Johnston reps: housing should meet local needs

As Rhode Island grapples with affordable housing, a proposed bill from some of Johnston’s state representatives seeks to set different criteria for smaller communities in the state when it comes to providing affordable housing.

In general, the bill introduced by State Representative Deborah Fellela and cosponsored by State Representative Richard Fascia would set lower quotas for multi-family affordable housing projects in smaller communities. The bill was presented to the House Committee on Municipal Government and Housing last Wednesday.

Fellela spoke before the committee regarding her proposal. She emphasized that a “one size fits all” approach to housing does not work for every Rhode Island city and town. She pointed out that large-scale, multi-family projects can have a far greater impact on infrastructure and local services in smaller towns than they would in larger cities.

"Smaller towns will likely have more infrastructure challenges – water and sewer availability or capacity issues – such as the lack of roadways or existing poor road designs," she said. Fellela also noted the potential strain on schools, police, fire services and public transportation.

Proposal is reaction to 252-unit plan

The bill was prompted by a recent case where the town sought use eminent domain to acquire land that would otherwise be privately developed as a 252-unit low-income housing project. That process has drawn lawsuits in state and federal courts from the property owners in an attempt to halt the seizing of land.

Fellela’s legislation would create a more involved local approval process before a large or “substantial” multi-family affordable-housing project could be approved in a smaller community. Her bill describes substantial projects as any with more than 60 units and defines smaller communities in Rhode Island as having a population of fewer than 35,000 residents.

For example, the bill would mandate that developers seeking to build these multi-family housing projects participate in a pre-approval conference. Before the pre-approval conference, developers would be required to submit documentation that could include a project description, unit numbers, and a conceptual site plan.

According to Fellela, the bill would also ensure that developers proposing substantial multi-family housing projects could not fast-track their applications through a single comprehensive permit as they are currently able to do, regardless of the size of the community.

"This proposal strengthens local community control by allowing a more thorough vetting of the application," she explained.

Bill supported by Fascia, Polisena

Representative Richard Fascia cosigned the bill because it aims to balance affordable housing needs with the unique characteristics of each community. He stressed the importance of adapting housing solutions to the unique needs of each municipality.

“What’s right for Providence or Pawtucket may not be right for Burrillville or Exeter,” he said. “Local communities know what’s best for local communities.”

Johnston Mayor Joseph Polisena Jr. expressed his support for the bill but suggested modifications.

Speaking before the House committee, Polisena contended that high-density developments do not fit the character or needs of small communities like Johnston. Referring to the proposed 252-unit low-income apartment complex, the mayor highlighted several concerns, including the impact on the town’s resources.

He said that such a project would add about 80 new students at a cost of $1.85 million and require a new rescue truck costing around $1 million. He has proposed taking the land for this site by eminent domain to build a municipal campus including new fire and police headquarters and a new Town Hall.

“Maybe communities like East Greenwich, Barrington, Jamestown and Portsmouth ... have the wealth for modest annual property tax increases for large affordable development complexes, but ... these proposals are happening in blue-collar, working-class communities like Johnston,” he said.

Polisena said he would rather see a tiered approach instead of a one-size-fits-all model. For example, the amount of affordable housing required in a community should be related to its population.

Current Rhode Island law mandates that each municipality have at least 10% of its housing stock in affordable housing.

Polisena acknowledges the importance of affordable housing, but he emphasized that in Johnston, this would mean prioritizing single-family homes over large multi-unit complexes.

“Working off of this legislation allows us to do just that while still allowing communities to individually address their housing needs as they see fit,” he said.

Now the debate begins

Although the bill was just introduced, it is clear it will face debate and opposition.

In a public session, representatives took issue with bill as proposed. Perhaps the bluntest assessment of the bill came from Rep. David Morales.

“I’ll just start by saying that this is a creative way to keep poor people out of certain communities,” he said, before listing multiple issues he believed were in the bill.       

Rep. June Speakman addressed the panel and suggested the removal of  “low to moderate income” in the bill’s wording addressing 60 units, so that it includes development of all types of multifamily homes, regardless of pricing.

“Bringing this bill forward, it does undo much of what we have done in the past four years of the speaker’s legislation, and I gather that’s your intent, which is very controversial legislation.  We’ve worked very hard on it,” she said. “I hear all the time that it is insensitive to the needs of smaller communities. I hear that all the time, I live in Warren and I hear it, but I disagree.”

As the bill’s cosponsor, Fascia maintained that the bill ensures that affordable-housing projects are ‘consistent with local needs’ while also maintaining public safety and supporting infrastructure capacity. He said it also aimed to prevent the stigmatization of low-income developments. He added that the legislation promotes fairness by requiring that both subsidized and unsubsidized housing projects follow the same zoning and land-use regulations.

Fascia concluded that the bill represents a thoughtful, balanced approach to addressing the state’s affordable housing crisis, recognizing the need for new developments while preserving the quality of life for existing residents.

Representative Raymond Hull saw it in a different light, saying the bill reminded him of “snob zoning” – land-use regulations used to discriminate against certain types of residential uses.

“I understand what you’re trying to do for your town, but what [Speaker K. Joseph Shekarchi] has done at the cost of this session and previous sessions is to open up housing for people throughout the state,” said Hull. “As I look at some of the fine notes in the bill … those things are designed to keep people out.”