Statement from Keep Metacomet Green to the East Providence City Council on proposed development

On Tuesday, Keep Metacomet Green had the opportunity to present their case against Marshall Properties’ proposed development of Metacomet Gold Course.

Rhode Island News: Statement from Keep Metacomet Green to the East Providence City Council on proposed development

July 20, 2021, 8:23 pm

By Keep Metacomet Green

This statement is presented for the record by the nonprofit organization Keep Metacomet Green (KMG). The members of the organization share a concern that the iconic Metacomet Golf Club, which has been a fixture along the scenic Veterans Memorial Parkway for 100 years, will be destroyed for the sake of an unneeded and unwise commercial and residential development. We share in the belief that green space is vital to the wellbeing and vitality of our community and that wanton destruction of that open space will not draw new residents, but will in reality repel them. 

KMG was created on July 3, 2020, following a positive recommendation by Planning Board on June 23, 2020, in response to Marshall Property’s first petition to rezone this parcel. Marshall subsequently withdrew its application on September 25, 2020.

Since July 2020, membership on KMG’s Facebook page has grown from zero to over 2800, a number that demonstrates the magnitude of opposition to this plan. Membership has held steady over the past year, despite Marshall’s “sweetening the pot” by revising its applications on several occasions. 

In conjunction with the Facebook group, a online petition started earlier on change.org now has over 5200 signatures, a vast majority of whom are East Providence residents and all of whom support the cause. In addition, a number of hand-signed petitions have gathered several hundred signatures. 

On June 29, 2021, the City Planning Board met to consider Metacomet Properties’ (Marshall) petition to amend the City’s Comprehensive Plan to create a “Metacomet Sub-District” within the Waterfront District. It also petitioned the Board to recommend that the Council rezone Metacomet from Open Space to the proposed Metacomet Sub-district. The Board’s vote was split, but the majority prevailed in making a positive recommendation to the Council. 

There are a number of reasons for our opposition to this proposal – increased traffic, stress on public services, loss of wildlife habitat and mature trees, the negative impact on existing owners of hospitality businesses and vacant commercial property, and the destruction of the peaceful culture of our City – and they will be addressed briefly in this statement. The bulk of our presentation, however, concentrates on four issues.

  • First is the utter disregard for the numerous references in the Comprehensive Plan with respect to preservation of open space and the quality of life for our residents.
  • Second is the questionable sequence of events that placed Metacomet within a Federal “opportunity zone” despite the fact that the property is not in actuality eligible as a distressed area.
  • Third is the lack of transparency on Marshall’s part in sharing firm plans with the community or with the Council itself for the many acres of development that are not designated for public access.
  • Fourth – perhaps most important – is the fact that, should the Council approve this application and pass it along to the Waterfront Commission, it will be out of the Council’s control, and, once that green space is gone, it will be gone forever. 

This may well be the most important matter that comes before the current members of the Council. Your decision will impact the future of our city for years to come. Let that impact be for the better. As residents of East Providence and as your constituents, the members of KMG implore you to put the brakes on the Marshall application to rezone Metacomet and to amend the Comprehensive Plan to include the property within the Waterfront District.

1. East Providence Comprehensive Plan, 2010-2015 

The City’s Comprehensive Plan, “Plan 2015,” was an update in 2010 from previous versions and was intended to serve as a guideline for city planning for five years. It is overdue for a revision again, and the City is now in the process of amending it. We believe strongly that this revision should happen before any decision is made to rezone the Metacomet property. Until then, however, the Comprehensive Plan is the City’s governing document for determining planning policy and must be given proper consideration. 

While the Comprehensive Plan stresses the need for economic development, it also strongly advocates for the need to preserve the quality of life that we have all enjoyed as residents of East Providence. Moving in sequence through the document, the “Executive Summary” of the Plan (page 1) begins:

“The East Providence Comprehensive Plan seeks to ensure that East Providence’s growth is balanced with preservation, and that quality of life is protected and enhanced as the City grows, with an emphasis on neighborhood preservation, a vital and welcoming business climate for small and large businesses, ample parks and recreation, improved mobility for all modes of transportation, and the protection of the City and the region’s natural resources.” (emphasis added) 

The above words state in the most unequivocal way that growth needs to be balanced with preservation and that the quality of life of City residents needs to be of utmost concern when development plans are considered. 

