But stop saying Charlestown was
“blind-sided” or “surprised”
By
Will Collette
Like
most Charlestown residents, I was alarmed by
recent details on the local segment of the Federal Railroad Administration’s
plan
for much-needed improvements to Amtrak service in the Northeast Corridor. The
new route is intended to straighten out tracks in our area to permit high speed
Acela trains to run at full speed.
The
alarming piece is called the “Saybrook-Kenyon Bypass.” It would cut a wide
swath through critical habitat and protected wild spaces such as Burlingame and
the Frances Carter Preserve.
Neighboring
communities face similar threats to their protected lands. It would even cut
through the US Fish and Wildlife Service’s proposed new
wildlife refuge to preserve our native bunnies.
Bear
in mind the Saybrook-Kenyon Bypass is part of a gigantic, multi-billion Northeast Corridor rail modernization
project
that at best will take 30 years to complete. That assumes it gets funding from a
radical Republican-controlled Congress.
We’ll
be lucky if this Congress funds disaster relief for the Northeast the next time
we’re hit by a big hurricane or blizzard, never mind a project like this.
This
plan has
not been approved by the incoming Trump Administration. For key
positions, Trump has picked oil industry executives with no self-interest in
public transportation projects. Incoming Transportation Secretary Elaine Chao has
no interest
in this type of project.
Nonetheless,
it would be irresponsible to ignore the threat, however remote, the Saybrook-Kenyon Bypass poses to our natural
treasures.
There
are some pretty powerful arguments on the merits against the Amtrak proposal,
given the impact it will have on natural resources in South County and eastern
Connecticut.
But
Charlestown town government seems fixated on basing their opposition on their claim
they have been hoodwinked by the feds. They claim the town was never given fair
warning.
In
her letter to the Federal
Railroad Administration, Charlestown Planning Commissar Ruth Platner even
implies that only the Narragansett Indian Tribe received any notice.
New
Council President Virginia Lee
complained to the Westerly Sun that the draft EIS didn’t explicitly
mention Charlestown “so we’ve been totally out of the loop
until now”. Lee also
makes several references to the Narragansett Indian Tribe, implying they were
“in the loop” while the town of Charlestown was not.
However,
that’s simply not true.
The draft Environmental
Impact Statement was sent to Charlestown Town Council Boss Tom Gentz over a year ago in November 2015. The plan itself was
first released in December 2014.
Gentz
is listed twice on the draft EIS
recipient list
twice, on pages FF-59 and FF-74.
Yes,
the Narragansetts were on that list. So were the Mayors, municipal councils and
municipal chief executives for virtually every city and town along the
Northeast Corridor. That includes Westerly, Richmond, Hopkinton, South
Kingstown, Exeter and so on.
Agencies
were also notified. For example, Jeff
Broadhead, director of the Washington County Regional Planning Council, got
a copy. Tom Gentz has been on that Council for years.
 |
| "Tom, is there anything you're not telling me?" |
State
and federal agencies, including the US Fish and Wildlife Service who’s new Great Thicket
National Wildlife Refuge will be heavily impacted, were also notified.
Nobody
from South County local government filed any
comments.
In
her FRA letter, Ruth Platner does acknowledge the FRA described the rail lines
running through Charlestown and the rest of our area. Oddly, she goes on a
tangent, criticizing Amtrak for calling the West Kingston Amtrak station “South
Kingston” and noting that West Kingston “is a place in the town of South Kingstown.”
Then five lines later, Platner criticizes Amtrak’s use of the
term “Saybrook-Kenyon Bypass”
asserting that “Kenyon is a place name,
not a municipality.” Well, neither is West Kingston.
None
of this semantical nit-picking helps Charlestown deal with this problem.
We’ve
known for years that the tracks running through Charlestown are not capable of
allowing Acela to run at full speed.
We’ve
known for years that Amtrak wants to change that.
This
is reason enough why we should have been paying attention from the very
beginning of the process because any likely
rail plan would have some impact on the tracks running through Charlestown.
We
missed the opportunity in 2015 to pay closer attention to Amtrak’s plan and to
at least pre-emptively file detailed comments about the important areas that
Amtrak should avoid.
