Charlestown vigilantes?

A new twist on the endless battle over shoreline access

By Will Collette

Signs warning of ticket penalties posted by Nope’s Island Conservation Association. 
Credit: Courtesy of Stephen Cersosimo

The Public’s Radio South County bureau chief Alex Nunes has probably done more in-depth coverage of the on-going battle between beachgoers and shoreline property owners than anyone. 

Even though the right of beach access is written into the RI Constitution and a new state law was passed last year to define those rights, the issue is far from resolved.

Along the way, Alex has written about fences, signage, walls, nose-to-nose conflicts, legislative fights and a conveyor belt of lawsuits filed for and against beach access. We’ve learned about “fake fire districts,” glorified homeowner associations that actually don’t fight fires but serve as a tax dodge and beach bulwark.

In a separate article, we’ll cover a brand-new problem – a federal judge’s rulingthat calls RI’s shoreline access right into question, but for now, let’s look at the issue of privacy and vigilantism.

Charlestown police accused of empowering ‘vigilantes’ to help patrol local beach

Under a new policy, the Charlestown Police Department is using video surveillance captured by private individuals to help enforce a town driving ordinance on a barrier beach.

By Alex Nunes July 12, 2024, The Public's Radio

Shoreline access and civil liberties advocates are crying foul over a new policy in Charlestown welcoming private individuals to collect surveillance evidence for police to use in enforcing a vehicle ordinance on a barrier beach at the center of multiple beach access legal fights.

Under the new policy rolled out by the Charlestown Police Department this summer season, people who believe they see someone violating a seasonal restriction on driving on the beach face at the Quonochontaug Barrier Beach can record video to send to the police department for officers to investigate and possibly act on, according to Charlestown Town Administrator Jeffrey Allen.

“The police department has been accepting time-stamped videos of potential violators, and they research it, and they obtain a written statement from the person who was responsible for taking the video, and they will look into it and potentially write summonses,” Allen said. “We’re basically getting the information from a private property owner.” 

In explaining the policy, he said the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management also accepts evidence from individuals “in these types of situations where there’s not a lot of active enforcement for whatever reason – right, lack of manpower, or situations where this is hard to get to.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: For many years, law enforcement has not only accepted, but often solicited photos and video to help catch criminals. The Boston Marathon bombing is a famous example. Private cellphone video of the police murder of George Floyd was crucial in convicting the officers involved. Few would question the value or legitimacy of those uses. – Will Collette

Charlestown police have already issued two tickets using the new system, Allen said. While it’s not clear what fine the tickets levy, the municipal ordinance they are issued under provides for penalties up to a $500 fine or 30 days imprisonment.

Allen, who previously served as chief of the Charlestown Police Department during a 32-year law enforcement career, said the new policy was “a first for me.” 

“I never really heard of it,” Allen said. “But times are changing, right?”

Steven Brown, executive director of the Rhode Island affiliate of the American Civil Liberties Union, had a stronger reaction to the new policy. 

“It sounds very disturbing,” Brown said. “The idea of delegating private citizens to engage in this type of law enforcement activity seems quite inappropriate.”

“That’s something that we might very well look into once we get more information about what’s going on,” he added. “If the town is essentially deputizing private residents to enforce a local ordinance, it’s problematic.” 

Scott Keeley, a shoreline access advocate and Charlestown resident, said the policy has created “vigilantes” gathering information for law enforcement. 

“It doesn’t sound right to me at all,” Keeley said. “I didn’t even know that was possible.” 

EDITOR’S NOTE: Weaponizing video or photo taking as a tool for harassment is, in my opinion, way over the line. Charlestown Citizens Alliance leader Cliff Vanover used to use his camera to provoke opponents or bait them into a fight. He did that to me. He succeeded in provoking then Town Council President Jim Mageau to push away Vanover’s camera. That led to an assault charge by Vanover against Mageau that ended up in a circus trial. But the actual legality of Cliff’s actions has never been judged in court. – Will Collette

The new policy comes as the town continues to navigate a fraught situation on the Charlestown side of the Quonochontaug Barrier Beach, which begins in Westerly and stretches 1.7 miles east before ending at a state breachway. 

