NORTH SMITHFIELD – A fire early Tuesday morning ripped through the Sayles Hill Rod & Gun Club, destroying the historic structure.
Firefighters were reportedly called to the blaze at 71 Sayles Hill Road around 1 a.m. on Tuesday, April 29 to find the building fully engulfed.
No one was inside the building, which has served a function hall for the member-based club, at the time of the blaze. The barn-like structure was believed to be around a century old.
Roads in the area were shut down as firefighters battled the flames, with concerns about a water shortage in the area. The building was ultimately reduced to ashes and firefighter were on the scene for several hours putting out hot spots.
The cause of the fire remains under investigation.
If there is one thing North Smithfield can be said to have an abundance of it is water. The USGS made that clear about 70 years ago and studies performed for the town’s former water authority confirmed those observations. And for fifty years that water was pumped and distributed without a chemical quality violation. In a matter of months North Smithfield will also be a community with virtually no debt. What we lack is the courage to take necessary, responsible and financially prudent action for benefit of both current and future residents.
Well said. A very small, vocal minority are obstructionists to growth and prosperity!!
Spoken like a true dreamer with other peoples money. Sounds like someone else we all know that thinks manufacturing is moving to the United States.
If you left the warroom and the keyboard and toured the country, you will already see that it is coming back.
So JP you believe the Trump lies because no new manufacturing will be coming to the US.
I have to agree with you on all counts
Here comes the Gary “the spender of taxpayers money” Ezovski. This is Gary’s plan spend $20 million in debt to do a favor for one person for a small section of town. Now is this fair to the rest of the taxpayers who do not have public water? The answer is no so any expansion of water should be paid by the current water users (aka Gary) and not the entire taxpayer base that will not benefit for adding water to one small section of town. Now lets debunk the statement “we lack courage to take necessary, responsible and financially prudent action for benefit of both current and future residents”. Why this is not prudent is the town will generate little to zero additional tax revenue and all the spending will be adsorbed by the current taxpayers. And second Gary has never been fiscally prudent.
Second does the city of Woonsocket have the necessary resources to treat all of the additional water resources. Having spoken to a person who works at the Woonsocket water department in a senior role told me that if treatment volume was increased Woonsocket would have to add additional infrastructure captivity that would then be passed on to North Smithfield. This is an example of another hidden cost that Gary fails to understand because Gary has zero financial skills or any fiscal responsibility. Now if a fire occurred in the Nipsachuck estates area of North Smithfield should we add water to that area which you must pass through Burrillville to access.
Lets also look at Gary’s past ideas and what the tax rate might be if all of his debt ideas came to passing. The $20M police station, the public safety complex, a new public works facility, new high school, and expansion of football parking. Now all of those items would be well over $100M which would sky rocket the tax rate and the town could not even float bonds totaling that amount. And we have not even taken care of the current roads infrastructure that is awful. As spoken by Dave Ramsey a notable financial expert, “is that debt isn’t your friend. Dave says it’s more like a thief that robs you of your financial potential. “Every dollar you send to debt payments is a dollar that can’t build your future.”
“DT” the more you opine, the more you reveal….
Fortunately DT or JR as it may apply, as evidenced by the last two wide vote on a water project, the majority of NS voters see things very differently than you. The Mechanic Street and Great Road water line extension passed quite easily. And as a result of my work the local cost of that line was reduced to less than 40% of the total cost because the RI Infrastructure Bank is waiving the other 60%. Continuing to spin your falsehoods won’t make them true DT/JR.
Gary, would you ever consider running again for TA? Feel like this town could use some forward thinking people vs those who want to just let it rot outside their own snow globe.
JP, I enjoyed the opportunity to serve for two terms. Those days will only be behind me now. I think we are in very capable hands with Administrator Gibbs.
So Gary can put the town into a serious highly leverage financial position with zero results.
