The Quonset Davisville Management Corporation’s Board of Directors has rejected a proposal to relocate Port of Providence operations to the port at Quonset Point/Davisville. University of Rhode Island Professor David Nixon had floated the idea, but legislators representing North Kingstown rallied against it immediately.
Rep. Melvoid Benson, a Democrat, said the town’s citizens “would never embrace it.” Rep. Kenneth Carter, a Democrat, said the port at the former Navy base should never have anything to do with grain or fuel, because of the potential for environmental problems.
Beyond Cash Donations: How New Forms of Giving Are Transforming Not-for-Profit Accounting
Evolving Funding Landscape for Not-for-Profits Not-for-profit organizations are being asked to do more with less,…
Learn More
“It’s not a good fit for Quonset or the town, and there would be tremendous unrest in North Kingstown were this proposal to be developed,” said Rep. Suzanne Henseler, also a Democrat.
Sen. John Patterson, a Republican, said the Port of Providence should be left in Providence.
“We spend a lot of time trying to attract good, clean industries to Quonset, and that will be jeopardized by bringing in a petroleum tank farm and the trucks and trains which go along with it,” said Patterson. “We’ve assured residents that they’ll get good neighbors at Quonset Davisville, but when you start talking tank farms, we threaten that good neighbor policy.”
According to Ron Patalano, general manager of the Quonset Davisville Port and Commerce Park, the park’s draft Master Plan commissioned by the Rhode Island Economic Development Corporation includes no provisions for fuel storage.
“Petroleum products have been ruled out as a commodity at Quonset Davisville,” said Patalano. “This comes out of a planning symposium that was hosted by the EDC in 1996. It concluded that containers and automobiles are the most desirable cargoes.”
Patalano also points out that liquid bulk is not consistent with the draft Master Plan, land resources at the park are limited, and EDC has repeatedly dismissed the option of a liquid bulk or petroleum-based port.