Under the heading of “Intent and Purpose” on page 3, The Plan continues:

“The challenge for the City is to ensure quality development of the remaining undeveloped lands and the re-development of land for new uses, such as land in the waterfront districts, while protecting the quality of the life for residents, protecting the natural resources of the City, and creating an environment that can promote a favorable economic climate.” (emphasis added)

On page 14, the Comprehensive Plan under “Land Use Plan” explains that it is guided by the “The State’s Plan, Land Use 2025,” which was written in 2006 with a 20-year vision. The State’s Plan asks “Where Do We Want to Be in 20 Years?” 

“The Vision: Rhode Island of 2025 will be a unique and special place, influenced by its proximity to the Boston metropolitan area, but separate from it. The State’s landscape will retain its distinctive character. Its history, tradition, and compelling natural beauty will prevail as its hallmarks…. Rhode Island in 2025 will also be green and blue…. Where land meets water, the waterfront edge will remain the State’s trademark, carefully managed to provide utility and activity, while preserving the beauty of its natural features. In 2025, Rhode Island will be a place that strikes the proper balance between the needs of its people and the protection of its unique environmental resources. It will be a place where present and future generations may enjoy the benefits of the State’s natural beauty, engage the world through a productive economy, and retain a connection to their past while embracing a prosperous future. (emphasis added) (source: “Land Use 2025: Rhode Island State Land Use Policies and Plan” (April 2006), page 2-1; www.planning.ri.gov/documents/guide_plan/ landuse2025.pdf 

On page 112, in the “Natural Resources Element,” the Comprehensive Plan states as its Vision:

“Our vision for Natural Resources in East Providence embraces a positive community understanding of the value that natural resources have on the quality of life in a community. Natural resources are a significant ingredient in the well-being of the community and should be perpetuated for their visual, passive recreational and aesthetic qualities; as habitat for local wildlife, and for their natural hazard mitigation function. These resources are finite and irreplaceable. Our vision also recognizes that our natural resources have an impact that extends beyond the bounds of the City and should be viewed in their local and regional context.” (emphasis added) 

Within that section of the Plan on page 118, under the sub-section “Waterfront Areas,” is a commentary on “Scenic Areas and Viewpoints:”

“… Veterans Memorial Parkway, a state-designated scenic roadway, offers a pleasant scenic drive in the western part of East Providence. As noted in Ocean State Outdoors – State Guide Plan Element 152, green space along our major public roads needs to be recognized for the importance of aesthetic and functional roles. Waterfront Development District projects along the Parkway will be executed with full regard to preserving this roadway’s unique attributes.” (emphasis added) 

Next in the Plan is a section on “Recreation, Conservation, and Open Space Element.” The most pertinent language in this section is found on page 138: 

Development of any of the City’s golf courses would result in a loss of open space which would be a detriment to the overall recreation and open space system of East Providence.” (emphasis added)

Within the “Recreation, Conservation, and Open Space Element” beginning on page 141, a number of goals pertaining to open space, including golf courses (identified earlier in the section as Agawam Hunt, Metacomet, and Wannamoissett) are set out: 

Goal 6: Expand opportunities for tourism relating to recreational and cultural offerings. Objective 6.2: Support the continued operation and maintenance of the three private golf courses presently operating within the City. (emphasis added) 

Goal 7: Establish a mix of activity both recreational and functional in nature that preserved natural resources and aesthetics and contributes to the quality of life and economic stability of the community.

Goal 8: Preserve, expand and enhance open space within the City of East Providence while broadening access to the public where warranted. (emphasis added) 

  • Objective 8.1: Create a contiguous greenbelt network to function as a passive recreation, non-vehicular circulation, ecological landscape buffer and physical link between natural, recreational and historic points of interest.
  • Objective 8.2: Protect endangered and rare plant and animal species in East Providence based on the Natural Heritage Program List and incorporate the list as a standard tool in the development review process. Develop a plan to study, identify and catalog rare plant and animal species. (emphasis added) 
  • Objective 8.4: Coordinate efforts with Save the Bay, The Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management, the Coastal Resources Management Council, and the Natural Resource Conservation Service for wetland restoration in specific areas of the City’s waterfront.

Goal 9: Coordinate the development and preservation of open spaces so that together they contribute to a satisfying urban environment for City residents. (emphasis added) Objective 9.4: Investigate means for the protection and preservation of the City’s private golf courses. (emphasis added) 

Goal 10: Ensure that appropriate open space is available for the purpose of implementing environmental practices such as state-of-the-art stormwater management and the preservation and planting of trees and other vegetation for mitigation of air pollution.” (emphasis added) 

Within the “Community Sustainability Element,” the Plan sets forth a number of “Community Sustainability Goals And Objectives,” which begin on page 162 and include “Sustainability and Natural Resources:” 

Goal 1: Maintain, enhance and appropriately manage the City’s abundant natural resources.

