With Friends like we have in the decision-making apparatus on subject island with three communities all doing their own thing, we do not need any obstructionists. I thought the Wicks traditional project was put to bed. There has to be another way to give landowners their money than destroy the rural setting of this island where organically-grown healthy food can still be found locally.

But if the town council bodies want to continue the economic growth of destruction then we get what we deserve: More pollution, toxins in watersheds, higher taxes to mitigate flooding and support the infrastructure, a bigger carbon foot-print due to "traditional housing" projects, etc., count me the ways...

During the "Target" debacle, that took many resources to arrive at a long-awaited decision regarding "big-box" development zoning, many subjects were broached to instill thinking outside the box by the committees and council members. But, to no avail! I felt like calling into C-SPAN at the hearings.

Perhaps we need to resuscitate the "PreservePortsmouth.org" banner carriers to head off the surges of projects that destroy our way of life. Do we want to become like Manhattan? Well it already exists in New York Harbor and is available for renters or buyers with unlimited potential. Try the air or water there.

Cheerio,
Wernerlll

While I agree that civility must prevail and that orderly processes for economic development of many species serve the interest of individual citizens, I am conflicted by the passivity of those involved in the processes.
I’m sure township members are working hard to support their missions with too little appreciation. However, the issues raised by local voters should be of concern by these same hard-working folks. Times have changed and more change is on the way with very little that will be classified as favorable to Aquidneck Island. I find these township bodies seemingly uncurious and continue to deliberate on their assigned tasks until their product is discovered by people adversely impacted causing emotional distress and anger. Why go so far? Because it has always been done that way and the charters cannot be changed?
If representatives working in the interest of a community conduct business as usual without considering the phenomenal changes racing toward us, then our way of life will not be sustained. Us here on our island are especially vulnerable to change with developers breathing down our neck and corporations wanting to get a foot-hold. There is no stemming the tide while stockholders, but not all, feel justified in following in the footsteps of Milton Friedman’s economic model, that of making money, and of course, there is never enough.
Planning and preparation for future needs comes at a premium. We like decisions, and fast. It’s the American way. But how will our grandchildren feel about our lifestyles – will we help them get prepared?
I will not see the catastrophe lurking ahead, but many scientists have warned us over the last 50 years. Yet we still do little to change our behavior or habits to ward against the consequences our life-styles. Our exuberance for unlimited consumption of earth’s resources above and below the surface while at the same time contaminating our home-planet with toxins that eventually will lead to the destruction of most flora, fauna and man himself will likely occur before the full force of climate change arrives.
Far out? Yes, for some. No one wants to listen to gloom and doom and even scientists have been censored by our government. I suppose, we, the people, do not have a “need to know”. As I was lectured once during a town council meeting that “we are not here to solve the world’s problems”. Right.
Cheers, I think,
Wernerlll

Hi John and Werner,

I have to say I agree with both of you. I think that the members of town boards, specifically in this case the Planning Board, can appear to be incurious because they know they must follow the ordinances, and that developers' lawyers are extremely well-versed in the ordinances. It's the ordinances and laws that need to be changed, as happened with the Target building cap which was the result of, as John points out, townspeople getting together and making it happen.

I've gone to several of these meetings, including the one on Wednesday where the board heard the new Wicks proposal. The board has to hear the proposal (although in this case it's unclear what kind of answer the developer was looking for, it seemed the only possible answer was "maybe"). What's really striking about these meetings is the dichotomy between the developers (usually white men wearing nice suits, lawyers in tow, also usually white men in nice suits, along with their engineers who strangely don't seem to have as nice suits) and the general public. For example, at the meeting on Wednesday, the developer's lawyer spoke confidently, referring often to professional engineering and traffic studies, to LMI issues, to town ordinances and requirements. Then Mr. Moitoza, an 80 year old World War II vet and abutter to the Wicks property whose grandfather used to own the land, got up to the microphone to speak. He objected on different grounds, like traffic and run-off, but he didn't reference ordinances and he wasn't as articulate as the lawyer. A sinking feeling went through the audience, at least I felt it, that Mr. Moitoza, though he's probably right and he's voicing what many people think, has no chance against the developer with his array of expensive professionals. It's very easy to feel disheartened and intimidated which is, of course, an advantage to developers and their lawyers.

So, the moral of the story is that we need in Portsmouth a grassroots group, maybe Preserve Portsmouth, that would serve as a counterbalance to the developers. We need a group that can come together and put pressure on town and state representatives to change out-dated ordinances that encourage development from the last century that ignore issues of stress on the land and quality of life (like traffic and breathing clean air). Members of this group would have to brainstorm ideas and be willing to go to very boring meetings. Anybody interested?

Thank You Gentlemen,
Great responses and encouraging remarks. Please permit me to explain my views. My seemingly discouraged attitude is in part driven by my experience with the Target debacle as part of the PreservePortsmouth.org experience.
1. While many dedicated people participated and spoke out I was disappointed that one parcel of land could generate so much wrangling and took an inordinately long time to resolve.
2. I was shocked to learn that zoning laws were in place that were outdated, antiquated, and did not consider green technology, impact analysis of continuing to pave over arable land when we are in dire need for organically-grown local food and the right to breath healthy air, drink potable water free of seeping chemicals and run-off, eat uncontaminated sea food, and swim in ocean waters free of E-coli.
3. I was surprised to find that we citizens had to raise our own funds, and find time and energy to conduct research in order to bring to bear experts for the benefit of educating us all, including elected officials and business owners as to the risks facing home owners and deciders alike.
4. Notwithstanding the impact to the community at large and the potential of eroding our quality of life, I am of the opinion that we should strive for “betterment” of life in paradise by installing bicycle paths on the designated bike trails, possibly resuscitate an old sewage plant I heard was located near the Raytheon plant using federal grants, benchmark our carbon foot-print, change our ordinances to encourage home owners to plant trees on their streets, authorize carbon credits for greening projects (including organic farming through USDA grants), change our zoning to both green farming and construction, Invite energy experts and scientists as to the Best Business and Management Processes and Practices (BBMPP) in all areas touching ours and our children’s lives.
5. Float bonds (or use other people’s money) for a Conservation Project Demonstration and Manufacturing Institute for such ideas as algae for bio-energy, rainwater harvesting, affordable solar panels, healthy fish farming, affordable reverse osmosis water conservation, organic deterrent for invasive species, state of the art technology transfer for honey bee protection from insecticide, pesticide, and herbicide.
Thank you for listening in the I hope not to offend or raise the ire of those of you who believe in continuous growth, prosperity, development, jobs, affordable housing, nor the entrepreneurs with thoughts of making this island a hub for international commerce.

Cautiously optimistic,

Wernerlll