exceeded the rest of Rhode Island, making it unfair for the state to insist the town build more affordable housing.

She cooked the data by choosing 1970 as the start date, which allowed her to use the period of 1970 to 1999 where population grew rapidly to offset the stagnant growth period of 2000 to the present brought about by her policies.

By 2023, alarm bells were sounding about Platner’s obstinate refusal to allow housing for families as reported by Alex Nunes on public radio: In Charlestown, limited progress and lots of discord on affordable housing - TPR: The Public's Radio.

We have no affordable housing for town employees, the children of existing residents or the people who come into town to work to clean our homes, mow the lawns, take out the trash, or change diapers. Those folks are expected to be out of town by sundown. Charlestown has become in the classic sense, a “Sundown Town.”

So, the Planning Commission needs six years to process an application. By sharp contrast, when Platner and Van Slyke want a project, whether its laying down tons of asphalt to build Faith LaBossiers’ ridiculous bike path in Ninigret Park or buying a piece of overpriced land from a CCA political donor or ally, they can operate at warp speed.

At last January 12’s Town Council meeting, we saw the CCA playbook for how to kill good projects.

Charlestown residents have long seen the derelict motel topping the moraine north of Route One just opposite the former Hitching Post, now Monahan's clam shack. It’s an eyesore as well as a waste of space, a tribute to the CCA’s anti-business attitudes.

Along comes the WARM Center, one of our area’s most venerable charities with a plan that would have warmed the heart of WARM’s founder, the late Rev. Jean Barry of Charlestown. (Jean and my wife Cathy served together for years on Charlestown’s Affordable Housing Commission.)

WARM wants to convert the derelict motel into affordable housing units by refurbishing the existing building, using the same footprint and making no additional demands on groundwater. They would continue helping residents with support services after they move in. By every measure, the perfect Smart Growth plan for affordable housing that even Ruth Platner should get behind.

Jean Barry’s successor Russ Partridge talked to Cathy and me about this project a few years ago and we loved it, becoming one of the first private major donors to the work.

All WARM asked for from Charlestown was a letter of support that they could use in their efforts to secure necessary state funding to make this important project happen.

Of course, Council President Deb Carney crafted such a letter and asked her colleagues to approve sending it. Given that this project really is a no-brainer on the facts and the merits, that letter should have immediately received unanimous approval.

But that’s not what happened. Council member Bonnie Van Slyke, clearly at the behest of her master Ruth Platner, raised issues with the letter of support. Van Slyke made a little speech where TWICE she voiced her support for the generic concept of affordable housing but questioned whether this project could get proper CRMC approval, implicitly challenging the competence of the WARM Center.

This is not WARM’s first rodeo – they’ve successfully carried out several major construction projects – and they know the steps that need to be done. Besides, the motion on the floor was a simple letter of support that highlighted Charlestown’s dire need for affordable housing not the details of the project.

But Van Slyke’s tactic of fogging the issue was enough to get Councilor Steve Stokes to decide to abstain even though he said he generally liked the project.

Van Slyke, despite her phony praise for affordable housing, voted NO. Deb and Craig Marr voted yes. Peter Slom recused himself and Stokes abstained. The motion to send the letter failed.

Van Slyke tried to pile on by insisting Ruth Platner be given the podium to speak to the issue, no doubt to raise even more phony issues about the project. Council President Carney slapped her down, noting that the motion had already been voted on, so discussion was over.

Under Robert’s Rules of Order, that meant that Platner needed to go back to her seat and STFU without being allowed to pile on or take a victory lap.

If you think I’m making this up, watch for yourself: here’s the LINK to the video of the meeting and the discussion starts about 90 minutes in.

But wait, there's more!

The letter of support story does have a happy end. Deb brought the letter back to the Council on January 26 where it was approved on a 3-1 vote. Van Slyke, implicitly on Platner's instructions, again voted NO to sending the letter of support for what is arguably a model for affordable housing. 

Van Slyke's claim of support for affordable housing is shown to be a lie. The Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA) remains unalterably opposed to affordable housing. Platner and the CCA paint this election as being about local control, but this incident shows what "local control" looks like under the CCA. More like Mississippi than Charlestown.

More reasons to oppose Platner, Van Slyke and the CCA slate

As promised, here’s that list of key reasons why you should not support the CCA and its candidates in this year’s General Election.

The CCA claims they cut Charlestown's property tax rate.
They lie. They controlled the Town Council from 2010 to 2022.
 See what happened in 2023 to the present after Charlestown
Residents United (CRU) kicked them out of office.
SOURCE: Charlestown Tax Assessor.

We’re still digging out from the CCA’s financial mess. Also click HERE to see how the new CRU Town Council started cleaning up this mess and HERE for a summary of the CCA’s financial messes.

Dirty Land Deals. Read about some of the worst – Tucker Estates, SPA-Gate, and Sawmill Pond.

