Pease board hears strong community pushback on Rye Harbor plans, pledges months of stakeholder work

The Pease Development Authority board opened a public session on Rye Harbor by telling attendees “we're not making any decisions today or imminently,” and laying out guiding principles for any future work: solicit input from local conservation and planning boards, review past practices, assess environmental impacts and seek financial sustainability, the chair said.

Dozens of residents and business owners then spoke during a tightly enforced three‑minute public comment period. Sarah Shanahan, a lifelong Rye resident, said she opposed demolition of the harbor’s historic fish shacks and warned that the proposed “building site itself is problematic” because it sits on “dredge material that is floating on top of salt marsh.” She added the schematic would remove “almost a third of the parking at the harbor,” complicating boat storage and ramp access.

Commercial operators described concrete costs and operational risks. One lobster pound operator said moving his facility “would cost over $200,000,” and another speaker said he has personally invested about $150,000 in a hurricane‑resistant building; several said the current schematic left little room for boat storage or large equipment. Business speakers asked how the PDA will make affected owners whole, whether right‑of‑entry terms will change, and whether the public application for ARPA funds (which speakers noted has a funding commitment date of 12/31/2024) accurately represented project impacts.

Town officials and elected representatives also weighed in. Bill Epperson, chair of the Rye select board, read a letter from state Rep. Jackie Grotta describing a July meeting with PDA leadership and asking the authority to work with the Rye planning board and conservation commission. A written message from State Sen. Deborah Altschuler raised similar concerns about public notice and a lack of recorded action on the Appledore Marine Engineering study.

PDA members and staff repeatedly told the room they would not move forward without more study and engagement. The chair said staff will review who has used the harbor in the past, how rights and fees were set, and what environmental measures are needed, and promised a schedule of stakeholder meetings in the coming weeks. Port committee members reported reaching consensus to advance preliminary designs with caveats: commercial fishing must remain a priority; projects should protect marshes and be accessible to people with disabilities; and the PDA will continue to work with town planning, the conservation commission and other stakeholders before any decision.

The board did not vote on any Rye Harbor redevelopment items at the meeting. The most recent operational figures presented by staff show the harbor is not self‑sustaining: Rye Harbor was cited as having an annual operating loss (figures discussed in the meeting ranged from about $250,000 to larger storm‑related repair costs), a point PDA staff said factors into evaluating long‑term viability and grant options such as FEMA reimbursements.

The board concluded public comment by reiterating that staff work and public engagement will continue and that the PDA aims to make any rules or procedures “open, not secret” so anyone in the state can find them and have a fair chance to participate.