As proceedings for quarry ordinance drag on, Material Sand attorneys meet privately with abutters

NORTH SMITHFIELD – With the application from a mining company to create a new zoning district in town that allows earth extraction still pending, attorneys representing Material Sand & Stone have requested private meetings with abutters in recent weeks in hopes to win support for the proposal.

Some area residents have turned them down, outright refusing to meet.

Others, including Councilor Rebecca DeCristofaro, have sat down with the lawyers to discuss concerns, leading to what has now become a public riff between her and others critical of the business, which has operated largely unregulated in North Smithfield for decades amid legal proceedings.

“I supported an individual who seems to find the elected position held as an opportunity to self serve rather than serving the greater good and supporting their constituents,” noted resident Jason Richer in a Facebook post this week in reference to the councilor. “I am more than heartbroken over this betrayal.”

Richer’s statements come as hearings regarding the application, submitted to the town in January, drag on. Pound Hill Realty, known locally as Material Sand, has requested an amendment to the town’s zoning ordinance to create a new “Industrial Special Management District 1 Overlay,” and to change the zoning on their 89 acre site on Pine Hill Road from Rural Estate Agricultural to the new designation, with corresponding amendments to the town’s zoning map.

The unique request followed a 2023 ruling in Superior Court that the business must follow the town’s process and pursue local administrative remedies after decades of unresolved litigation.

But the zone change would first require a vote by the Town Council, and recommendation from the Planning Board regarding consistency with the town’s Comprehensive Plan. Residents opposed to the idea have cited ongoing nuisance from the quarry, concerns about blasting some say has damaged their wells, and worries that the operations could lead to water contamination due to the business’s proximity to Superfund sites, among other objections.

Throughout the months of February and March, a team of hired subject matter experts and legal representatives testified on behalf of Material Sand with reassurances of safety procedures at several council and planning meetings, before both boards ultimately tabled the matter with plans to obtain peer review from independent parties.

It was around that time that opponents including Richer and DeCristofaro began getting requests from the company’s legal team for private meetings.

“On February 19, I declined an invitation to meet with the lawyer myself,” said resident Richard Grubb.

DeCristofaro said she received notice in the mail offering opportunity to meet with the attorneys.

“Before I responded I consulted with our town solicitor,” DeCristofaro said. “He said ‘as an abutter you have every right to meet with their council and voice your concerns.'”

The councilor, an immediate neighbor who has recused herself from the town’s official proceedings, says she sat down with the lawyers to discuss concerns about noise, dust, traffic and more.

“It was everything that’s been stated in public forum,” she said. “The conditions I outlined were really no different than what (Town Planner) Mark Carruolo had outlined.”

But Grubb noted that prior to that meeting, when he shared the news that the attorneys were trying to meet with him, DeCristofaro referred to their request as “slimy.” Grubb said it was only after her meeting with the group in March that DeCristofaro began saying she was worried that if the town didn’t approve the business’s zoning request, the quarry would be free to continue operating as in the past, perhaps mining right up to her backyard.

One of the business’s most outspoken opponents, Richer worked with DeCristofaro to draw attention to the business’s operations prior to her election campaign last year. But he remains staunchly opposed to the proposed ordinance.

“I most certainly feel betrayed,” Richer said of DeCristofaro. “It was my research and support that got her elected to represent the people, but when her fear arose, she put her personal concerns ahead of those of her constituents. She campaigned on the quarry situation and got many votes from people who believed she would do more.”

DeCristofaro disputed the idea that her campaign was based on the issue.

“I was very clear that my experience with a local business inspired me to get involved,” she said. “I never stated that I’m running for Town Council because I wanted to shut down a business.”

She noted that she sought informal advisory opinion from the state Ethics Commission on the matter and was told she should only testify as a resident. DeCristofaro said that despite her passion on the issue, she’s been careful not to discuss her feelings with her fellow councilors.

“I’ve really just taken a step back. I’ve been walking that line,” she said. “I think that I’ve done a very fine job of maintaining that integrity.”

Richer stated that DeCristofaro – once a vocal opponent – stopped speaking during good and welfare after her private meeting despite doing so previously – and when pressed, stated she did not think she was allowed.

“That contradiction speaks volumes to me,” said Richer. “I personally believe she knows more than the rest of us somehow and is covering her bets.”

DeCristofaro, however, said it was personal life issues – not her opinion – that changed in recent weeks, and that she was unable to attend one of the public hearings. Since then, she noted, there has not been an appropriate opportunity to speak on the issue.

“I don’t feel comfortable speaking about this topic when it’s not on the agenda,” she said.

She also denied the idea that there was anything secret or less than transparent about her meeting.

“People were aware because I went through the appropriate channels,” she said. “Whatever I’ve said in private, I’d be happy to say in public.”

The councilor added that the general concerns mentioned were issues like decreasing the number of trucks on the road – concerns that would help all of the abutters.

“That’s not just to benefit me,” she said. “There was not one condition I articulated in my meeting that was just for me.”

Grubb noted that the question of whether or not the business has the right to mine the land, as the attorneys contend, is at the heart of the long-standing legal dispute – and should also be answered by local officials. The quarry’s original owners, Carmine and Emma Pezza, operated a quarry in the area since the late 1950s, when they first purchased land. But in 1979, the Town Council banned the activity in all town zones, exempting existing businesses in cases where the subject property was acquired or leased prior to the law’s effective date.

The Pezzas acquired a second 32-acre lot sometime around 1987 and merged the properties, arguing since that they could mine the full property by right and blocking efforts at enforcement with legal appeals.

Grubb noted that Material Sand attorney Thomas Plunkett has insisted that the merged 89 acres must be considered as one lot by law.

“I have challenged this on numerous occasions and no one has responded to me personally whether he is correct,” said Grubb. “If Rebecca bought the arguments then her concern that they would dig to her property is understandable. I cannot determine in my own mind whether she had a change of heart first, and then accepted the lawyers invitation, or whether she was convinced after she met with the lawyers.”

“I am just incredibly frustrated by all these delays with the public being kept in the dark,” Grubb added of the proceedings.

The process of finding experts to conduct a peer review of the company’s testimony, however, remains ongoing. Plans by the Town Council to take up the issue again this week were tabled to Monday, June 2.

DeCristofaro said they will again allow her the chance to speak publicly on the topic.

‘I don’t feel that I’ve changed my position following the meeting,” she said. “I was very clear that I had to maintain a different approach because of my position as a town councilor and an abutter, and my position would be in my own self interest. We don’t know which way this is going to go, so I need to ensure the well being of my family and my property.”