Last week, Rhode Island Judicary spokesperson Craig Berke wrote a letter to The Valley Breeze in which he discounted grass roots opposition as the primary reason for the Judiciary abandoning plans to build their courthouse complex in the residential neighborhoods near CCRI in Lincoln. Mr. Berke showed that he has absolutely no connection to, or awareness of, the community where this courthouse was to be built.

Here are a few highlights (or lowlights) from Mr. Berke's letter (excerpts from letter are italicized):

* Opponents used scare tactics ... and cited many unfounded fears, about the courthouse project ...

In addition to traffic, is Mr. Berke implying that child safety, wetlands disruption, property value decline and neighborhood encroachment are unfounded fears?

* Lincoln councilors want to believe that grass-roots opposition and what they characterized as "investigative" work of The Valley Breeze in obtaining the judiciary's traffic study were the major factors in the decision to abandon the Lincoln plan . . .Had the consultants' report been favorable (regarding traffic), we would still be making plans in Lincoln.

Was the Judiciary ready to ignore the other compelling issues affecting Lincoln?

Lincoln resoundingly did not welcome the courthouse. A non-political citizen group took action and educated the community about the serious problems with the courthouse facility in a residential neighborhood. The Stop the Courthouse group gathered more than 1,200 signatures of Lincoln residents opposed to the courthouse. The majority of the Town Council as well as the town administrator were among those signing the petition.

* Chief Justice Williams met personally with the traffic consultants, at which time he became convinced the traffic patterns created by a new courthouse could not be abated.

The original traffic report was done in 2006 and revised in 2007. The Judiciary had the report when Justice Williams sent his mailing to Lincoln residents, and when he had the General Assembly put it in Article 5 in June of 2007. Why did the Judiciary wait so long to change plans if they knew early on that traffic was going to be an irresolvable issue?

* The Town Council gave notice of plans to ban courthouses and seek withdrawal of state support for the courthouse before it even met with the chief justice or his staff. That is why the chief justice declined to meet with the council.

The time line does not work. When Justice Williams refused an invitation to meet with the Lincoln Town Council, the plan to restrict courthouses using zoning changes had not yet been introduced. The reason given at the time was that Justice Williams would only agree to meet in executive session.

* The chief justice appreciated Councilman Macksoud's leadership in reaching out to the Judiciary for dialogue in a manner that other councilors cast aside in favor of political grandstanding.

Mr. Macksoud broke ranks with his fellow Town Council members and entered into private meetings with Justice Williams. Mr. Macksoud kept many of the specifics of these meetings secret. And, Mr, Macksoud never signed the petition in opposition to the courthouse which was going to be built in his neighborhood district.

* Recognizing the state's dire financial straits, Chief Justice Williams has agreed for the second time to postpone this project for one year.

In one year, Rhode Island's budget crisis is expected to be much worse. How is the expense of a new courthouse going to make more sense 365 days from now?

Ed O'Neill

Chairman, Stop The Courthouse Committee, Lincoln