Over the last three years or so, under the leadership of former Speaker of the House K. Joseph Shekarchi, the Rhode Island General Assembly passed legislation designed to make it easier for developers to build housing. Given the massive shortage of available housing, rapidly escalating rents that harm low- and middle-income families, and a more than 400% increase in homelessness across the state, these measures, though not sufficient, are a necessary stab at mitigating Rhode Island’s housing apocalypse.
[Update: After this story went to press, I received the following from East Greenwich Town Councilmember Renu Englehart:
[“I checked with our town manager, Andy Nota, and town solicitor, Andy Teitz. East Greenwich is not party to any litigation, nor did the town agree to any litigation regarding the affordable housing mandate. East Greenwich, through our planning department, adopted all proposed housing bills that former Speaker Shekarchi spearheaded. I am attaching a copy of the resolution that we passed in March and submitted to the General Assembly via Senator Valverde.
[“It appears that litigation might be led by Portsmouth’s legal counsel and one of their town council members. However, I can assure you that East Greenwich did not agree to any litigation, and EG’s Town Council has never been asked to join in any litigation.”]
The legislation, among other things, reformed the comprehensive permitting process to better enable affordable housing development and streamlined zoning and land-use regulations. These aren’t exactly the sexiest bills; we’re talking about things like density bonuses for building near transit, adding homes in commercial lots, or infilling non-conforming lots (think weird-shaped lots that require some creative designs).
The goal of these reforms is to reduce costs and accelerate the construction of new homes. Given that Rhode Island has long been last in the nation for building homes (on a per capita basis, not because of our size), and it is estimated that the state needs to build between 15,000 and 24,000 new units to get the situation under control, it is right to ask if the state is doing enough. That said, permitting for new housing is trending up, as shown in the 2025 Integrated Housing Report from the Rhode Island Executive Office of Housing, but at our current rate of development, we are over a decade from seeing the housing market stabilize.
As Rhode Island families suffer, you’d think that local municipalities would be all in on these reforms, but of course, that’s not the case. Instead, around 14 municipalities, including Portsmouth, Tiverton, Hopkinton, Burrillville, Bristol, Smithfield, West Greenwich, East Greenwich, Lincoln, Middletown, Charlestown, and Westerly, have signed onto a Joint Municipal Statement1 opposing the state’s efforts. The statement appears to be the brainchild of Larry Fitzmorris, President of the conservative Portsmouth Concerned Citizens, and Mark Brady, former Narragansett Planning Board Chair.
According to Fitzmorris, in a May 2026 op-ed printed by EastBayRI.com, “...almost half of the towns in our state, the councils — on a bipartisan basis — have voted to enter Superior Court to obtain a temporary injunction on the housing laws passed in the recent Assembly sessions.”
What Fitzmorris is objecting to here is “preemption,” state law enacted to block a local ordinance from taking effect or to dismantle an existing ordinance. Usually, conservatives favor preemption. In 2014, conservative Rhode Island Democrats passed a law preventing cities and towns from raising the minimum wage. In 2017, when the state passed a law requiring paid leave for some workers (low-wage workers were exempted), language was included to prevent a municipality like Providence from expanding the law to cover more workers. [See: Rhode Island is the only New England state relying on anti-labor, ALEC-inspired preemption clauses]
When the General Assembly pre-empted efforts to expand the minimum wage and paid leave, municipal governments largely remained silent. (Providence City Council President Luis Aponte being an exception.) Legislation passed to increase the affordability and availability of housing, on the other hand, draws legal action.
The lawsuit is being done, writes Fitzmorris2, “to both evaluate the actual impact [of the state’s legislation] on the infrastructure of their towns and its cost. They also intend to ask the court to rule on the constitutionality of the 35 or so laws passed, and specifically how Article XIII, the home rule section of the Rhode Island Constitution, applies to that legislation.”
Through their state legislators, 13 bills [H7123, H7124, H7125, H7292, H7294, H7295, H7297, H7372, H7492, H8034, H8041, H8279, and H8281] have been introduced at the state level seeking relief from zoning laws, specifically amendments that were made to the Low and Moderate Income Housing Act to enable more affordable housing development. These bills, according to testimony presented to the House Committee on Municipal Government & Housing, “propose changes… that will undermine the progress that has been made and leave many Rhode Island households without any affordable housing options.”
According to a recent poll,
80% of voters agree there are not enough affordable homes for ordinary people to buy or rent.
79% reported that housing costs have had a negative impact on their lives or on those of their family, friends, and neighbors.
88% agree that the state legislature should take action to address the housing shortage and housing costs.
70% support creating more housing options in their neighborhood, even if their neighborhood would look different.
Fitzmorris, for his part, is framing this as a property rights issue, ironic since in many cases, the laws passed by the General Assembly allow property owners to more fully exercise their property rights, such as turning a garage into an accessory dwelling unit (ADU), or building homes on irregular lots, both of which might have previously required onerous local permitting.