That’s
on Tom Gentz who had the draft document 14 months ago. It’s on Jeff Broadhead
who runs an agency that’s supposed to stay on top of issues like this. He too
had the draft 14 months ago. They missed it. ‘Nuff said.
So
my advice to Charlestown town government is to stop with the victim act and
stick with the real issues, of which there are many. That’s the best way to not
only provide credible opposition to the plan but to also hold together what
seems like a Charlestown consensus against the local track re-routing proposal.
Here’s
one example of a way to frame the arguments on the substance, an op-ed written
by Kristen M. Castrataro of Richmond that ran in EcoRI.
By
KRISTEN M. CASTRATARO
Every election cycle, Rhode Islanders are asked to pass bond
issues to preserve farmland and open space, and every election cycle Rhode
Islanders rise to the occasion. Millions of dollars have been earmarked to buy
development rights on farms that otherwise would be turned into housing
developments or strip malls.
It is the height of irony, therefore, that Sen. Jack Reed, D-R.I.,
supports using more taxpayer dollars to destroy the very farmland and open
space his constituents regularly vote to protect.
The Tier 1 Final Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) details proposed changes to the
course of the tracks of the Northeast Corridor, changes that Sen. Reed
considers good for Providence.
What does that proposal entail for Rhode Island? According to the EIS,
the new railroad tracks would adversely impact an additional 11 cultural
resources and historic properties (note these are only the registered sites),
200 acres of prime farmland, 1,415 acres of prime timberland, and tribal lands.
This taxpayer fails to see the value in “preserving” farmland and
open spaces with tax dollars while simultaneously destroying farmland and open
spaces with more tax dollars.
It is no secret that Rhode Island has its struggles. The economy
is generally sluggish. The business environment has been described as decidedly
unfriendly. Political corruption jokes are standard fare in the media.
Despite these negatives, the Ocean State attracts residents,
tourists and students from all over the world, and is home to families that
trace their heritage back hundreds of years.
Why do they come? Why do they stay?
They stay because our little state offers something for everyone.
History and culture buffs can visit Newport mansions, historic farms and
industrial landmarks. Nature enthusiasts can wander through acres of forests,
bask on sun-drenched beaches, and bird-watch in open fields. Foodies can pick
out fresh meat, vegetables, fruits and seafood at farm stands, farmers markets
and local eateries.
Our cultural and natural resources make Rhode Island a destination
worth visiting, and this rail plan cuts through the heart of that.
Should this plan be implemented, a 150-acre, fourth-generation
livestock farm will be divided by the new tracks, land-locking the individual
parcels and effectively killing the farm business.
The Frances C. Carter Memorial Preserve, one of the largest
preserves in the state, will also be cut in half, endangering an 11-mile
open-space corridor. The Amos Green Farm, an 18th-century historic farm and
site of Revolutionary War Encampments, will be segmented.
Residents who just recently bought homes in a new subdivision
could be forced to move out.
The real travesty is that this plan has been almost five years in
the making and nobody thought it was important to inform these residents of the
threat until a week before Christmas. Really?
[EDITOR’S NOTE: Even in a letter written largely on the merits, we
still get this complaint about notice. However, in her case, notice to Richmond
residents should have come from Richmond town officials who also received the
draft EIS 14 months ago. At least she confines her complaint to just two lines
rather than make it the central theme].
In return for this, what does Rhode Island get? A shorter commute
to Boston and Washington, D.C., which will encourage local talent to work out
of state and further cripple our economy.
Increased train speeds, resulting in increased noise pollution and
additional threats to wildlife.
Added strains on the state coffers — higher taxes, anyone? — to develop and maintain the new, wider tracks.
The reality is that the EIS plan offers no real value to Rhode
Island while substantially damaging the elements that make the Ocean State an
appealing place to live and visit.
Contact your local, state and national officials via telephone
today to let them know that you are opposed to the Tier 1 EIS and that you
support Rhode Island’s open space and farmlands.
Kristen M.
Castrataro is a resident of Richmond, R.I.