The Nope’s Island Conservation Association, which owns the majority of the land on the barrier beach in Charlestown, has been pressuring the town to more strictly enforce a town ordinance that prevents vehicles from traveling on the beach face in Charlestown during the summer months. Nope’s Island members say four-wheel-drive vehicles are damaging the dunes.

Allen said the evidence that led to the two tickets was submitted to the police department by the conservation group.

Shoreline access advocates and fishermen who use the area have accused the conservation association of overstating the threat of vehicles as part of a “ruse” aimed at making the area less accessible to visitors. The Nope’s Island Conservation Association is associated with the Weekapaug Fire District, which is fighting two costly legal battles to prevent public access to the barrier beach shores. The two organizations share the same address, the fire district headquarters, and belong to a membership group that sets policies on the barrier beach.

People pushing for increased police enforcement also contend the Sand Trail path that leads down  the barrier beach and onto the beach sand in Charlestown does not give the public the right to access the state property at the breachway. The path is currently before the Rhode Island Coastal Resources Management Council for consideration as a state designated right-of-way to the shore, and the Weekapaug Fire District has taken the case to court to prevent a public designation.

EDITOR’S NOTE: Weekapaug is one of those fake fire districts that lacks the ability to fight fires, instead serving as a homeowners’ association. = Will Collette

Earlier this year, Charlestown Town Council member Stephen Stokes held a private meeting with Nope’s Island and officials from Charlestown, Westerly, the CRMC, DEM, and Rhode Island Mobile Sportfishermen, which also owns property on the barrier beach in Charlestown, to discuss concerns the conservation group has about vehicles on the barrier beach.

The town council later considered an ordinance change to expand the dates of the beach driving restrictions, but the plan was abandoned following outcry from beach access advocates and skepticism from some town council members.

People interested in the issue had considered it settled for the time being. Then photos surfaced this week of signs posted on Nope’s Island Conservation Association land implying visitors could face enforcement action.

Two signs photographed read:

“Sand Trail Ends…Private Property

No Vehicle Trespassing……Violators Will Be Ticketed By Camera”

Allen, Charlestown’s administrator, said the signs do not belong to the town or state and Nope’s Island Conservation Association President Michael Sands has acknowledged that he placed them on Nope’s Island property.

Allen said the town does not plan to remove the signs. When it was pointed out to him that the signs could be read to suggest enforcement of trespass law, while Nope’s Island is assisting the town with enforcing an ordinance about driving on the beach face, Allen said, “Well, fine, then it’s not legally valid then. So what’s the problem?”

“What do you want me to say?” Allen said regarding the signs. “You want me to go down there and throw them away? I’m not throwing them away. It’s on private property. It’s on Nope’s Island property.”

Allen said he forwarded the information to CRMC in case the signs violate state regulations and CRMC is investigating the situation.

In a statement sent to The Public’s Radio, Sands, the Nope’s Island president, said his organization has “photographic resources and evidence of vehicles illegally trespassing on our property that we share with respective law enforcement officials. Those same photos may contain violations of Charlestown, CRMC and DEM laws at the same time. That is for the respective agencies to determine.”

EDITOR’S NOTE: It’s not illegal for a private group to take photos and videos and then forward them to law enforcement along with their allegations. Does it have a chilling effect on beachgoers? Sure it does.

The CRMC and DEM did not immediately respond when asked by email Friday morning if the agencies had received any video or other image evidence from Nope’s Island and acted on it.

Brown, of the ACLU, called the signs Nope’s Island put up on the barrier beach “completely inappropriate.”

“Private residents have no right to be putting up signs saying that people are going to be ticketed,” he said. 

