Platner pans progress
By Will Collette
In Platner’s latest screed against the state for wanting
Charlestown allow more homes to be built for average families, she headlines
the issue this way: New
State Plan, Housing 2030, Mandates Rural Towns Grow At A Faster Rate Than Urban
Areas.
She's referring to Housing 2030, Gov. Dan McKee’s attempt to appear proactive
about Rhode Island’s affordable housing crisis. His plan has been mainly seen
as too little, too late but to Platner, it seems like an existential threat.
Why? Because it singles out rural towns, particularly Charlestown, as most in
need of new housing, more so than the cities.
Duh. Of course rural towns need to do more because over the
past 25+ years, they’ve done less.
In her new CCA blog article, Platner continues to try to
manipulate data to make her case that Charlestown is being treated unfairly. This
is far from the first time that Platner has followed the adage the “if you
torture statistics enough, you can make them say anything.”
In March 2024, she attempted a particularly obnoxious
approach using census data to “prove” her thesis that “Charlestown
has grown 11 times faster than the state.” Her point was that the state
wanted Charlestown to grow even faster and really, enough is enough.
Except Platner cooked the census numbers. Using 50 years of
data, she arrived at the 11 times number. But all of Charlestown’s growth was
pre-2000. In this century, Charlestown’s growth has flatlined as Platner admitted in the Charlestown Comprehensive
Plan:
"The Town of Charlestown experienced rapid
population growth in the last decade of the 20th century, moving from 6,478
residents in 1990 to 7,859 in 2000, a change of 1,381 residents or 21.3%.
Since
2000, however, population growth has declined or been flat, as is
shown in the above table (See Plan,
page 10-2, Table HC-1) showing an estimated town population of 7,772 in
2015 (a decline of 87 residents or 1.1%). Population projections provided by
the RI Office of Statewide Planning show a return to a growth trend, with a
population of 9,329 by 2040.
This represents a 20% increase between 2015 and
2040. However, this level of growth is not likely to be realized given recent
trends, the ageing [SIC] of the local populace and expected modest declines in
average household size. While the actual numbers are likely to be considerably
less, these projections will be utilized in this chapter for estimating housing
growth, and the need
for low and moderate-income units relating to the state’s 10% threshold…”.
Since 2000 and certainly since Platner rose to become
Planning Commissar, the most powerful politician in Charlestown, the town has
devolved into a gated senior citizens’ enclave as Platner and the CCA blocked
new housing for working families.
 |
| Here's a Charlestown house that just sold to a Connecticut couple. It was assessed at $1,060,000 and sold for $1,300,000. (Charlestown Tax Assessor) |
“From 2010 to 2023, 357 new homes were built in
Charlestown. However, those 357 new dwellings barely register in the census data as many are
consumed for non-resident use. An additional 54 new house lots were
approved in 2023 and have not been built yet; the majority are likely to be second homes."
She made an even blunter assessment in a CCA blog article:
“The supply of affluent people willing to pay high
prices for homes and short or long-term rentals will consume any increase in housing production.”
 |
| Currently, the best many low and moderate income buyers can hope for in Charlestown is a campsite at Burlingame Park (DEM photo) |
While median age will trend upward and the segment
of the population over age 60 will continue to grow, other general population
characteristics should remain steady or change in modest form.
“This trend may suggest a greater need for housing
designed for and more suited to elderly occupancy and needs, including
elderly rental, single-story accessible designs, smaller unit footprints and
limits on bedrooms. Location wise [SIC] such housing should consider issues of
service availability, ease of access and walkability. Entry level family housing, both
homeownership and rental, will remain a need over the timeframe of
this plan."
Those 8,000 of us who make Charlestown our home understand the status quo that Ruth Platner created and desperately seeks to maintain.
Contrary to Platner's claims, Charlestown experienced massive population growth each and every year.
 |
| EcoRI photo by Frank Carini |
This morning's Providence Journal carried a deep dig analysis - spread over several articles - of housing sales statewide over the past five years. The first piece is entitled "Out-of-state buyers are purchasing more RI homes. Is that a good thing or bad thing?"
The ProJo confirms that we're not imagining the influx of out of state buyers. They also bluntly note that they buy here because we're cheaper than where they live, plus they can and do out-bid local residents.
They provide more detail in a second piece, "RIers can't compete with out-of-state home buyers. Why building more is the only way out." Their data analysis and conclusions directly contradict the CCA's and Ruth Platner's stance on housing.
There are two more articles that focus primarily on high-end property, of the type that have been selling for enormous prices in Charlestown and the demographics of the new buyers. These articles are entitled Where are out-of-state home buyers coming from, and what brings them to Rhode Island? and Out-of-state buyers snap up nearly half of RI homes over $1 million. Where they're going.
 |
| Another recent sale of a Charlestown property to a Connecticut couple. This house was assessed at $2,415,400 and was bought at $2,850,000 |
The ProJo's main conclusion is: RIers can't compete with out-of-state home buyers. Why building more is the only way out. This is the point where Ruth Platner's head explodes. The ProJo collection of articles and research eviscerates the arguments she and the CCA have promoted since the millennium. I look forward to her counterpoint to the Providence Journal.
Platner thinks the solution to Charlestown’s problems is to accept
the swarms of absentee property owners and summer people while restricting housing
for everyone else, young or old. And she’ll continue to search for ways to
rationalize that approach.
If you’ve followed Progressive Charlestown’s coverage of the
many times Platner and the CCA have made different and contradictory claims,
you’ll notice a pattern. When Platner produces an official document that will
be fact-checked prior to state or federal approval, or is subject to perjury, she
keeps the bullshit to a minimum.
But when she writes (or ghost-writes) campaign material or
propaganda for the CCA blog, anything goes.
For me as a political writer, it’s a lot easier to debate a politician’s claims by using their own words. When Ruth the politician makes a claim, often about housing or open space, it’s a simple matter of finding what Ruth wrote when she faced the pain and penalty of perjury because it's usually the opposite.
Two-faced politicians are a plague on our civil society. Charlestown
voters made it clear in 2022 and 2024 that they are sick of lies and deception.