Host Joe Tasca spoke with The Public’s Radio South County Bureau Reporter Alex Nunes about the commission’s work. Listen to the discussion or read a transcript of their conversation below.

TASCA: Hi, Alex.

NUNES: Hi, Joe.

TASCA: Alex, this commission has been meeting regularly since late last summer. What have they been up to, and where are they at now?

NUNES: The first part of this process was hearing testimony from experts in areas related to shoreline access–so property rights, coastal science, marine law, and privileges of the shore under the Rhode Island Constitution. The commission even traveled to South County for a public hearing that dozens of shoreline access advocates came out to. Now they need to decide what the big takeaways are and what the legislature should do. The commission’s chairs–representatives Terri Cortvriend and Blake Filippi–have indicated that they want to come away with proposed legislation that can help settle some of these shoreline disputes. 

TASCA: Remind us what the issue is here, what are people at odds about?

NUNES: So shoreline access is a complicated issue with different aspects to it. But one relates to where people are legally allowed to be along the shore in Rhode Island. That’s specifically what this commission was set up to look at. The Rhode Island Constitution guarantees what are called privileges of the shore, including fishing, collecting seaweed, swimming, and walking along the shore. And this is for the entire Rhode Island shoreline. But the Constitution doesn’t say what the boundaries of the shore are. So that’s where the dispute is: Where can you legally be along the water? We’ve been using a court ruling from the 1980s that says you have to stay below the 18.6-year mean high tide line. Shoreline access advocates say that’s absurd: It’s not enough room on the beach, and no one knows where that line is anyway. But property owners say they pay a lot in taxes to their towns and are entitled to the beachfront in their backyards. Last year, Representative Cortvriend introduced a bill that sought to basically decriminalize trespassing along the shore. That failed, and I think that’s now seen as being too indirect a way of dealing with the problem, and people want to establish a line that’s specific and clear.

TASCA: Does the commission seem to be leaning in a certain direction?

NUNES: I would say yes and no. There is agreement that the current way of doing things isn’t working and that it needs to be changed. People think the 18.6-year line is not practical and it’s becoming more and more irrelevant with sea level rise and coastal erosion. But the commission doesn’t have consensus on what the change should be. I should say that the commission is made up of people who come at this topic from different perspectives and professional backgrounds. Some are more neutral, some favor more access for the public, and some appear to lean more on the side of property owners. Attorney Mark McKenney is one member who has a more conservative take on things. He’s on the panel because he has experience with land use issues. When the commission met Thursday, he recommended allowing access to the “wrack line” where seaweed washes up, but he seemed to suggest the commission should be wary of bigger changes.

MARK MCKENNEY [quote from commission meeting]: I think everyone is in favor of expansive public rights. I do think it is wise for us to at least keep in mind the concern that comes with going too far.

TASCA: So where do the people who want more access think the line should be drawn?

NUNES: The members of the commission who are more strongly pro access weren’t as specific and concrete, but they suggested being bolder and more expansive. Different states define public access differently. Oregon says the public can use the whole beach below the vegetation line. But a state like Maine is actually more restrictive than our current rules. Access advocates I’ve spoken with like the vegetation line idea. They’ve also suggested the seaweed line, plus 10 feet. But property rights people say the more expansive options would amount to an illegal taking of their land without compensation, which shoreline access advocates disagree with.

TASCA: And when are the commission’s recommendations expected to be ready?

NUNES: Probably sometime in March.

TASCA: Complicated stuff, Alex.

NUNES: Yes, Joe. No day at the beach.

TASCA: Alex, thanks for the update.

NUNES: Thank you, Joe.

Alex Nunes can be reached at anunes@thepublicsradio.org