EDITOR’S NOTE: Rhode Island General Laws 11-14-1 makes it a crime to impersonate a “public officer.” The law’s definition would apply to Charlestown Police, the Town of Charlestown, CRMC or DEM. The Nope’s Island signs that claim that “Violators will be ticketed by camera” looks to me like a fit. But hey, I’m not a lawyer. – Will Collette

Keeley, the shoreline access advocate, said the signs and video surveillance will have the effect of scaring away people who have a right to visit the shore, which he believes is the intent of Nope’s Island. 

“They’re getting a private beach for filming and turning people in,” Keeley said. “I’m surprised that the Charlestown police would support that. Maybe they just don’t understand its intent is to privatize the shore.”

No simple walk on the beach

Scientists decipher shoreline access law for public in Charlestown

By Cynthia Drummond, Rhode Island Current

Coastal geologist Janet Freedman, far left holding microphone, and Coastal Institute Science Director Nathan Vinhatiero, holding measuring instrument, point out one of several seaweed lines on East Beach. (Cynthia Drummond/Rhode Island Current)

One line of seaweed lies up against the dunes at East Beach. A second is in the middle of the beach. A third line is near the water.

Rhode Island’s new shoreline access law calls for using the seaweed line to measure public access. But which line would you use?

That depends, Coastal Geologist Janet Freedman and Science Director Nathan Vinhatiero told a group of about 50 people late Thursday afternoon. They were on a tour to learn more about how Rhode Island’s new shoreline access law will work.

Freedman pointed to the highest seaweed line, or wrack line, near the dune.

“We believe that this was deposited during Lee,” she said, referring to the offshore hurricane that passed by southern New England last Saturday. “It’s still kind of an extraordinary tide, just because the waves were much higher than usual. So, this line would not be the line that you measure your 10 feet off of.”

Then the group turned their heads to follow Freedman’s gesture toward the second seaweed line in the middle of the beach.

“We had a little debate on would you go by this debris line, because we don’t see another debris line,” she said.

Freedman said she and Vinhatiero had concluded that in this case, the measuring point should be the line where wet sand met dry sand.

Congratulations to local heroes

Let’s give a round of applause to local folks doing good things

By Will Collette

Over the past 12 years that I’ve written in Progressive Charlestown, I must admit that most of the things I write go after people and organizations who, in my opinion, deserve to be criticized. This article is different as it celebrates a crop of local heroes who have, again in my opinion, made life a little better for all of us.

Earlier this year, I flagged Charlestown’s own gourmet spot, the Sly Fox Den Too, at the junction of Routes 2 and 112, and Chef Sherry Pocknett for winning this year’s James Beard Foundation Award for Best Chef Northeast. I’m looking forward to congratulating her again when she gets her first Michelin star.

In this article, I will feature South County Hospital, our intrepid town staff who came up with a way to save lives at the beach, opening the beach to the public and two guys who worked hard to make that happen, including one who has been giving Charlestown some of its best coverage since Cynthia Drummond stopped being our town’s go-to reporter.

Thank you, South County Hospital. 

As a recent patient (read my review HERE), I was not surprised to see that South County is the only hospital in Rhode Island to receive a double-five-star rating from Medicare. They earned this top rating for “Hospital Quality” and “Patient Experience.”

In a separate rating done by US News and World Report, South County was rating as “High Performing” in three categories of orthopedic care: back surgery, hip and knee replacement. This is probably due to their affiliate, Ortho RI.

I can add my amen to both those rankings after my four days as an inpatient, where even the quality and taste of the food was great. South County has been earning top marks for a very long time, a tradition I trace to their long-time legendary administrator, the late Donald Ford. If you must go to the hospital, South County is the place to be.

Using drones to save lives. 

Charlestown's drone drops rescue device, not bombs

Congratulations to Charlestown GIS Coordinator Steve McCandless and the Parks & Recreation lifeguards for deploying rescue drones at each of the town’s beaches. Unlike the Russo-Ukrainian war where drones play a Terminator role, our drones watch for swimmers in trouble, missing kids, debris in the water and sharks.

