To the editor:
This letter in opposition to H6172 is provided as a resident of Little Compton, Rhode Island. If passed, H6172 would not only affect the general well-being of my neighbors and me, but would also create a serious health and safety concern for all Rhode Islanders, and create an unintended adverse impact on the on-going businesses of existing event venues throughout the State.
Most importantly, H6172 has not received support from farmers – the stakeholders that H6172 is intended to assist.
On May 10, 2017, the House Committee on Municipal Government held a hearing on H6172. The Rhode Island Farm Bureau, active farmers, the League of Cities and Towns and dozens of citizens from throughout the State opposed H6172 (recently, the Towns of Little Compton and Exeter adopted resolutions in opposition to H6172).
The near dearth of support was deafening – only counsel for Carolyn’s Sakonnet Vineyards testified in support – even H6172 sponsor Representative Costantino’s purported farmer constituents did not provide support for H6172.
Zoning has historically been the purview of municipalities.
The General Assembly wisely concluded that the intent and purpose of zoning is to allow municipalities to adequately regulate land use to promote the public’s health, safety, and general welfare. See, Rhode Island General Laws Sec. 45-24-29, Findings and Intent, and Sec. 45-29-30, General Purposes.
H6172 would eviscerate municipal control of land use and the fundamental purpose of zoning; i.e., to separate incongruous land uses to promote the public’s health, safety and general welfare. Promoting the general welfare, includes, but is not limited to, preventing adverse economic impacts on property values, preserving the character of the community, promoting orderly growth and development that recognizes the community’s natural, historic, cultural, and scenic character and the unique or valuable natural resources and features such as open space and scenic vistas unmarred by commercial activities such as parking lots.
Even more importantly, local zoning protects the health and safety of residents and visitors.
If passed, H6172 would allow any “farmer” to establish an event venue, wherein alcohol is served. The neophyte venues are not capable of or well suited to prevent over-serving of alcohol. Furthermore, farm venues make it nearly impossible to police “parking lot” alcohol consumption. Just imagine the increase in potential drunk drivers on unfamiliar rural roadways? For example, Carolyn’s Sakonnet Vineyards in Little Compton host concerts and weddings of up to 750 attendees, 4 times per week, with four football-field sized parking lots.
The basis for these events is justified by increased wine sales at these events. Could a “farmer” build a hotel, bar or restaurant and serve alcohol consistent with his/her claim of on increased agricultural product sales? The answer is yes, because “secondary agricultural operations”, as written in H6172, includes a vast array of potential commercial activities under the rubric of “other special events” and does not impose any measure of proportionality, scale, size, or impact on the surrounding community. Together with the amendment’s language forbidding a municipality from imposing restrictions on secondary agricultural operations that are “unduly burdensome”, the amendment would authorize the introduction of large-scale commercial activities in rural areas.
H6172 would set a dangerous precedent. In other words, what would be the limit of the General Assembly’s usurpation of local zoning authority? What other special landowner and/or business group might seek exemption from the long-standing principles of local zoning authority?
H6172 would undermine event businesses. Consider the impact to the more than 200 wedding venues in Rhode Island. If only 10% of Rhode Island’s 1,243 farms hosted weddings, this would represent over a 50% increase in the number of wedding venues in the state. Undoubtedly, this would have an impact on this industry and the increased opportunity for inebriated attendees driving on our roadways.
By passing H6172, you will allow an unknowable number of new competitors to enter the Rhode Island wedding venue business. These entertainment venue developers, disguised as “farmers”, will have several competitive advantages that traditional event venues do not enjoy:
- Limited exposure to the requirements of local zoning ordinances;
- Limited restrictions under local noise and entertainment ordinances; and
- Favorable property tax treatment based on conservation easement status or participation in the RI Farm, Forest and Open-Space program.
Even the casual “backyard farmer” who plants a pumpkin patch will be able to open a wedding or concert venue claiming that the revenue from his non-agricultural business is necessary to sustain his pumpkin business.
Brian Eliason
Little Compton