Ward 2 News

Dear Neighbors:

After having a July for the ages, the Red Sox could not make it to October. Here’s hoping their midsummer success provides a foundation for a better 2027 season. In the meantime, in this week’s letter I will begin my discussion of November’s ballot questions with a focus on two of them (Question 2 and Question 6) that request bond funding for housing development.

The Secretary of State is mailing us a Voter Information Handbook that includes at pages 8-15 a summary of Questions 1 through 5 on the November ballot, which are also summarized in this Providence Eye article. That article also includes a summary of Questions 6 and 7, which will appear on our Providence ballot only. In this letter, I will discuss Question 2 (statewide $120 million housing bond) and Question 6 ($25 million Providence only housing bond).

A.  Question 2 (the State’s $120 million housing bond)

Question 2 seeks voter approval to issue a $120 million bond for housing development. If approved, up to $25 million of the bond’s proceeds would be allocated towards producing housing for home ownership, while up to $10 million would be allocated to establish a “public developer.”

Beginning in the Great Depression, governments built and ran public housing, often in the form of large apartment blocks dedicated to low-income tenants. Over time, however, these projects often failed, due to flight to the suburbs, poor maintenance and crime, among other reasons. Governments moved to subsidizing affordable housing built by private companies that receive government subsidies and tax incentives in return for deed restrictions concerning the amount of rent charged. In 2021, Maryland’s Montgomery County established a Housing Production Fund, a revolving loan fund that makes short-term construction loans for new housing projects developed by the Housing Opportunities Commission, the county’s public housing authority (PHA). These loans take the place of private equity and lower the cost of financing. If approved, Question 2 would provide initial capital to bring a public developer model to Rhode Island.

Earlier this year, the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council (RIPEC) published a Report that raises questions about the efficiency of the State’s affordable housing program, concluding that the State’s program in recent years had cost more than $500,000 affordable housing unit developed, of which slightly over half was a public subsidy.  Given the need to build thousands of affordable housing units, this cost level is not sustainable.

Fortunately, there are ways to reduce the cost of affordable housing production in addition to using the “public developer” model.  For example, some communities have opted for modular construction, rather than “stick built,” realizing reductions in construction costs, construction time and environmental impact.

B.  Question 6 (Providence $25 million housing bond)

Question 6 seeks voter approval for a $25 million bond to replenish the Providence Housing Trust Fund, which is administered by the Providence Redevelopment Agency (PRA). As described in its FY 2026 Housing Report, the City “braids” (combines) PRA funding with federal funding sources to produce new housing stock, preserve existing housing and stabilize existing housing arrangements through rental support, legal services and other means. The Housing Report provides examples of recent projects, in which roughly $20,000-$30,000 of PRA funding supported the development of each unit of affordable housing.

I will be voting “Yes” for both bonds, with the understanding that our State program needs to find cost savings.

Tonight marks the beginning of Yom Kippur, the Jewish Day of Atonement. I wish those of us observing this holiday an easy and meaningful fast. In this week’s letter I discuss a recent report by the Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council (RIPEC) on the cost of municipal public safety services.

Three weeks ago, RIPEC published a Report analyzing the cost of municipal public safety (police and fire) spending. The RIPEC Report found that Rhode Island municipalities appear to devote larger budgets to public safety than other states, in some cases by a large margin. The Report did not analyze in detail why this is so, or how Rhode Island municipalities could improve the cost-efficiency of public safety protection without compromising safety or quality.

The RIPEC Report reminded me of studies the City of Providence performed during my service on the City Council. We looked into the factors driving the cost of the Providence Fire Department, and possible ways to reduce expense without compromising safety.

Before discussing the City’s 2016-17 findings, I will share my own appreciation for the stellar quality of our City’s emergency medical services (EMS) program. Earlier this summer, my wife Lauren had a medical emergency, and the professional skill and compassionate care she received from Providence Fire Department first responders was amazing. We always will be grateful.

With that said, the Providence Fire Department performs two critical functions, namely fire suppression and EMS. In a report prepared by the National Resource Network (the NRN Report), we learned that Providence has an excessive amount of fire suppression staffing. Over the years, buildings have become more fire-resistant, thereby reducing the number and severity of fires to which our fire fighters must respond. The increase in building safety reduces the number of fires, and with it the level of fire suppression staffing needed to ensure prompt responses.