They can drop a flotation device to a swimmer in distress. The importance of beach safety was recently highlighted after a 15-year old from New London drowned off a Westerly beach. While a system like Charlestown’s would not have saved that boy (he died after hours when no lifeguard was on duty), it can and will save others.

DEM also has a single drone, but according to WPRI, hasn’t figured out how to use it. I don’t know if WPRI intended to make DEM look bad or if DEM did it to themselves.

DEM admitted they: (a) can’t come up with trained operators, (b) don’t have a plan for where to deploy it and (c) admit the obvious problem of only having one drone for all the waters DEM covers. DEM has not been able to hire enough lifeguards either. Hmm, maybe they should buy a few more drones. Or pay lifeguards more.

DEM told WPRI they will study what Charlestown is doing to see if there are lessons they can learn. Duh.

Public use of the beach.

Scott Keeley, beach crusader (photo by Steve Ahlquist)

Congratulations to the RI General Assembly for finally passing legislation that clarifies where the public’s right of beach access begins on Rhode Island’s coast. Though snotty beachfront owners, fake fire districts and the Filippi family are still fighting as well as flouting the law, the tide has turned, if you’ll pardon the pun.

I credit passage of the new law to the years of relentless fighting by Charlestown activist Scott Keeley, whose recent run-in with private security had a happy ending. I also credit South County public radio reporter Alex Nunes for his frequent, in-depth stories on beach access in general and the role played by fake fire districts in worsening the problem.

What missing from this picture from the Central Quonnie
Fire District? Answer: fire trucks cuz they don't have any

Fake fire districts are misnamed organizations because they have no capacity to fight fires. Instead, they operate as upscale homeowners’ associations as well as tax shelters for millions of dollars’ worth of prime coastal land – for which they pay little or no property taxes.

They own lots of beachfront land and are among the most tenacious in trying to keep the public off “their” beaches. Next, the General Assembly should enact legislation stripping fake fire districts of their undeserved tax status. How can you honestly call yourself a “fire district” when you have nothing to do with fires. Except for the barbeque at the tennis club.

Shining a light on Charlestown affordable housing

Alex Nunes

Congratulations again to The Public’s Radio’s Alex Nunes for an in-depth look at Charlestown’s affordable housing crisis. 

I can’t remember any other major media outlet taking such a detailed look at this Charlestown issue in the 20+ years Cathy and I have lived here.

It’s an open secret that Charlestown’s near complete lack of affordable housing either for sale or rent is largely due to blocking efforts by the Charlestown Citizens Alliance (CCA) and their de facto leader, Planning Commissar Ruth Platner. 

Through the CCA’s exclusionary zoning, rapacious land deals and the use of arbitrary standards, “affordable housing” has become anathema in Charlestown.

But maybe that will change now that the CCA is out of power. 

Nunes interviews the pro- and anti- sides of the affordable housing debate, giving ample time to proponents such as Affordable Housing Commission chair Evelyn Smith and commission member Thom Cahir time and space to build the case for affordable housing.

Nunes also gave Ruth Platner the most time and space I’ve ever seen in an article she didn’t write herself to expound on her philosophy of aesthetics, astronomy and what she sees as the common good. 

This is just a summary - this article is a must-read for anyone living in Charlestown.

Charlestown Town Council plate runneth over

Upcoming Town Council Meetings - Mar 27, 29

From Charlestown Residents United

From left to right: Susan Cooper (CCA), Rippy Serra (vice-president), Deb Carney (president), Grace Klinger, Steve Stokes

We have three, yes THREE, Town Council meetings coming up on Monday, March 27, and Wednesday, March 29. Here is your preview.

Monday's meeting will start at 7 pm in the town hall council chambers as usual. The agenda and backup materials can be seen here.

