Until last week, Tiverton residents Daniel Perry and Madeline Dessert would likely have laughed if anyone had referred to them as activists. That was before they woke one morning and discovered that a neighbor had installed a no-trespassing sign and oversized planters on a nearby patch of town-owned land that provides access to the beach bordering their home. 

Within days of complaining to town officials, a Tiverton DPW crew came by and removed both the sign and the barriers.

The couple lives in a tranquil neighborhood off High Hill Road, not far from Fogland Beach. The mini-drama that played out last week in some ways mirrors the public access battles taking place in coastal towns throughout Rhode Island, and was also the latest skirmish in a bitter feud with a neighbor that has gone on for more than a decade.

Elaine Barboza, who installed the sign and barriers, could not be reached for comment, and her attorney did not respond to a reporter’s query.

But Perry and Dessert, and some of their neighbors, say last week’s issue was a perfect example of the chaos and disruptions that now seem to define their once peaceful neighborhood. 

“She was blocking access for the public to go to the beach,” said Perry of Barboza. “The public can come down here — and they do. They come from everywhere.”

Perry and Dessert’s neighbor, Carolyn Wieman, said she shared their concern about the attempt to block beach access, and contacted shoreline access activist Conrad Ferla, the founder of RI Coastal Access, who counseled her on next steps. Following his advice, she went to the Tiverton tax assessor, who told her the property was town land, and no permission had been granted to limit public access.

“You can’t just stick a sign in the middle of town property. The answer was no. So DPW came and removed it,” Wieman said.

Perry said the disputes with Barboza reached a turning point last fall, when her attorney wrote to Dessert, informing her that his client(s) possessed a “specifically deeded access right” to and from the beach area, guaranteeing her use of the beach or shore for purposes of boating and bathing. Dessert’s property, he said, does not enjoy the same “delineated rights.”

Perry, who for 13 years had mowed the town-owned patch of land adjacent to his and Dessert’s home, learned via the attorney’s letter that maintenance of the property was not an acceptable practice. The attorney’s letter was a demand to “cease and desist in utilizing the property in any way whatsoever.”

Perry and Dessert’s legal counsel has responded, addressing what they say is Barboza’s attorney’s mistaken opinion regarding Dessert’s property rights.

“He keeps insisting she has no rights, because it’s not in her deed,” said Perry.

Despite the latest incident, Perry, Dessert, Wieman and the other friends who gathered last week had no problem answering a reporter’s query about what they love about the area.

“It’s so tranquil,” said Dessert. “As soon as I make the corner from Main Road, down Pond Bridge, I relax. It’s so beautiful.”

Said Wieman: “It’s the peacefulness.”