The City Council studied this issue in greater detail, engaging MMA Consulting Group, which prepared this Draft Report concerning Providence Fire Department staffing. MMA looked at response times for fire alarms as measured against industry standards. The MMA Draft Report concluded that Providence could safely reduce fire suppression staffing in two ways: first, by consolidating fire protection on the East Side by closing the stations at Rochambeau and Humboldt Avenues, and second by removing two ladder trucks from the City’s fleet of fire protection vehicles. (Each ladder truck requires four fire fighters to operate, and each operating vacancy requires four fire fighters to fill, given that the position must be filled continuously during the 168 hour week with four shifts of 42 hours per week.)

Based on these findings, in 2017 the City negotiated a collective bargaining agreement with Local 799 that reduced minimum staffing by consolidating the East Side fire stations, which reduced “minimum staffing” from 94 to 88. The agreement did not implement the second proposed reform of reducing the fleet of ladder trucks by two. Implementing the second reform could have reduced the Fire Department budget by millions of dollars each year, or tens of millions of dollars over the past decade.

While I no longer serve in City government, I will encourage my representatives to perform an updated analysis of response times and Fire Department runs to test whether we need to maintain the current level of fire suppression staffing to ensure adequately prompt responses, or whether the reductions recommended by the MMA Report (or perhaps other reductions) can (or cannot) be achieved. The current collective bargaining agreement between the City and Local 799 expires next year.

Dear Neighbors:

I hope you are managing well in this weekend’s storm. In this letter, I invite you to a community meeting two of my Senate colleagues and I will be hosting in November. I also discuss State initiatives to address the shortage of housing, especially affordable housing.

A.       Community Meeting

On Wednesday, October 14 at 5:30-7:30 p.m. at the Rochambeau Library on Hope Street, my Senate colleagues Meghan Kallman (District 15) and Tiara Mack (District 6) and I will host a community meeting to hear your concerns and priorities for the next General Assembly session. We will be delighted if you can join us.

B.       The National Housing Affordability Crisis

We are living in the middle of a housing affordability crisis. This is a national issue, documented in recent books such as Yoni Appelbaum’s Stuck: How the Privileged and the Propertied Broke the Engine of American Opportunity. Mr. Appelbaum points to local land use laws as a major factor in the lack of housing generally, and affordable housing in particular, an example of a larger problem addressed by writers supporting the “abundance agenda” such as Ezra Klein and Derek Thompson’s book Abundance and our own neighborhood’s Mark Dunkelman in his book Why Nothing Works: Who Killed Progress—and How to Bring It Back. All of these authors note the dramatic increase in the cost of housing that exceeds income growth, attributing the problem to the sharp decline in development of new housing.

C.       The Affordability Crisis In Rhode Island and Providence

1.        Rhode Island

As noted in a recent Providence City Council report, Rhode Island ranks last nationally in new housing development per capita. In recent years, the General Assembly has taken steps to address this issue, establishing a Department of Housing which recently published its Housing Plan to add 15,000 units of new development by 2030. The plan assigns 5-year “municipal production goals” to each municipality in the form of a specific number of affordable housing units and overall housing units to develop by 2030. The plan anticipates developing a set of carrots (incentives) and sticks (mandates and/or penalties) to facilitate each municipality’s attainment of its expected housing production. To advance this project, voters will consider approving a $120 million Housing Development Bond, which includes funding earmarked specifically to low income housing and the possible establishment of a “public developer” model.

2.        Providence

The City Council’s above-mentioned report proposes the passage of a rent stabilization ordinance, an issue that was prominent in this year’s Democratic primary for Providence Mayor. That debate highlighted the possible tension between the short-term goal of rent relief and the long-term goal of expanding the housing supply.

D.       Local Reaction To State Initiatives

Recent experience in Johnston and Portsmouth provides examples of how local communities may resist participation in the Statewide project to increase housing stock generally and affordable housing in particular.

1.        Johnston

The Town of Johnston attempted to block the development of an affordable housing project by condemning the planned site for construction of a new town hall. When the affordable housing developer sued, the federal court granted summary judgment in its favor, holding that the Town exceeded its legal authority to condemn.

2.        Portsmouth

Last week, the Town of Portsmouth approved the filing of a Lawsuit challenging the State’s authority to regulate the local housing permitting process, which if successful would undermine the entire program. Portsmouth’s resistance is notable, given its status within Rhode Island Housing’s Inventory of low and moderate income housing: the town’s current housing stock of roughly 6,610 units includes 3.34% of low and moderate income housing (versus 16.67% in Providence and 9.94% statewide). The State’s housing plan calls for Portsmouth to produce a modest 26 units of additional affordable housing (0.4%) and 172 housing units altogether (2.6%) during 2026-30. Rather than cooperate, Portsmouth has elected to pay for what could be an expensive lawsuit, reflecting the depth of the Town Council’s will to resist. The ultimate court decision in this case will determine whether Rhode Island state government has the authority to address the State’s housing affordability crisis.