Here are some notable topics from the agenda:

• The Council will be considering new Zoning rules for Public Storage Facilities and perhaps schedule those rules for the formal public hearing on April 24. Public Storage Facilities were removed as an allowed use on April 11, 2022 with that restriction set to expire on April 30, 2023. This proposal would extend that restriction for another year. More details can be read here.

• There has been previous discussion about Cannabis regulation (reported here and here). At this meeting there will be a discussion of draft ordinance changes for that purpose. Starting here in the agenda packet, you can read the history in Town Council minutes, the new draft, and comments on that draft by Joseph Warner, the Town Building Official (dated March 20, 2023).

• There has been a ongoing issue with bills for "out of scope services" from our financial auditors, that total about $56,000. The Town has been struggling to receive adequate explanation of the work and the authorization for it. This will be discussed again. The agenda packet section for this topic, starting here, does not appear to include any new information.

• The Council will consider directing the Parks and Recreation Director to obtain quotations for lighting and electricity for Puchalski Field, behind town hall. The agenda packet gives a paragraph of rationale here.

• Scott Keeley proposed new signs for our Town Beaches at the February 27 Council meeting (reported here). This meeting includes an agenda item to consider developing new signs. The details can be read in the agenda packet here.

• The South Couth County Tourism Council has proposed something called the South County Troll Trail as a tourism initiative. The Council will discuss whether to participate in this. The details are in the agenda packet starting here.

On Wednesday, March 29, there will be two Council meetings:

The first Wednesday meeting will start at 6 pm and will be held jointly with the Planning Commission to discuss Commercial and Village Design Standards. This is an outcome of the February 27 Council meeting here there was some concern about how the bid process was handled and how the work would be done, reported here. The agenda packet has details including the detailed minutes of that section of the February 27 meeting.

The second Wednesday meeting will start at 7 pm and will be devoted to discussion of a report on Operational and Organizational Assessment of the Town’s financial processes and internal controls by consulting firm Clifton Larson Allen LLP. The agenda packet includes the report.

As usual public attendance in person in town hall is allowed for these meetings. They will be offered as a live stream to view through WebEx as described in the agenda. People watching online will not be able to comment or ask questions. The video of the sessions should be available for viewing on the morning after each meeting, on the meetings page. It will be down the page in the Past Meetings section.

Council considers village district guidelines, affordable housing and pot shops

Feb. 27, 2023 Town Council Meeting Report

From Charlestown Residents United 

New sign design suggested by Scott Keeley

Our preview of this meeting was published here.

The agenda packet for this meeting is here. The video for the meeting can be viewed here.

Scott Keeley appeared under Persons Wishing to Be Heard to speak about signage at the town beaches. He lamented the condition and quality of the current town signs and the misinformation on private signs near the beach. 

He showed some ideas for new signs, that would include statements of the constitution rights to use the beach. These can be seen in the agenda packet here.

Planning Commission Chair Ruth Platner spoke for awarding the bid for Commercial and Village Design Standards. (agenda item Fiscal Matters A) This work will produce guidelines for village areas of town. The result will come to the Council for possible adoption in zoning regulations. 

There was considerable discussion, initiated by Councilmember Stephen Stokes and taking almost half of the meeting time, about whether the bid period of approximately 3 weeks over the New Year was sufficient to receive the best bid. Only one bid was received. 

The current bid was rejected and the Council asked the Planning Department to re-issue the RFP for a period of 30 days to receive more bid options.

The town solicitor suggested that he could draft a cannabis sales ordinance based on other examples that are readily available, with the objective of bringing a draft for discussion to the Council in a month. The Council approved that.

The Council requested that the town solicitor draft an affordable housing trust fund ordinance to put a better framework around management of town funding for affordable housing. The Council expects to review this in April.

Council member Stephen Stokes initiated the agenda item to request an advisory opinion from the Planner and Planning Commission about giving development options among Conventional, Cluster and Conservation Development. 

