'Delay tactic': Coastal council criticized for inaction on country club's illegal seawall

NORTH KINGSTOWN – A "very influential and wealthy person" receives a speeding ticket on Interstate 95. They hire a former attorney general as their lawyer, and get engineers to argue that the state should actually raise the speed limit on that stretch of highway.

That's the analogy that Rich Hittinger of Rhode Island Saltwater Anglers drew to the situation at Quidnessett Country Club .

Last year, Quidnessett illegally built a massive, 600-foot seawall without the Coastal Resources Management Council's permission. After getting caught, the club hired the CRMC's former chair as its attorney, and petitioned the coastal regulator to change its rules.

Now, the closely watched saga is proving to be the latest example of how the CRMC's politically appointed council isn't always aligned with the agency's professional staff.

In a detailed 20-page report submitted last week, CRMC policy staff made their position clear: The council should deny the club's request. But on Tuesday, the CRMC's Planning and Procedures subcommittee punted on a decision and instead voted to hold another meeting where the club can bring in experts to present their case.

"It’s a delay tactic," said Jed Thorp, director of advocacy for Save The Bay. "I think the country club feels that the longer they stretch this out, the longer that wall sits there, and that’s to their benefit."

Raymond Coia, the CRMC's chairman, disputed that assessment and said it was simply a matter of due process.

"Obviously, they don't know the law," he said of the council's critics. "They just want to throw bombs."

Erosion, public access at stake

If the country club had asked permission to build the seawall, there's a strong likelihood that request would have been denied.

Quidnessett's scenic course overlooks what are deemed Type 1 waters, meaning that they're in a natural, undisturbed state – and seawalls aren't allowed.

The club is now petitioning the CRMC to change that water type classification, making the case that the surrounding area has changed and the current designation no longer fits.

If successful, the club will seek approval for the riprap revetment that it already built. But the CRMC is also addressing the violation through a separate enforcement process, and could potentially force the club to remove the wall.

At a July meeting where the public had a chance to comment, both sides outlined what was at stake.

Representatives of the country club, including numerous members and employees , said that a portion of the 18-hole golf course could tumble into the ocean if the seawall is removed. There isn't space to simply redesign the course, one member argued.

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

Environmental and coastal access advocates argued that the seawall is blocking public access, and hastening the erosion of the surrounding shoreline. They vehemently objected to the idea of changing the water type classification after the fact.

"It's way too late," Hittinger said.

'Lack of urgency' criticized

The CRMC's staff ultimately came down on the side of advocates, and concluded that the country club's petition should be denied.

Severe wave action makes the area "particularly unsuitable for structures," the report states. It goes on to explain that the seawall could accelerate the erosion of the sandy beach to the south, further restricting the public's ability to use the shoreline and damaging fragile salt marshes that are home to endangered turtles.

After policy analysts Bruce Lofgren and Kevin Sloan presented those findings to the subcommittee on Tuesday, attorney Jennifer Cervenka said Quidnessett would like to make its own presentation and bring in several witnesses. Members unanimously voted for a continuance, giving the club time to do so.

"The lack of urgency is disappointing," Michael Woods of Backcountry Hunter and Anglers said afterwards. He and Thorp noted that Quidnessett's experts could have made their case at the meeting in July, like everyone else.

"They could have," acknowledged Anthony DeSisto, the subcommittee's attorney. "But they did not."

If Quidnessett doesn't get a chance to make a formal presentation, a court could rule that the club was denied due process, or remand the matter back to the council, DeSisto said.

Quidnessett's spokesman, Mike Raia, said in an email that the club "was informed directly by CRMC staff that there was no need to present at the meeting in July."

The presentation "will show that the change we seek is appropriate for this area of shoreline," he wrote, adding that Rhode Island "needs to modernize its regulatory processes to ensure that resilient infrastructure can be built at the speed of climate change."

This story was updated to add a video.

This article originally appeared on The Providence Journal: 'Delay tactic': Coastal council criticized for inaction on country club's illegal seawall