Objective 1.1: Identify special districts or special places, and define their character, functions, and contributing features.

The clear intent of the Comprehensive Plan is to balance development with the preservation of our City’s beautiful natural resources.

2. The sequence of events that placed Metacomet within a Federally designated “opportunity zone” when in fact the property is not eligible as a distressed area 

From the United States Economic Development Administration

“An Opportunity Zone is an economically-distressed community where private investments, under certain conditions, may be eligible for capital gain tax incentives. Opportunity Zones were created under the 2017 Tax Cuts and Jobs Act, signed into law by President Donald J Trump on December 22, 2017, to stimulate economic development and job creation, by incentivizing long- term investments in low-income neighborhoods.” (emphasis added; source: https://www.eda.gov/opportunity-zones/) 

In February 2018, two months after the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act was signed, Rhode Island House Representative (and House Majority Leader) K Joseph Shekarchi, District 23 Warwick, introduced legislation to designate 25 areas in the state as “opportunity zones.” Then State Senator William J Conley Jr, District 18, then introduced the sister bill in the Senate. Note that both public servants have been part of Marshall Properties’ legal team. 

Of the 25 areas, only one in East Providence, Census Tract 104, was designated as an opportunity zone. Census Tract 104 includes a vast swath of property including Metacomet, Pierce Field, the surrounding community, and the waterfront commonly known as the Chevron property, despite the fact that this area is far from distressed. No other area in East Providence was so identified. Of most interest here, the Federal Financial Institutions Examination Council Census Reports, last modified in June 2020, reports that Census Tract 104 does not meet the criteria set by the IRS: “Tract Income Level: Moderate; Distressed or Under-served Tract: No.” (source: https://www.ffiec.gov/census/report.aspx?year=2020&county=007&tract=ALL&state= 44&report=demographic

Of particular interest here is language contained in a July 29, 2020, memo from Jim Moran, Chief Economic Planner, to William Fazioli, Director of Planning and Economic Development, regarding the placement of the Metacomet parcel in the Opportunity Zone: 

“While the [Opportunity Zone] Prospectus identifies several potential properties that might be good candidates for designation as an opportunity zone (opportunity fund) project, Metacomet Golf Club is never mentioned as a potential Opportunity Zone project site. Its only mention in the Prospectus is as a recreational amenity in the Zone (Agawam Hunt and Wannamoisett are also mentioned in the narrative). The City recognized throughout this entire process that the Metacomet Golf Club would not be referenced as an eligible Opportunity Zone project due to its ineligibility under federal rules to participate. 

“To be clear, as it relates to Tract 104, it should be firmly stated that at no time during the preparation of the Commerce Corporation’s recommendation questionnaire, nor during the City’s efforts to prepare a marketing prospectus, nor at any time in the overall marketing of the City’s Opportunity Zone, did staff from the City ever represent that the Metacomet Golf Club was a potential candidate for Opportunity Zone participation. In fact, Treasury rules specifically stated that golf courses are ineligible to participate as they are deemed a ‘sin use’ and are specifically banned from participation.”

In April 2018, Governor Gina Raimondo submitted a request to the Federal government to designate the 25 parcels within the state as opportunity zones. In May 2018 all areas were so designated. 

In a statement on its website, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) explains: 

“Recent changes in the tax law [pursuant to the Tax Cuts and Jobs Act] created qualified opportunity zones to encourage tax-favored investment in distressed communities throughout the country and United States territories. Under the new law, investors may be able to defer tax on almost all capital gains they invest after December 31, 2017, through December 31, 2026.” (emphasis added; source: https://www.irs.gov/newsroom/tax-reform-creates-opportunity zones-tax-incentive

Attorney Conley, a member of Marshall’s legal team, has mentioned several times that this project will take up to 10 years to unfold. This fits the timeline for an investor such as Marshall to defer tax on almost all capital gains they invest

3. The lack of transparency on Marshall’s part in sharing firm plans with the community 

As it did a year ago, Marshall has been vague, if not deliberately fuzzy, in its “plans” for the 60+ acres it intends to develop. The list of possible land uses makes it impossible to visualize what the reality will be. Allowed uses, either as permitted or conditional, range from all types of residential, retail, offices, hotels, conference centers, nursing homes, schools, congregate and continuing care, indoor agricultural centers, flex-tech, fast food and drive-through restaurants, medical research, places of assembly, churches, schools, theaters, business accelerators, government offices, and more. One cannot know what is being approved. At this point, any required “findings of fact” regarding adherence to the Comprehensive Plan are futile. 