He stated the objective, to give more flexibility. He asked for the advisory opinion to be delivered by April 10, 2023. This motion passed 4 - 1 with Councilor Cooper opposing.

The meeting adjourned at 8:38 pm.

Our Shoreline Rights are under attack.

Anonymous shoreline owners trying to kill bill affirming your constititutional rights

By Scott Keeley 

Photo courtesy of Scott Keeley

A form of this article originally appeared in the Westerly Sun.

Please contact your state representative in support of H8055 and your rights to the Rhode Island Shore. 

The Shoreline Access Study Commission was made up of representatives from both sides of the issue, studied both sides of the issue over the past year, and has come up with a fair compromise in the bill H8055.

The Rhode Island Constitution gives citizens the right to the privileges of the shore. A few of those privileges are listed in the constitution after the phrase “including but not limited to…” 

A new bill, H8055, protects our rights to our shoreline. The bill does not expand our rights.

It only clarifies that we indeed have rights under the Rhode Island Constitution and designates a location where those rights exist by clarifying the definition of the term “Shore.”

But Rhode Island residents beware! 

The bill is under threat by privately secured legal groups hired by anonymous shoreline-property owners. 

You may hear that the property owners are concerned for the safety of the public and that they would be liable if someone were hurt on what they like to call “their beach.” 

You may also hear them say that Rhode Island taxpayers will have to compensate them for “their beach” if the state lets people use the shore. 

You may also hear that if a beach chair is placed on the shore, a keg party will soon follow. 

These arguments are meritless. 

Shoreline property owners are not liable for public safety as we exercise our constitutional rights. 

The Rhode Island Constitution addresses the takings clause, and they will not win in court. So, your tax dollars are safe.  

Forbidding Rhode Island residents to sit on the shore will lead directly to private beaches statewide. 

Contact your state representative now and ask for her or his support for H8055. 

The House Judiciary Committee is expected to hold a hearing on the bill on Tuesday, April 5 at 4:30 PM. You can send the Committee an e-mail at HouseJudiciary@rilegislature.gov.

You can watch the hearing at https://www.rilegislature.gov/CapTV/Pages/default.aspx.

Class war at the beach

Public Concerned About Ocean State’s Vanishing Shoreline Access

By ROB SMITH/ecoRI News staff

Homeowners, like this one in South Kingstown, R.I., have been known to make it difficult for the public to gain shoreline access in front of their properties, despite the constitutional right to do so. (Frank Carini/ecoRI News)

Rhode Islanders got their first crack at public comment at a recent meeting of the House commission to study shoreline access. Beachgoers and shoreline advocates shared their experiences of being arrested for trespassing, navigating Barrington’s arbitrary no-parking laws, and finding increased restriction to the coast by private landowners.

The 12-member commission was created by legislation passed in the spring and introduced by now-chair Rep. Terri Cortviend, D-Portsmouth. Shoreline access is enshrined in the Rhode Island constitution, and limited by legal precedent to the mean high tide line, or mean high water (MHW). Advocates say limiting access to the MHW denies people their rights; landowners claim anything else encroaches on their property rights.

Barrington resident and shoreline advocate Ken Block described how his town government severely restricts access to the shore. The wealthy East Bay town, said Block, has blanketed all roads leading to six separate public rights of way to the shore with “no parking” signs. 

According to data provided by the town, all but six parking tickets issued between 2019 and June 2021 were issued on streets with a public right of way. The remaining 352 tickets were written in response to a resident calling to complain.

EDITOR'S NOTE: On Nov 2, the Boston Globe reported on the entrance of the RI ACLU into beach access litigation brought against Sarah McKenna of Pawtucket by Charlestown beach property owner James Marsh of Avon, CT. Marsh charges Ms. McKenna with trespass and libel for sunbathing in a spot she thought was below the mean high tide line. Marsh also claims Ms. McKenna libeled him by her description of their confrontation posted on a Facebook (Meta?) site. 

