With Fogland Beach now officially open for the season, the Tiverton Town Council is considering an ordinance amendment that would prohibit non-Tiverton residents from accessing most areas of the beach between sunrise and 8 a.m. and from 4 to 10 p.m. each day.

At a public hearing last week, recreation commission chairman Stu Gilfillen told the council the proposed rules resulted in part from residents’ complaints that when visiting local beaches, particularly Fogland, they notice many parked cars are from out-of-state.

“We wanted to see if we could give Tiverton’s residents the opportunity of accessing the beach first,” he said.

Recreation Commissioner Bob Sedoma added that for the past two summers, he has routinely been visiting Fogland early each morning, and often sees 20 to 30 cars entering before the arrival of beach attendants who check passes and assess entry fees. He says many are out-of-state vehicles and it is not unreasonable to assume their occupants arrive early to avoid the admission fee. Some have told him so.

“Out of town residents are going in there, using our beach, our water, our bathrooms and they are not paying and is not fair for Tiverton residents. I have complaints from Tiverton residents that they get to the beach and all the good spots are taken.”

A similar scene unfolds in late afternoon, he said.

“At 4, they are lining up on the road and coming in like it’s Seekonk Speedway. Five, 10, 15 [vehicles] at a time because they know they don’t have to pay…It’s just not fair to the taxpayers of the town, and we should take care of Tiverton residents first.” He said other communities including Little Compton and Westport avoid similar situations because restrictions are in place.

Homeowner concerns

Babak Bina and Mark Plympton, who each own homes near the beach, told the council they fully support the proposed changes. They described illegal activities they often observe at or near the beach, and spoke of nightmarish and in some cases life-threatening encounters they’ve had with visitors.

Bina said that because of unrestricted access visitors now enjoy, he has chased trespassers out of his yard in the middle of the night, been physically threatened, and routinely sees visitors violating town ordinances by consuming alcohol, setting off fireworks, and burning fires late at night. 

The town has been responsive to his complaints, Bina said, and he has seen improvement in the past couple of years. Nonetheless, he feels a long-term and permanent solution is needed. 

“I’ve been in situations – not once, not twice – to the point where I’ve wanted to sell the house. I should not have to go through that.”

Plympton said last year a man started throwing rocks at him in his back yard, because he felt Plympton was staring at him. He has observed trespassers defecating in his yard and seen fishermen urinating on the rocks near his home.

“I am not asking people who come to Fogland Point not to come," added Plympton, who said he has had several encounters, including trespassers going to the bathroom in his yard, or on the rocks near his home.

"I am not asking them not to enjoy it. I am simply asking them to come at a reasonable time and to do reasonable things.”

Both men support installation of a gate at the entrance to the beach and are willing to absorb the costs. “We need to lock it down like every other place gets locked down at night,” said Plympton. “It’s a little bit out of control.”

Police Chief Patrick Jones told the council that a key part of any enforcement at the beach will ultimately include a police presence. He outlined steps to address residents’ complaints, including the installation of cameras at strategic locations and the addition of $35,000 to this year’s police budget to fund summer beach patrols. This will allow trained special officers, he said, to patrol the beach for up to 12 hours a day throughout the summer. They will be friendly to visitors, but will be able to issue citations and will serve as a deterrent to improper behavior. One of the duties of a newly appointed community policing sergeant will be to manage the officers and handle scheduling and training.

The special officers, Jones said, will be a positive presence, walking the beach and introducing themselves to families, but their message will be clear: visitors cannot come to the beach and misbehave. “If they do, there will be consequences.”

Impact on windsurfers

Not all favor tighter beach restrictions. Carl Ferreira, a Tiverton resident and member of the Fogland Windsurfers, said the group’s 340 members object strongly to the proposed changes, particularly the exclusion of non-residents after 4 p.m. He acknowledged the concerns raised by Bina and Plympton and said the installation of cameras, a greater police presence, and other methods should be implemented to curtail undesirable and illegal activities.

Ferreira believes the ordinance will give rise to “confusion and acrimony” and will have profound implications for business owners in town.

“The prospect of discouraging people from coming to town is not exactly the template for sound business practices,” he said.

Harbor Commission Chair Bruce Cox said the commission opposes “any exclusivity limiting access to the waters for any citizens.”

When asked by deMedeiros if the commission is therefore opposed to the gate at Grinnell’s Beach, Cox said it was an interesting question and clarified that his statement represented the Harbor Commission’s position, not his as a private citizen.

“I don’t see the difference between shutting down Grinnell’s at sunset and shutting down Fogland at sunset,” said deMedeiros.

Harbor Commission member Clint Clemens, who said he was addressing the group as a private citizen, said the proposed amendment “opens a Pandora’s box of enforcement.” He suggested the town should not emulate other communities when managing its beaches.

“In the Seapowet area, we are actually proud of the fact that people can come into the beach and use the beach. Granted, we don’t have many houses there, but it’s open to many underserved communities.”

The problems experienced by homeowners at Fogland, Clemens said, need to be addressed by “beefing up enforcement of existing laws.”

Next steps

Councilors agreed to continue the public hearing on the proposed amendment to a future date. In an apparent nod to windsurfers, they seemed willing to remove the 4-10 p.m. restriction. Input from the Coastal Resources Management Council (CRMC) and Tiverton’s Open Space Commission is needed prior to final action.

At least two councilors, Denise deMedeiros and Mike Burk, showed a willingness at the meeting to consider installation of a gate. In follow up comments later, however, Burk said he is rethinking the gate and does not believe it is the council’s role to create a gated community. “Babak and Mark are the only two voices of Fogland residents from whom we have heard publicly and we don’t know if others have the same concerns,” he said.

During the meeting, Councilor Deb Janick summarized the discussion on the proposed amendment and the balancing act facing town officials.

“People should not live like this,” she said, referring to the homeowners who spoke at the hearing. “They should not have their personal space occupied by people doing no good. But we want to keep the waters open for recreation. How do we control that?”