They ran up the highest municipal government costs in the state: Progressive Charlestown: Charlestown has very high municipal costs, according to new report. The CRU fixed that.

They used secrecy in government to hide their incompetence

They regularly created fake emergencies to “prove” how good they were at protecting the town. For a list of those emeergencies, read THIS ARTICLE.

They favored rich, non-residents over full-time residents. Prime example: Blocking tax breaks for permanent residents

They banned residential wind power

The put out a deeply flawed and very late Comprehensive Plan: Platner submitted the plan to the state eight years late. It was full of weird ideas (e.g. Seniors should use Uber to overcome Charlestown’s lack of public transportation): Progressive Charlestown: Slyke of hand, Part 3: The Plan from Hell

The CCA consistently raised Charlestown’s tax rate, not lowered it as they claim: https://www.progressive-charlestown.com/2025/11/the-charlestown-town-council-december-2.html

CCA’s thoroughly compromised Town Administrator carried out the CCA's policies: Progressive Charlestown: CCA favorite, former Charlestown Town Administrator Mark Stankiewicz leaves the second job he’s held since leaving Charlestown in 2023.

Stanky made Van Slyke, Platner and the CCA look like idiots. They rose up to attack the Charlestown Residents United (CRU) newly elected Council majority for driving out such a talented guy. 

But, in fact, Stanky had already lined up the new job months before the election and didn't tell the CCA. He stuck around and milked the town for every last day of salary. Even after the details of Stanky's exit came out, Van Slyke still stuck to her story that he had been driven out. 

In case you’re wondering where Stankiewicz is, he’s back in his hometown of Stoughton where he’s doing weird YouTube appearances like this:

That's Stanky on the left. See if you can last through this entire video. I tried a few times but just couldn't stand it.

First Contact

Pete Hegseth is an idiot

They caved in the bottom so there's a hole where Antarctica used to be

 

Where do Charlestown candidate’s stand on women’s rights?

Do your elected officials support reproductive rights and LGBTQ+ rights?

The Womex Project

The Bodily Freedom Forever Index (BFFI) is a voting guide to provide transparency on where Rhode Island's political candidates stand on issues of bodily freedom. Specifically, candidates were asked:

• Do you support reproductive rights?
• Do you support LGBT+ rights?

Local Races:

Key

FOR: The candidate believes in Bodily Freedom Forever, including reproductive rights, the right to gender affirming care, and the rights of LGBTQ+ people.

N/A: Information was not provided despite every effort made.

MIXED: TWP Research Collective found conflicting information and the candidate has not responded to the BFFI Survey to clarify.

AGAINST: The candidate does not believe in supporting policy that recognizes the dignity of LGBTQ+ people and reproductive rights.

5 simple, science-backed activities that boost happiness

Check out the tips and try them out

By Monique Clement

Want to feel happier? That “treat yourself” self-care strategy may not help as much as you think. Happiness may be more about connecting with other people. 

“What a lot of research is now showing is that when we orient ourselves outwards to other people, that leads to greater increases in happiness,” says Katherine Nelson-Coffey, an associate professor of psychology in the School of Social and Behavioral Sciences, part of the New College of Interdisciplinary Arts and Sciences at Arizona State University.

She says social connection is one of the strongest predictors of happiness and well-being — in the moment and over time. Activities that bring people together strengthen relationships and decrease loneliness, which boosts well-being.

These findings come from a newer field called positive psychology. Traditional psychology often focuses on overcoming problems such as mental illness. But researchers like Nelson-Coffey and her husband, John Coffey, also an associate professor of psychology at ASU, explore the other side of mental health. 

“There's a lot more to helping people than just getting them back to a baseline, and that baseline does not constitute thriving,” Coffey says.

Nelson-Coffey adds, “This is where positive psychology can come in and offer insights for how we get people from that kind of zero point (the absence of mental illness) to the thriving, flourishing good life.”

Coffey and Nelson-Coffey study people who are naturally very happy and what they do. Then they assign groups of people to try those activities and measure their emotions and well-being.

For this year's World Mental Health Day on Oct. 10, try out five simple activities backed by positive psychology research to build more happiness into your life.

1. Perform at least three small acts of kindness in one day

Nelson-Coffey conducted a study that randomly assigned people to do acts of kindness for others, the world or themselves, or do a neutral control activity. She found that people who performed acts of kindness for others or the world had a greater increase in positive emotions than those who did acts for themselves or the neutral activity. 

Ideally, it’s best to do several acts in one day. 

Report Details How Trump Duped His MAHA Base by Appeasing Corporate Interests

Toxic Betrayal

Julia Conley for Common Dreams

It’s been seven months since more than 30 leaders of the “Make America Healthy Again” movement told the Trump administration that they were losing patience, and demanded to see evidence that the US Environmental Protection Agency took seriously millions of Americans’ concerns about toxic “forever chemicals” and microplastics.