Again, as it did a year ago, the Marshall team has claimed that the development will be a work in progress, and that actual plans will roll out in a long process. They have consistently suggested: “We’re only looking for rezoning now. Just trust us. We’ll work it all out together as the process moves along.” That puts the cart before the horse. Require that Marshall divulge its plans first; then rezone if appropriate. 

4. If the Council approves Marshall’s application, it will then be totally out of your control

The Rhode Island General Assembly passed a legislative act in June 2003 entitled “Relating to Special Development Districts — East Providence.” Following are sections of the Act making it clear that the Waterfront Commission has exclusive authority over the Waterfront District. (source for the following: http://webserver.rilin.state.ri.us/PublicLaws/law03/law03345.htm) “SECTION 1. There is hereby created an East Providence Waterfront District….” 

“Section 2. Purposes.

The purposes of this act are (a) to create a State-local-private sector partnership to plan, implement, administer, and oversee the development of the East Providence Waterfront District and (b) to authorize, provide for, and facilitate the consolidated exercise of development and redevelopment powers existing at the State and local levels. 

“Section 3. East Providence Waterfront District Created.

The East Providence Waterfront District is hereby constituted an independent public instrumentality and body corporate and politic for the purposes set forth in this chapter with a separate legal existence from the City and from the State and the exercise by the District of the powers conferred by this chapter shall be deemed and held to be the performance of an essential public function…. (emphasis added) 

“Section 5. District governance — Commission.

The powers of the District shall be exercised by a commission as herein provided.

“Section 6. Powers of the Commission.

The Commission shall have all the rights and powers necessary or convenient to carry out and effectuate this chapter, including, but not limited to, the rights and powers: …” (emphasis added) 

Substantial powers are then spelled out in this section: to purchase land, to sell land, to make contracts, to make and execute agreements, etc. 

“Section 11. Inconsistent laws or ordinances inoperative. 

Except as otherwise provided herein, any provisions of any special law and part of any special law and all ordinances and parts of ordinances pertaining to development within the district which are inconsistent with the provisions of this chapter shall be inoperative and cease to be effective. The provisions of this chapter shall be deemed to provide an exclusive, additional, alternative, and complete method for the doing of the things authorized hereby and shall be deemed and construed to be supplemental and additional to, and not in derogation of, powers conferred upon the District by law and on the city by its charter; provided, however, that insofar as the express provisions of this chapter are inconsistent with the provisions of any general or special law, administrative order or regulation, or ordinance of the City, the provisions of this chapter shall be controlling.” (emphasis added) 

Marshall’s legal team has stated numerous times that the rezoning request is simply Step #1 in a long process, suggesting that this step is the least important of many to come. We strongly believe that Step #1 is the most important step in the process and should be delayed now until numerous issues are sorted out or at least until Marshall sets forth before the Council a definitive plan.

We strongly urge the Council to defer a vote on this matter until the Planning Board issues its advisory opinion on a zoning ordinance amendment proposed by Councilwoman Anna Sousa that would require impact studies to be conducted prior to, rather than after, a rezone of Open Space to any other designation or district. 

The members of the Planning Board and the Waterfront Commission are appointed positions, not answerable to the residents of East Providence and not answerable to the East Providence City Council. You, the members of the Council, are our elected representatives. You are the firewall that keeps this proposal from moving on to the Waterfront Commission, which by law does not answer to any other authority. 