The libel claim and the demand that Ms. McKenna remove all posts related to the dispute brought the ACLU in to defend Ms. McKenna using Rhode Island's anti-SLAPP law. SLAPPs are "strategic lawsuits against public participation." They used to be common but now are less so after many states. like Rhode Island, passed laws protecting free speech.      -Will Collette

On Saturday, fight for the right to the beach

Join in group kelp collection at Charlestown Beach

From http://www.shorelinerights.org

On Saturday, June 26 2021, 10:00 AM at Charlestown Beach supporters of the legal right to use Rhode Island beaches will gather to …. Collect kelp!

This action signifies the right of Rhode Islanders under the state Constitution to, among other things, “collect seaweed” as well as fish, walk and enjoy the shore line.

In Rhode Island, the public has a constitutional right to use the shoreline below the mean high-tide mark. This right has been repeatedly violated by court cases and private beachfront landowners. We call on our state legislators to draft a clear law to codify our right to the shoreline.

On June 6, 2019 a man was arrested for collecting seaweed on a public beach in South Kingstown, RI. The next day, police dropped the charges and apologized. Why? Because neither law enforcement or the landowners who had him arrested could identify a boundary between public and private land. They could not prove trespassing.

When we enjoy our shoreline, we are not trespassing. We are exercising our constitutional right to “to enjoy and freely exercise all the rights of fishery, and privileges of the shore, to which they have been heretofore entitled, under the charter and usages of the state.” (RI Constitution).

No one, not even a private landowner with a hired guard, can take that away from us. Every year these beachfront landowners try to take away more of the public’s shoreline.

We demand a clearly defined statute that codifies our right to the shoreline.

Here is the language in the Constitution:

Charlestown Voters asked to support Council Candidates

Please support these Charlestown Democrats

By Catherine O’Reilly Collette, Chair of the Charlestown Democratic Town Committee

On behalf of the Charlestown Democratic Town Committee, I am proud to endorse and support the three fine Democrats on the November 3 ballot for Charlestown Town Council: Deb Carney, Jodi Frank and Scott Keeley.

Each of these individuals bring experience and talent that will serve the people of Charlestown well.

I have known Deb Carney for nearly 20 years, watched her chair the Council when we first moved to Charlestown, then admired her outstanding work on the Chariho School Committee. I consider her to be one of the most talented and hard-working public servants I have ever met. She currently serves as Council Vice-President and seeks re-election.

Jodi Frank served the town for six years as a member of the Parks and Recreation Commission, putting her Ph.D. in Kinesiology to good use by working on improvements in Ninigret Park and Charlestown’s public lands. She is currently finishing up her B.S. in Nursing and will be an RN early in 2021.  

I met Scott Keeley 15 years ago and have always loved his humor and breadth of knowledge. I admire the way he has taken on the issue of the people’s right to use the beach despite efforts by non-resident beachfront property owners to deny access.

For the past decade, Charlestown has been controlled by a single party: the Charlestown Citizens Alliance that was spawned by the Rhode Island Shoreline Coalition with its focus on the interests of absentee land-owners. They have raised our taxes just about every year since they’ve been in control, engaged in shady land deals, driven out small businesses and purged town commissions of anyone not a CCA loyalist.

Each election year, absentee property owners flood the CCA treasury with cash to try to sell Charlestown voters the same overblown story that we are under threat of unspeakable horrors to our rural way of life and only the CCA can keep us safe. You’ll see that message in the CCA flyers that will be filling your mailboxes.

It’s time to stop being driven by fear. We need to focus on positive ways to move forward: fair taxes, sensible land use, choosing qualified people for town boards and commissions and using town resources to help our community cope with the problems caused by the pandemic and a badly damaged economy.

I know Deb Carney, Jodi Frank and Scott Keeley are the best qualified people on the ballot to get the job done. I urge you to vote for them when you cast your ballot – by mail or in person - in this year’s election.