Gary having read all of the comments and having lived through your time as town administrator you have always had one issue with residents and that is you do not listen to other’s opinions and take suggestions and criticisms well. Many times residents have questioned your decisions and ideas and you have ignored or belittled the people. You also believe you are always correct and then as you execute your ideas issues arise and cost taxpayers additional funding because you did not develop a comprehensive plan. Now you have another idea to spend significant capital and again you criticize citizens when they have good points about funding and water infrastructure. For example you have continually ignored one resident who thinks the town should have a multi year capital plan and you publicly stated at a town council meeting that it is a waste of time. So you just continue with multi million dollars spending ideas with no plan except the town can afford additional debt that in the past had proven not to be the best course of action. As for the water issue I have spoken with a Woonsocket town council member who has raised concerns about water expansion into NS and felt that Mr. D’Agostino who was part of the former disgraced mayors team did not always have all of the facts and would commit Woonsocket to expansion without funding or the city councils approval. While many residents may support water expansion a more comprehensive plan needs to be developed and I agree with DT must be funded by the residents who receive the water services and not the entire taxpayer base. Hope you can be opened minded to other people’s perceptions and concerns about the risks of large spending and debt ideas which you think they are prudent but may not be as black and white. We also need to remember the results of the new police station you supported.
Do you, DT, Rick D, Paulie and that “one resident” all believe that only families with children in schools should pay a school tax? And families that don’t have kids in the schools should be exempt for paying any tax toward the operations of the schools?
JP, you bring up an interesting debate, but I will give you the financial justification of paying taxes for schools. The theory behind property values and a good school system is potential buyers of a home would be willing to pay more for a home in a community with a better school system so a good school system in theory raises the value of property for the entire city or town. Now when you are speaking about water and sewers that is specific to the property so in theory a property with city/town services would be more valuable than a home with a well and a septic system. Thus, if the town adds water and sewage to a property in one section of town those properties would increase in value and the properties without water and sewer remain the same. So, since the people who property values do not increase should not pay for the resident’s property values that did increase.
Now if we actually looked at the total life cycle costs of city water and sewer versus a well and a septic system you may find that it is cheaper over the long term to not have city water/sewers. And based on recent studies the quality of well water tests better than city water.
Great question with a simple answer.
How does a private water and septic system cost less than public infrastructure?
Rick B
My initial reaction to your post was why do I bother trying to share what I have learned from decades of Town activity. Foolish as it may be, I will continue trying to offer thoughts.
If I have ever belittled anyone in conversation, that certainly wasn’t my intent. Do I offer too much detail occasionally? Probably, but aren’t details necessary? As to not listening or even taking suggestions, it is fair to say that I don’t cave to the vocal but small uber frugal crowd because those views generally don’t create the best value for all. Look back to the 1950’s decision to reduce cost by building the wood framed mistake that was Halliwell School. That was to save money! We just knocked down that mistake! We wasted money by going too far with perceived savings. I believe current plans for the police station will ultimately result in the same end. Beyond that, I believe we elect people to study issues and to lead. Leadership has been defined as getting people to do what they would not otherwise do themselves. As the TA I gained a great deal of information which most do not have. That knowledge drove my advocacy for actions.
Going further on spending you say I ignored recommendation that there should be a five year capital plan. First, there has been a five year capital budget plan since at least the 1980’s when I reviewed them each year as a planning board member. Second, what I did say was it is impractical to pursue a five year financial budget plan. My basis for that is it will put forth numbers that are of little value because multiple factors in that forecast would be nothing but wild guesses. Portraying finite results from third, fourth or fifth order differential equations based on wild guesses isn’t forecasting. Finally on spending, by saying “no plan except the town can afford additional debt that in the past had proven not to be the best course of action”, I presume you are referring to those who justified the bogus budgets for the 2014(?) bond questions by referring to the town’s bonded debt level without consideration to the forward looking pay down of that debt! Clearly that was justification of frugality that resulted in chaos. I hope that isn’t what you call financial planning! We wouldn’t have had the whole police station debacle if that plan was based on reality instead of bogus budgets.