“MAHA is a mandate, not a marketing campaign,” the advocates told EPA Administrator Lee Zeldin, calling for an end to both corporate-friendly loopholes in regulations and the “revolving door” that saw chemical lobbyists hired by the agency tasked with regulating the industry.

But on Monday, the government watchdog Public Citizen revealed that 20 out of 21 environmental chemicals that the White House pledged to address in its May 2025 “MAHA Report” have been subject to less, not more, regulation under the Trump administration.

For nine of the chemicals, including the carcinogenic herbicide atrazine, mercury, and per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS)—often called forever chemicals—President Donald Trump and his top officials have loosened public health regulations.

For 10 of them, the administration has taken none of the action promised in the MAHA Report, and in the case of the cancer-causing herbicide glyphosate, Trump issued an executive order not only endorsing the use of the chemical but mandating its production—a year after Bayer, the parent company of the chemical firm that uses glyphosate in popular weedkiller Roundup, donated $1 million to Trump’s inaugural campaign.

Public Citizen found just one substance, microplastics, for which the administration has “taken any step toward regulation, and at best it was a baby step”—announcing in April that microplastics may be considered for regulation in the future and that the government would study measuring and removing them from the human body.

The stress of uncertainty

Stress has become the backdrop of American life

American Psychological Association

APA’s latest Stress in America survey—conducted online by The Harris Poll on behalf of APA—suggests something beyond elevated stress alone: Many adults appear to be growing accustomed to it.

Against a backdrop of persistent uncertainty and ongoing societal challenges, many adults appear to view chronic stress as something to be managed rather than overcome. In response, many seem to be recalibrating their expectations, shifting from hopes of returning to stability toward learning how to live amid ongoing uncertainty. Stress is no longer being experienced as an interruption to everyday life. For many U.S. adults, it has become part of the baseline.

What’s stressing out U.S. adults most—and why it matters ahead of Election Day 2026

Financial pressures and concerns about the future of the nation continue to dominate the stress landscape, highlighting the extent to which questions about affordability, financial security, and the country’s direction are weighing on people’s minds. Ahead of the 2026 midterm elections, these findings offer important context on the concerns U.S. adults are carrying with them into the broader political environment.

The economy in general remains a top-cited source of significant stress. After climbing sharply from 64% in 2023 to 73% in 2024, the economy has remained a significant source of stress among three-quarters of the population, reaching 75% in 2025 and 74% in 2026. More than seven in 10 adults (71%) reported that money is a significant source of stress, an increase from 63% saying the same in 2023.

Candidates for Governor differ on ways to curb energy costs

Foulkes has a plan; Block doesn't

By Rob Smith / ecoRI News staff

No-False-Choices.pdf

If there’s one issue dominating this year’s gubernatorial election, it’s energy costs.

Utility bills this winter are reaching historic highs. According to an estimate published by the state Public Utilities Commission, a household using 500 kilowatt-hours of electricity a month will pay $180.15 on their electric bill this winter. It’s the highest electricity prices in over a decade, and the fifth straight winter of higher-than-average electric prices.

Gubernatorial candidates on the campaign trail — Democrat Helena Foulkes, Republican Aaron Guckian, and Independent Ken Block — have acknowledged voters’ concerns over high energy prices and pledged to do something about it if elected.

Move over, Martin Luther King. Trump has a dream

Guide to religious freedom

Commission studying water supply planning and housing development in rural communities meets Wednesday with Rep. Megan Cotter chairing

Rural water commission begins work

Rep. Megan Cotter chairs commission
created by her legislation

The Special Legislative Commission to Study and Provide Recommendations on the Water Supply Planning for New Housing Developments in Rural Communities meets Wednesday for presentations by experts from the University of Rhode Island as well as representatives of the state Water Resources Board and the Charlestown Climate Resiliency Commission.

The commission is scheduled to meet Wednesday, Oct. 28, at 3 p.m. in Room 101 on the first floor of the State House. No public testimony will be taken at this meeting.

The meeting will include presentations from Sarah Racine of Charlestown Climate Resiliency Commission; commission member and Water Resources Board Acting Staff Director Hector Barreras and URI geosciences professor Brian Savage; as well as commission member and URI professor of water resources and water quality Soni Pradhanang with URI Geoscience Department Chairman Thomas Boving.

The meeting will be televised by Capitol Television, which can be seen by Spectrum subscribers on channels 15 and 61 for high definition, on channel 15 by i3Broadband viewers, and channel 34 for Verizon subscribers. Livestreaming will be available at https://www.rilegislature.gov/CapTV/Pages/default.aspx.

The commission is led by Rep. Megan L. Cotter (D-Dist. 39, Exeter, Richmond, Hopkinton), who sponsored the legislation (2026-H 8032Aaa) establishing it to ensure groundwater capacity is considered as part of the planning process as Rhode Island works to address its housing crisis.