In addition, Other Concerns of the East Providence Community: 

  • Stress on the infrastructure and resources of the City: 
    • These stressors include dealing with increased traffic and road needs, such as evacuation routes; electricity and other power sources, water, water runoff, and sewage. Other public resources will be strained, including police, fire and rescue functions, and the already-strained education system. 
  • Destruction of the character and value of a significant portion of our community:
    • The designated “scenic drive” along Veterans Memorial Parkway will no longer be scenic with the intensified traffic, “signalization” and large-scale buildings that a massive development will bring. Fort Street and Lyons Avenue and neighborhood side streets such as South Broadway, among others, will see a significant increase in traffic as motorists and delivery drivers try to avoid the congestion on Veterans Memorial Parkway. The monetary value of a significant number of homes in the neighboring community will decrease, adversely affecting a significant portion of our population. Those residents’ entire quality of life will be diminished. 
  • The disappearance of green space for urban wildlife habitat provided by Metacomet:
    • As a result of the destruction of this green space, we will witness the displacement, accidental death and/or intentional killing of deer, coyotes, and smaller mammals such as raccoons, skunks, and hedgehogs; birds including turkeys, eagles, hawks and songbirds; reptiles including snakes, frogs, toads and lizards; and insects including important pollinators such as bees and butterflies.

On August 3, 2020, an article was posted online by ecori.org, an organization that provides “Environmental News for Southern New England.” The headline read “Metacomet Golf Club Developer Sells Itself as City’s Best Friend.” Marshall Properties’ principal Lianne Marshall is quoted in the article, “It’s going to be even better for the existing wildlife that is on the property.” This seems highly unlikely. 

  • The loss of mature trees: 
    • Although some trees may be retained along the property lines, other mature trees are sure to be cut down to make way for the construction of multiple mixed-use buildings. On the subject of trees, the United States Environmental Protection Agency declares that “Trees are valued for the beauty and many other benefits they bring to our landscapes and neighborhoods. Trees are increasingly recognized for their importance in managing runoff. Their leaf canopies help reduce erosion caused by falling rain. They also provide surface area where rain water lands and evaporates. Roots take up water and help create conditions in the soil that promote infiltration.” 
  • Concerns with Marshall Properties’ experience as developers: 
    • Marshall’s lack of experience with this type of development is a concern. A search of projects on Marshall Properties’ website (https://www.marshallpropertiesinc.com/projects.aspx) reveals that, other than Smith Street Plaza in Smithfield (RI), all Marshall projects to this point in time have been stand-alone office buildings, storage facilities, residential buildings and hotels. Regarding Smith Street Plaza, the development encompasses “a 3.5 acre 40,000 SF grocery anchored retail development which includes ALDI, Family Dollar, Advance Auto, Subway, Little Caesars, and Popeyes Chicken.” Is this the scope of experience or vision to which we will entrust our precious and limited Open Space?
  • The impact on existing commercial property owners and hospitality businesses in the City
    • There are a number of restaurants and taverns in Watchemoket Square, and on Warren and Waterman and Massasoit avenues, plus many scattered across the city, that would be severely impacted by the addition of new competitors. All across the City, commercial buildings sit vacant with storefronts boarded up. The property owners, who are existing taxpayers, would be negatively impacted by having to compete with the addition of a number of new commercial spaces. 

Recently, as the East Providence Post article noted in a June 23rd online article: 

“Designed to remove the blight that has become too numerous among vacant storefronts in the center of the city, the council recently gave the necessary approvals for a revised ordinance creating so-called “Mixed Use Hub Overlay Districts” in three of East Providence main traffic thoroughfares.”

The overlay district three existing commercial hubs in the city: Taunton Avenue, Waterman Avenue, and Warren Avenue. 

In its memorandum of June 25, 2021, to the Planning Board, the Planning Department advised— and cautioned: 

“The Planning Board and City Council have made recent efforts to revitalize the commercial corridors of Taunton Avenue, Waterman Avenue and Warren Avenue by allowing higher residential densities, a decrease in the minimum requirement of off-street parking and mixed use commercial/residential by the use of overlay districts. The overlay districts are intended to attract commercial, housing, retail, offices, and personal convenience services to create economic and social vitality to areas of the City that are experiencing vacancy rates and underutilized properties. The proposed 60.9 acres to be developed on the subject property has the potential to pull future economic and social activity from the commercial corridors that are in need of public and private investment. In addition, the existing commercial corridors of the City have the infrastructure in place to accommodate growth and investment that include controlled intersections (traffic lights, pedestrian crossings and turning lanes), in the vicinity of I-195 and arterial roads designed to carry large volumes of traffic.” (emphasis added) 