E.       Conclusion

Across the country, and especially in Rhode Island, the housing affordability crisis is driven by a lack of supply. That lack of supply is driven at least in part by restrictive local land use regulations. The State’s Housing plan proposes a combination of carrots and sticks to relax those regulations to reduce the cost of new development. Some local communities are resisting this initiative; therefore, the courts may play a major role in determining the success of the State’s program.

Dear Neighbors:

When the sun sets tonight, the Jewish community will begin its observance of Rosh Hashanah, making the beginning of the religious new year. To all of you, of whatever faith or belief you hold, I extend the holiday’s traditional wish:

A good year

A year of peace

May gladness reign

And joy increase.

This past Wednesday, citizens of our City and State voted in the political primary which, in many cases, selected the likely winner of November’s general election. I would like to thank those of you who voted to nominate me as the Democratic Party candidate for Rhode Island Senate in our neighborhood. I will continue my campaign of meeting with you and hearing your ideas as the November election approaches.

Other winners of that primary include candidates Helena Foulkes for Governor, Kim Ahern for Attorney General and David Morales for Providence Mayor, each of whom brought compelling visions for the future that voters endorsed. I hope you will join me in congratulating them on their victories as they head towards the general election. I will be pleased to support their campaigns over the next two months and, if they win their general elections, find ways I can work with them for the good of the people of our City and our State.

As I met with you the past few months to discuss State issues, including these campaigns, many of you expressed concern about the tone of the discourse, which on occasion focused on issues that did not always align with what was most important to you. Part of this disconnect results from the nature of primary campaigns, in which competing candidates from the same political party often share a wide range of common principles and goals, making it necessary to find other ways to differentiate them from their rivals.

Even if the recently concluded campaigns did not always achieve the Platonic ideal of the Lincoln-Douglas debates of 1858, I remain deeply grateful for the free and fair elections we have in Rhode Island. We are blessed to enjoy the fine work of our Secretary of State, Board of Elections, local Boards of Canvassers and hundreds of poll workers statewide. Within a national context of a President who tried to overturn the 2020 election, and who is currently trying to tip the scales this November through aggressive gerrymandering, U.S. Postal Service interference with mail ballots and even $5,000 attempted bribes to voters, we cannot take our American elections for granted. Instead, we can support the current efforts of our Secretary of State (and possibly our Attorney General) to protect the integrity of the democratic institutions we all cherish.

Dear Neighbors:

I hope you are enjoying the Labor Day weekend, as we say goodbye to unofficial summer and enter the home stretch for the primary elections on Wednesday, September 9.

Given the dominant position of the Democratic Party in Rhode Island’s government, the primary’s outcome often determines the outcome at the general election, even as voter participation in Rhode Island party primaries is typically a fraction of the general election turnout. For these reasons, I encourage you to exercise this right of citizenship on Wednesday if you have not done so already.

While it is up to each of us to cast our vote for the candidates we consider to best for our neighborhood and our State, in response to inquiries from neighbors, I explained my own choices to vote for Democratic Party candidates Helena Buonanno Foulkes for Governor, Keith Hoffmann for Attorney General and Brett Smiley for Mayor.

In this week’s letter I discuss the issue of recent report issued by the Office of Health Insurance Commissioner regarding primary care insurance rates.

A.   Rhode Island’s Primary Health Care Access Gap

1.     Primary Care Physician Compensation

In my discussions at the doors of our neighborhood this summer, you have raised the issue of access to primary care as one of our two top issues (the other being public education). In the State House, we have held hearings on access to primary care in our effort to understand the problem and find possible solutions. One recurring theme we have heard from doctors and providers is that Rhode Island does not pay its primary care doctors sufficiently to support a viable practice, particularly when there are opportunities in neighboring states to earn significantly more.

2.     Current Policy Responses

The General Assembly has enacted several partial responses, including (1) State-sponsored conditional loans to health care professional students attached to commitments to practice in Rhode Island, (2) planning for a State medical school and (3) increasing reimbursement under Medicaid for Rhode Island primary care. Tuesday’s Report by the Office of Health Insurance Commissioner (OHIC), provides the latest analysis of this third policy tool to address the problem.

