By Brant Owens, resident of Newport’s Westside neighborhood
The recent revelation of plans for a new Kroger in West Newport, complete with a gas station and a liquor store, has sparked significant debate. While these plans were only recently disclosed to the public, rumors have been circulating for a while, as Kroger has held a lease on the property for several years.
The proposed development site is currently zoned as a “Business District Fringe,” with clear language in Newport’s zoning code prohibiting gas stations in this zone. Yet, the Newport City administration approved the inclusion of a gas station, citing ambiguities in the zoning code and claiming it as an “accessory use” rather than a primary one—despite the prohibition. This decision, whether made under pressure from Kroger or in collaboration with the company, bypassed public input entirely.
In response, the Newport Westside Citizens’ Coalition (WCC), a local advocacy group, filed an appeal, arguing that the City misinterpreted its zoning laws and should honor the prohibition of gas stations. This move has ignited debates within the community. Some residents express concerns about increased traffic and pollution, while others welcome the grocery store—even if it includes a gas station. However, it’s clear there is no unified consensus among neighbors. The question remains: who should decide whether the appeal is pursued or dropped, and on what terms?
And therein lies the problem.
The issue at hand isn’t the Kroger project itself but the process—or lack thereof. By allowing Kroger to include a gas station without public consultation, the City effectively silenced the voices of its residents. This decision denied the neighborhood an opportunity to express opinions, ask questions, or feel assured that local government would uphold its own laws.
This is why the appeal must continue—and, ideally, prevail.
Newport has established processes and procedures for rezoning parcels. Kroger could have pursued this proper route, which would have included public hearings, community input, and due process, fostering transparency and trust. Instead, these steps were circumvented, undermining public confidence and creating unnecessary division.
Would this take time? Certainly. But as mentioned previously, Kroger has likely been considering this for several years – they’ve had the time.
These processes exist to protect Newport’s citizens. Circumventing them allows outside interests to override community needs and policies, setting a dangerous precedent. Transparency, public input, and adherence to due process should not be optional—they are the minimum we should expect from both our City government and corporate partners like Kroger.
The appeal is not just about a gas station; it’s about ensuring that Newport remains a place where policies are respected, citizens are heard, and decisions are made transparently. The WCC’s appeal is essential to holding the City accountable and preserving trust in local governance.
Do not withdraw the appeal.