My original comment here was offered to encourage thought about water infrastructure. I spent a few years as a member of the towns water authority and learned a great deal. I have discussed options with multiple state and local leaders including Woonsocket. About 25 years ago a NS leader stated they didn’t want to be in the water business and others followed. It was a sad day for NS. Later, when my administration looked for support to get real about fixing our Union Village water system problems people again said no. Those views are the path to disasters the smallest of which in the long term may be loss of structures like the rod and gun club. Disasters such as that and larger diminution of property values are issues we have the resources to avoid.
At one of the last town council meetings, Administrator Gibbs spoke of his grave concerns, regarding water issues in the town, particularly, Union Village. Unfortunately, this brings new light to his concerns. Our residential infrastructure needs immediate attention and can no longer be overlooked.
At what costs?
Doesn’t it get old “DT”; penny pinching every spend reference in an article ?
I really hope you live on a street with a fire hydrant and never have to experience what just happened to the Rod and Gun club at your house due to lack of water.
Literally everything is about cost for you. What WOULD you spend money on? Also, spending tax dollars are not investments, so please spare us the “ROI” commentary.
JP Do you have an extra $1,000-$5,000 per year to connect to a water line that the town will assess or maybe more. And then you have to pay for the water which is another $1,000 per year. And lets not forget where is North Smithfield going to get all of this water. We need to remember that NS does not have the Scituate reservoir and the Woonsocket water supply barely services Woonsocket. Now NS will also have to float a large bond to connect the whole town with water which would be in the hundred of millions which the town could never secure. The town will then need to build a water treatment plant and water tanks to store water. Then you need to remember that NS is a large spread out logistical area not like tight cities. Also you will have to determine who gets water and will they want to pay for the connection costs. It is also not fair for people not included in the expansion with wells to fund the proposed expansion. When you have no operational, logistics, and financial skills this is the type of comments we see with the idea I will get water at no cost to the user. Spare us the non intelligent comments, we get enough of those from the Orange man.
Nobody takes immature name calling people serious. Grow up and then you can join the adult conversations.
Life is not fair DT – sometimes it’s sacrifice for the greater good and the next generation.
It’s clear all you care about is your own pocketbook. Well done ! What a glorious way to live.
Also, who said “I will get water at no cost”?
Must be those little voices ….
Typical “DT” complains about everything, but never really offers any solutions to the issues that this town really faces.
Just curious, was there no sprinkler system required and working in this building? I thought that it could have saved the building somewhat….just asking. I thought all business buildings or functions had to have a sprinkler system?
If the building was built today most likely it would be required to have a sprinkler system installed however with no water to the area it would need to have a cistern or water tank installed to provide enough water for a period of time which in this case wouldn’t have really made a difference. However since the building was quite old it was “grandfathered” and not required to have such a system. Either way having hydrants or not wouldn’t have made a difference as this fire had quite a head start on the fire department and had no chance at being saved. Sad outcome as I had been here several times for various events growing up.
Thank you for explaining that. Much appreciated.
So sad, all the love they put in that remodel. Beautiful area.
Man….. the j/t/t crowd really out in force today, shame that it’s devolved into this yet again… Better luck next thread I guess…
What does that even mean ? The conversation is around making water more available throughout the town for the safety and benefit of all. Do you not agree ?
Thats what it started as, but quickly devolved j/t/t…. Better luck next thread. Take the “L” and move along.
I don’t know what j/t/t means in your world or what take the L means. It’s a conversation about town infrastructure. Are you not capable of adding anything of value to the discussion? Do you have town water? Do you have a hydrant in your neighborhood? Are either of those two things important to you?
We’ve already been over this in the past, no need to go over this again. You lost the argument as you started to insult first and start the trend of bashing of people. It’s sad honestly, maybe take some time off. I have plenty to add to the conversation, I just choose not to. I could talk about the horrors of having everyone connected or the benefits, the struggles and other mistakes that happened to get everyone on town/city water or the push back from residents about the whole issue. Would a hydrant have prevented this issue, unlikely. It’s almost as if you listen to others who have been there in the past, things might be different now.