To the Editor:

Having lived in this area for over 20 years and being a keen observer of Cranston’s politics, having run for mayor of Cranston, attempting to run as an independent for City Council, organizing “Citizens of Cranston for Fair and Equitable Taxation,” and in the middle of “Freedom now a New Beginning,” I have observed a palatable sense that the “train shall never meet” for Cranston East versus West!

I’m sure you remember all of the shouting coming from the West for the naming of the Cranston Stadium.

The recent yelling that has taken place over two proposed projects to be located in the west are as plausible as any signs that Cranston will never be united as one city. Residents holding NO signs in the Cranston East Auditorium (yes, they did drive to the East side), over the Procaccianti proposal and at the council chambers a few days later over the proposal, they were yelling bloody murder against these projects. It should be pointed out right away that the Planning Commission enthusiastically endorsed the Procaccianti proposal and were leaning strongly for approval of the proposal.

Although I am sure there are some sincere residents that are concerned with each or both projects being in my neighborhood, the main complaints as demonstrated in the meetings were traffic, sewer and water. Now, lets talk about traffic. First, the road structure in the concerned area was established mostly for open land, however as the communities grew they did not expand with the development of the area. But where were all of the demonstrators before the announcements of these projects? You never heard from them, even though highways were being built right under their noses through western Cranston. My strong guess is they did not want expanded roads, because it would disturb their feeling as rural living. I believe that their concerts about sewer and water were properly explained.

So what we really have here are smoke screens put forth to hide the truth. The truth is they do not want any established developments in their section of the city! Now they will be quick to yell that there have been other developments, however none as large or involved as the two current ones. Maybe it’s a case of enough is enough, or they either don’t know or like the current developers.

This entire anti-development attitude flies in the face of a city hanging on by a financial thread. It still has not begun (although, there is agreement subject to lawsuits and/or court and state approval) to begin solving the city’s $350 million unfunded liabilities. Notwithstanding that problem, our schools and city parts of the overall budget do not look favorably on what was once a vibrant and forward looking city. This leaves all factions: unions, administration, council and school district all fighting for more dollars to satisfy their special interests, many of which are, or should be, to the benefit of all citizens of Cranston. However, many of the desires are broken up by the division brought on by the East versus West we find ourselves living with!

At this time, it should be pointed out what a former superintendent of schools told me; that there is no way to minimize the fault line between East and West when it comes to education.

Now let’s get to the current politics and how it is influencing (fostering is a better word) the slide to division. At the last meeting, three of the council members spoke (Lanni, Aceto and Farina) and challenged the project on the basis of a certain road for the project. They were so anxious to give their opinion that they forgot to do their homework. If they had, they would have found out that this road was proposed by the Cranston Fire Department for safety reasons.

Now ask yourself, why are East side council members looking to shower favors on the West side? It is pure and simple politics. See, if they can shower the western part of the city with “kisses,” they will have a much better chance of keeping control of the council as Democrats. Even though they will argue that the map does not support this notion, they will fail to tell you that there is much “oil” to be discovered in that part of the city and they want to claim it.

If you care to be even more cynical, in suggesting that there are behind-the-scenes goings-on for other land sales and development that will be discovered shortly. How about giving the suffering taxpayers of Cranston a clue: we would like to know how we are to expect where and when the required revenue is to come from to pay for all services, including roads, trees, curbs and educational funds for more than basics: to include music, sports, special classes and maybe even band uniforms that were not handed down.

So you see, Senators Lombardi, Gallo and Miller, and Representatives Lima, Mattiello and Palumbo, et all, please face reality and start the framework to set up autonomous Cranston East and Cranston West cities.

If you all do your homework, you will find many more examples than I have stated that truly divides this once thriving city. You will look long and hard to try and find common ground, but the divide is so great on so many levels that the only answer is to let them go their separate ways. You might be surprised that a healthy rivalry would be born to offer all taxpayers a more honest approach to governing, resulting in financial stability and services that will allow for sustained growth for both entities. This will allow promises made resulting in promises kept!

Let’s begin a new and exciting era, giving citizens from East and West the opportunity to cheer for their cities!

If anyone wants to argue against this proposal, then have him or her come up with alternate suggestions to remove us from the “quicksand” road we are currently traveling!

Richard Tomlins

Cranston