Where does public access to Rhode Island’s immaculate coastlines end and private, limited, and protected ownership begin?

It is a complex question with no certain answers which will undergo further scrutiny this week at the Rhode Island Senate, where a bill (S0417) introduced by Warwick’s Mark McKenney will be discussed in a continuation of efforts that began over a year ago, when a different version of that bill came up late in the legislative session at the RI House of Representatives. McKenney looks to answer where the public right of way along a beach ends and how is that measured when there is a seawall or a rock embankment from the water’s edge.  Does the public have the right to set up chairs, spread a blanket and have a party on the lawn of a homeowner? The answer would seem to be “no” and that’s what McKenney reasons.

The premise and arguments for advocates in support of increased public shoreline access is somewhat simple. Rhode Island’s Constitution states that the public shall have access to the shoreline, but centuries of development have rendered many of those access points to the shore firmly within the confines of private property. The result, those in favor of the bill claim, is that areas once utilized for public access (and marked as such on historic maps), are now out of reach of members of the public, and solely enjoyed by owners of private property.

Private property owners, as you might imagine, see it differently. As taxpayers who purchased valuable parcels, they see no reason, morally or legally, that any random stranger should be allowed to take a stroll or set up a beach chair in what for years has amounted to their own private backyard.

Regardless of where the state’s legal authorities (namely the Attorney General’s office and the Coastal Resources Management Council) lands on the issue, and regardless of whether the legislation proposed in the House or Senate (they vary somewhat on where exactly that line between public and private property should begin) actually passes, it is all but guaranteed that private property owners will bring lawsuits against any decision that threatens their hold on such picturesque and valuable pieces of property.

We are of the mindset that important recreational resources, such as Rhode Island’s beautiful coastlines, do not benefit the public good when they are confined to use by a handful of citizens. Those citizens have reaped the benefits of those natural resources, which have ballooned their home values. It seems only fair that there be some sort of compromise, even if just specifically in the instances where private property has overtaken historically public access points.

We commend our legislators for tackling the issue.