By Rep. RICHARD R. FASCIA May 13, 2026

Recent legislation at the House of Representatives (H-8006) mandates a 30-year structured tax schedule for new or existing low-income housing in any Rhode Island municipality. This concept is yet another attempt to take total control away from small towns and cities and impose a statewide “one-size-fits-all” form of governance.

This bill is not just about housing, it’s about who controls local taxation and who bears the cost of state policy. H8006 declares that certain housing is a matter of statewide concern, and then it limits how municipalities can tax those developments. It sets the structure, it sets the formula, and it tells cities and towns they cannot go above it – and for that matter, they cannot go below it. This is a direct loss of local control that should not be simply given away. Local municipalities are unique and cannot all be painted with the same wide brush. Moreover, the seizure of that control demeans the integrity of local government and casts aside the rights of local citizens to control their own financial destiny.

Conceivably, through individually crafted tax incentives, cities and towns could otherwise encourage more new development to meet the state imposed minimum affordable housing threshold. This legislation impedes that creativity. Cities and towns are ordered to meet state requirements for affordable and low-income housing, but are then restricted on how to achieve those goals and absorb the resulting financial impact.

No one likes paying taxes, yet property taxation is one of the most fundamental powers of local government and it should be controlled locally. More importantly, it’s how communities fund their schools, maintain roads and provide police and fire services.

This bill takes that authority and restricts it from the state level on down.

The bill in question sets a specific graduated scale that slides from 8% to 15% over a 30-year period. Cities and towns are saddled with this formula, which they had no input on, regardless of the financial repercussions the development might have. These developments will still require the aforementioned services despite having no crystal ball to anticipate costs 30 years in the future. Under this bill, municipalities may not be able to collect the full revenue needed to support those developments or the wider resulting growth. Those additional costs do not disappear; they shift to existing taxpayers. Those taxpayers receive nothing more in return as a result of the state-imposed low-income housing threshold, or the tax plan in question. Nothing.

We need to be honest about the position we are putting our communities in. We already cap their ability to raise revenue through the 4% levy limit. We tell them they cannot increase their tax levy beyond that ceiling, regardless of rising costs to support the state-imposed affordable housing mandate. However, at the state level, we do not hold government to the same discipline when it comes to spending.

Now, on top of that cap, this bill further restricts how municipalities can collect revenue from mandated affordable-housing development. It ties their hands even more. It limits their ability to manage their own budgets and respond to local needs. Our towns, especially those outside the urban core (like Johnston and Cranston) are already frustrated. We feel like the state continues to tie our hands, whether it is zoning, planning, or now, taxation. This bill reinforces that concern by telling us that even our local tax policy is no longer fully our own.

The state should be working with municipalities, not restricting them. They should respect our ability to make decisions based on local budgets, our own infrastructure and the local taxbase. I am never in favor of taxation, but if we must have taxes the structure should be fair to everyone and controlled at the local level, not by the state. We know what’s best for our cities and towns, and we should make our own decisions.

Post Script: Sadly, Bill H-8006 was passed on May 5, 2026 on a vote that included all but four Democrats voting in the affirmative.

Rep. Richard R. Fascia represents House District 42, which includes parts of Cranston and Johnston.