3.     The OHIC Report

a.     Findings

The OHIC Report contained several findings on the primary care issue that I had not previously appreciated, and which support new focused policy initiatives. The Report demonstrates at page 11 that Rhode Island is already competitive with its New England peers in Medicaid reimbursement rates for primary care (for example, the rate in Massachusetts is less than 80% of ours). On the other hand, the Report demonstrates at page 19 that Rhode Island’s Medicaid primary care reimbursement rate is around 40% lower than what would amount to reasonable compensation for a physician (based on OHIC’s independently derived model), and at page 13 that Rhode Island’s commercial insurance reimbursement rates are significantly lower than our region (where, for example, the Massachusetts commercial primary care reimbursement rate is around 250% of ours).

b.     Recommendations

i.       Medicaid rates

The OHIC Report recommends that Rhode Island increase Medicaid reimbursement rates to the level that would provide Rhode Island physicians with reasonable compensation. This would require additional funding of $42 million. In prior years, the federal government would pay for slightly over half of this amount, but that may have changed with the enactment of HR-1 last year. The Report also notes there may be issues with obtaining federal approval for this increase.

ii.                 Private insurance

The Report also recommends closing the private insurance gap between Rhode Island and Massachusetts. This presumably would involve an increase in Rhode Island private insurance rates, but the Report does not identify the specific regulatory process that could achieve this outcome and/or whether current State law provides sufficient tools for regulators to bring this change into the private market.

4.     Conclusion

The OHIC Report informs us that Rhode Island’s previous multiyear effort to bring State Medicaid primary care reimbursement rates into parity with our neighbors was not by itself enough to compete successfully for primary care doctors. Instead, the Report recommends increasing Rhode Island’s Medicaid reimbursement rate to substantially exceed our neighbors, while also finding ways to increase private insurance payments for primary care.

Dear Neighbors:

At slightly before 11:00 Thursday morning at Providence City Hall, I cast my early vote in the Democratic primary, making me the 90^th person to vote in our City. While we wish the COVID pandemic had never occurred, I believe its dreadful legacy included three benefits, namely (1) Operation Warp Speed, (2) the greater use of virtual platforms (such as Zoom) and (3) expanded early voting. In this week I discuss three of my voting choices: Keith Hoffmann for Attorney General, Brett Smiley for Mayor and Helena Buonanno Foulkes for Governor.

A.   Keith Hoffmann

I explained my decision to vote for Keith Hoffmann in this Letter to voters in February.

B.    Brett Smiley

I explained my decision to vote for Brett Smiley to return as Providence Mayor in this Letter to voters earlier this month.

C.    Helena Buonanno Foulkes

I believe Helena Buonanno Foulkes has valuable executive skills and experience that our State will need in the challenging circumstances we will face in coming years. I also believe that Rhode Island needs a change from the practices of the current administration, including in the areas of budgeting and transparency. We consider each in turn.

1.     Budgeting

a.      The Attack On RIPTA

Over the past six years, the Rhode Island Department of Transportation (RIDOT) budget increased from $607 million to $1.14 billion. Despite this growth, the Governor’s RIPTA budget for fiscal 2025 included a funding gap of $8.1 million, while his RIPTA budget for fiscal 2026 had a funding gap of $32 million. While the General Assembly budget provided partial relief, the Governor’s RIPTA budgets amounted to a declaration of war upon a public service that is a vital part of the lives of thousands of Rhode Islanders every day.

b.     The Wasteful, Inefficient RIDOT Highway and Bridge Program

While starving RIPTA, the Governor’s budget provided generous funding to RIDOT’s highway and bridge program which, as documented in a WPRI Report, is close to the worst in the country both in terms of high cost and poor quality. As noted in RIDOT’s forensic audit report, RIDOT’s poor road and bridge maintenance practices contributed to the failure of the Washington Bridge.

2.     Transparency

The current administration also failed to be transparent with the public in its financial practices, including these three examples:

a.      The ILO contract

As documented in the Attorney General’s report, the Governor’s office violated state procurement rules and regulations in awarding a $5.2 million contract to the ILO Group to assist schools in COVID-related programming. This winner of this contract was essentially decided before bids were accepted in what was supposed to be an fair and open process. The Attorney General concluded that the conduct, while improper, did not amount to a crime.

b.      The Investigation Of The Washington Bridge Failure

As documented in detail in my November 16, 2025 letter, the Governor withheld from the General Assembly (and the public) both the April 5, 2024 “forensic audit report” and a February 19, 2024 metallurgical analysis report related to the Washington Bridge failure when both were requested by the General Assembly Joint Oversight Committee at a February, 2024 hearing, as well as in RIDOT’s March 26, 2024 answers to questions.

c.      Quietly Undermining The Act On Climate

As documented in detail in my April 19, 2026 letter, the month of December, 2025 was a critical time in the implementation of the Act on Climate’s plan to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. At that time, the Executive Climate Change Coordinating Council (EC4) was finishing its Climate Action Strategy to implement the Act, which legislation the Governor proudly signed in 2021. A central pillar of that strategy was (and remains) the conversion to renewable electricity generation by 2033. Unbeknownst to EC4, the Governor was at that time developing a budget that would push the renewable energy conversion date back to 2048, effectively knocking down the Act on Climate’s central pillar. The Governor did not inform the EC4 of this development, nor did his budget (which was released in January, 2025) have any acknowledgment or analysis of the budget’s impact on the Act on Climate. Fortunately, the General Assembly’s budget restored the 2033 renewable energy standard that the Governor’s budget would have undermined.