  • Delay rezoning the Metacomet property until the City’s Comprehensive Plan is updated.
    • As noted above, the City of East Providence is currently in the process of amending the current Comprehensive Plan, which is targeting an October 2021 date for Council and public review. We believe strongly that this revision to the Plan must happen before any decision is made to rezone the Metacomet property.
  • Postpone a decision on Marshall’s petition until the Planning Board renders its advisory opinion on Councilwoman Sousa’s zoning ordinance amendment as detailed above. 
  • Deny this application until Marshall Properties presents a detailed, solid plan for the property.
    • As noted above, Marshall has been vague about its plans and has not submitted any details as to what will actually fill those 60-plus acres of development. We cannot sacrifice such a beautiful, iconic and historic property and deliver it to the Waterfront Commission knowing next to nothing about the plan. 
  • Focus on supporting existing commercial property owners and hospitality businesses in the City.
    • As noted above, this Council has created a Mixed Use Overlay District specifically to benefit revitalization of existing commercial hubs with adequate infrastructure. 
  • Purchase the property for a City recreation center for young and old.
    • Twice in recent years, the people of East Providence have voted for a bond to build a recreation center. Twice our elected officials have done nothing. KMG has advocated tirelessly for the City to purchase this property either through a “friendly sale,” which Marshall has refused, or via eminent domain. Citing financial considerations, the Council voted not to pursue eminent domain “at this time.” The door is still open. The city is awash in Federal post-COVID money, and there are a number of Federal and state grants specifically targeted toward preservation of open space. We urge the Council and administration to work together to put together a financial plan that will help realize this goal. 
  • Let the people of East Providence decide the future of our City through a ballot referendum.
    • This is an extremely important issue, and a decision that should not be left to five individuals. The electorate deserves to be heard.


KMG is aware that Council members are being bombarded from all sides – from residents who support this development, from residents and others who don’t, from Marshall Properties, and from Mayor DaSilva himself, who has been the primary cheerleader for development of this property, despite the fact that numerous development projects are ongoing and envisioned for the city, including the so-called Chevron property immediately across the Parkway from Metacomet. 

On the day that Marshall announced its purchase and sale agreement with Metacomet Property Company in October 2020, the Mayor stated: “The city is fortunate that a local Rhode Island developer… will be working on this project. Working together… we’ll achieve something beneficial to East Providence through development that makes sense for our community.” In KMG’s view, this development makes no sense for our community. In fact, we fear that it will irreparably harm our community. The destruction of the open land as it now exists in order to build a concrete jungle in the midst of a residential community—complete with an elementary school and the iconic Pierce Field—is just not right. 

In closing, a sampling of online comments from East Providence residents: 

“Vets parkway is already over developed. Enough condos. The wildlife have no where to go. Make this beautiful course public or at least semi-public. We need open space.” – Margaret T

“I live in fort st across the street and one of the reasons I bought my house was because there was no houses in front of it. Just a nice golf course.” – Bella B

“East Providence doesn’t seem to ever fight for green space. That golf course has been there my entire 60 years how sad would it be to see it filled with buildings!” – Kathleen S

“We must stop eliminating habitat from our wildlife. We must deter the increase of traffic congestion and air pollution.” – Mary M

“This area is far too residential for something of this nature, it would diminish the quality of life for the residents of this neighborhood & the city as a whole. While I firmly believe that our city needs a development of this type and more commercial business & development this is not the location for it. The residents of this area need to be the first & utmost consideration in any decisions regarding the use of this property….” – Deborah C

“This area of East Providence remaining primarily residential is important for the community. The further industrialization/commercialization of this section of the city will not benefit the citizens.” – Kyla S

“It’s important to me.” – Devin P

“We don’t need more buildings we should value scenery and nature. It was already ruined twice before as trees were cut down by the bike path and expensive housing built for kettle point.” – Shauna M

“It’s essential to maintain community green Space.” – Ryan S

“As a 4th generation Townie it breaks my heart to see the rural scenic part of our community slowly disappear to big business. Please preserve this beautiful area for our children and future generations of Townies!” – Scott D

And just two days ago: 

“Hope everyone made out alright after yesterday’s storm… It doesn’t take much for the corner of Fort Street and Lyon Ave to flood, so water is then forced down side streets. Just think of what could happen if we don’t have the protection of the Met golf course to take most of the rain? What then?” – Lori C

These are our neighbors. These are your constituents. Once this green space is gone, it’s gone forever. It’s in your hands. This will be your legacy. The members of Keep Metacomet Green urge you to do the right thing. 

Presented by the administrators of Keep Metacomet Green on behalf of its members: 

  • Heather Andrade 
  • Jane Brindisi Crevier 
  • Roselette DeWitt 
  • Lynn Miller 
  • Candy Seel