Where this battle goes next depends on the courts, of course, and on the new Speaker of the House, Christopher Blazejewski. Will Speaker Blazejewski center housing as prominently as his predecessor? Highlighting his work on housing affordability is a good sign. In the official House press release announcing his election as Speaker, it was noted, “As a representative, Speaker Blazejewski has championed housing affordability, environmental protection, public education, civil rights, senior services, health care, and economic opportunity for working families.”
JOINT MUNICIPAL STATEMENT
Rhode Island Municipalities on the 2025 State Affordable Housing Laws
We, the undersigned Rhode Island municipalities, recognize the urgent and legitimate need to expand access to affordable housing throughout the State of Rhode Island. We share a commitment to solutions that are equitable, sustainable, and responsive to the diverse housing needs of our residents.
At the same time, we affirm that Rhode Island municipalities are constitutionally and statutorily vested with home rule authority over local land use, zoning, and comprehensive planning, as set forth in Article XIII of the Rhode Island Constitution and the Rhode Island General Laws governing municipal planning and zoning.
Rhode Island’s cities and towns vary significantly in geography, infrastructure capacity, environmental constraints, fiscal resources, and existing housing stock.
Accordingly, a uniform, one-size-fits-all approach to affordable housing policy risks producing unintended and inequitable outcomes that may conflict with locally adopted comprehensive plans, strain municipal infrastructure, and undermine long- established planning processes.
We are collectively concerned that aspects of the 2025 State Affordable Housing Laws, as currently written or applied, may impair municipal home rule authority and disrupt the balance between statewide housing goals and local governance. These concerns warrant careful review, legal clarity, and constructive intergovernmental dialogue.
Therefore, we jointly state the following:
We affirm municipal home rule authority over land use, zoning, and planning, and assert that state housing mandates must be implemented in a manner consistent with constitutional and statutory protections of local governance.
We call for collaboration among Rhode Island municipalities to evaluate the impacts of the 2025 State Affordable Housing Laws and to share legal, planning, and policy analysis.
We support coordinated municipal efforts to seek clarification or judicial review, including joint or class-based legal action where appropriate, to resolve questions regarding the scope, interpretation, and lawful application of the law.
We urge state leaders and agencies to engage directly with municipalities to amend, interpret, or implement the law in a manner that allows flexibility based on local conditions, infrastructure capacity, environmental considerations, and community planning goals.
We support responsible, lawful administration of local land-use review processes during this period of uncertainty, including careful scrutiny of applications submitted pursuant to the 2025 State Affordable Housing Law, consistent with existing statutes and upon advice of municipal legal counsel.
Signature Page
Joint Municipal Statement of Rhode Island Municipalities Regarding the 2025 State Affordable Housing Laws
By signing below, the undersigned municipality affirms its support for the principles and positions set forth in the Joint Municipal Statement of Rhode Island Municipalities Regarding the 2025 State Affordable Housing Laws, as approved in accordance with local municipal procedures.
This signature signifies endorsement of the Statement’s shared concerns and call for collaboration and does not constitute independent legal action by the undersigned municipality.
Municipality Information
Municipality Name: ___________________________________________
Governing Body (check one):
☐ Town Council ☐ City Council ☐ Other: ______________________
Date of Local Authorization (if applicable): ______________________
Authorized Signatory
Name (Print): _______________________________________________
Title:
☐ Council President☐ Mayor
☐ Town/City Manager
☐ Other Authorized Official: ______________________
Signature: _________________________________________________
Date: ______________________
Attestation
Town/City Clerk Name (Print): _________________________________
Clerk Signature: ____________________________________________
Date: ______________________
Contact Information (for coordination purposes)
Primary Contact Name: _______________________________________
Title/Department: ___________________________________________
Email: _____________________________________________________
Phone: ____________________________________________________
Fitzmorris also takes a swipe at renewable energy in his letter, again leaning on questionable, conservative tropes:
“The cost of owning a home in Rhode Island is high and getting higher. In part, this is driven by the heavy cost of residential electricity. Rhode Island is fourth highest in the U.S., as measured by the U.S. Energy Infrastructure Administration in November 2025. Our rates are being rapidly driven up but the state as it levies subsidies for renewable energy onto our electric bills. This is driving up rates as it pours money into the renewable energy industry in an attempt to replace the carbon-based electric generators that have been shut down. This is not working. Building wind turbines in the open sea is a very difficult and stunningly expensive enterprise. The maintenance is also very costly. Yet our government continues to chase this white whale and pass the cost to us.”
"We, the undersigned MAGA and MAGA-friendly communities, object to doing anything good for people with less money than we have. Plus, we prefer not having Black or Brown people moving here. We actually don't care how much money they DO have. Make America Great Again!"
We do not want more housing and we do want a growing economy. Wake up. You cannot have real economic growth in RI without more places to live as to grow the economy you need more workers and more consumers. These town councils want to protect a past that never was and a town character that only was for a sliver of the population, and reflects the domination of the automobile in an age in which we need to use mass transit and eliminate carbon emissions.