3.     Conclusion

For his first five years in office, Governor McKee had the benefit of $1.1 billion of federal funding through the State Fiscal Recovery Fund of the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA). Less than $150 million of ARPA was spent on public health, while several hundred million dollars of the balance was available to spend on State priorities outside of the COVID pandemic. These were relatively easy budgets to balance.

The budget picture for the next several years will be the polar opposite of the federally subsidized budgets from 2021-25. Last year, the State of Rhode Island issued Reports describing the budgetary challenges the State will face in the next few years due to draconian cuts in federal aid resulting from the Congressional passage of HR-1 in 2025. In these tough times, I believe Helena Buonanno Foulkes is in a better position to find solutions to manage Rhode Island’s budget fairly and efficiently, while providing Rhode Islanders with an open and transparent government.

P.S. If you are a registered voter in Senate District 3 and choose to participate in the Democratic primary, I will be grateful for your vote.

Dear Neighbors:

Next school year will mark the return to full local control for the Providence Public School District (PPSD). This presents both risks and opportunities. I will be voting for Mayor Smiley to return to office because I believe he is best able to ensure a successful transition. For the past year, he and his staff met with PPSD to exchange ideas and build working relationships. I also believe his education plan offers a promising vision for how the Mayor’s office can support and enhance our City’s public education program both in the coming year and going forward.

The plan recognizes the School Board’s primary role in developing education policy, i.e., what our children learn in school during school hours on school days. The City can support our children’s education (1) before they are old enough to attend kindergarten, (2) after school on school days and (3) during the summer. The Mayor’s plan addresses all these areas, while also supporting PPSD programming in ways they have requested. We consider each in turn:

1.     Pre-school

Mayor Smiley plans to expand our City’s current Pre-K program (which provides access to 79% of our children) with the goal of providing full-day Pre-K to all Providence 4-year-old children by 2030. This ambitious goal is now possible because of the City’s collaboration with PPSD’s construction program that will include space for pre-K in our school buildings.

2.     After school programs

Mayor Smiley’s plan includes increased support for Providence After School Alliance (PASA) programming both in PPSD facilities and in a “neighborhood campus” model that will coordinate with the City’s community centers, public libraries and other resources. A good example is an after school math program for Pleasant View Elementary School students that opened last school year at Vincent Brown Community Center.

During the past four years, the City enrolled in the State’s Learn 365 Program to obtain $16 million to fund renovations to the Davey Lopes Community Center, Elmwood Community Center and Joslin Community Center that will house learning centers to contribute to the education of children attending schools in their neighborhoods. Going forward, Mayor Smiley’s plan calls for improving coordination between PPSD and programming at nearby “campus” community resources.

3.     Summer programming

During the past four years, Providence expanded its Eat Play Learn program to provide summer recreational and educational programming for Providence children. Going forward, Mayor Smiley’s plan will build upon it One Providence for Youth program, which this summer funded summer employment and enrichment and career development opportunities for 131 young Providence residents at AS220, the Boys and Girls Clubs, College Visions and Providence Public Schools career and technical programs.

4.     Supporting PPSD

At PPSD’s suggestion and request, Mayor Smiley is making use of his relationships with City businesses and organizations to provide programming for the benefit of Providence students. For example, the Mayor assisted Central High School to develop a curriculum to train fire fighters, some of whose graduates now serve in our Fire Department. Mayor Smiley is now working with Providence Public Schools to facilitate other internships and training programs for Rhode Island businesses.

5.     Building Internal Capacity

To help him implement this plan, the second Smiley administration will hire a full-time professional educator to serve as advisor.

6.     Conclusion

A successful transition of our public schools to local control will require a combination of continuity of essential functions and the introduction of new initiatives. I believe Brett Smiley is the candidate best able to support continuity along with a plan for effective improvements. That is why I will be casting my vote for him in the upcoming Democratic mayoral primary, and I encourage you to join me.

Thank you for your consideration.