Cranston council denies resolution asking legislature to grant tax-exempt status for Little Flower Home at 85 Westview Ave

The Cranston City Council voted on June 2 to deny a resolution that would have asked the Rhode Island General Assembly to amend R.I. General Laws §44-3-3 to grant tax-exempt status to Little Flower Home, a property located at 85 Westview Avenue.

The resolution first appeared on the ordinance committee docket and was the subject of a special ordinance committee meeting earlier the same evening. The item’s original legislative sponsor withdrew her name before committee consideration; a substitute sponsor from the council was proposed so the committee could hear public testimony. After discussion, a motion to deny the resolution carried in committee and then in the full special city council session.

Neighbors who live on and around Westview, Rutland and Marigold Court turned out in force to oppose the item and to press for clearer notice and community meetings. Several residents said they learned of the sale and proposed use of the property only after the transaction had occurred and called for additional public outreach. Elizabeth Roadie of 111 Rutland Street told the council the residents had been “misled” about meeting subject matter and that many came specifically to speak about neighborhood impacts. Resident Tim Golan of 30 Westview criticized the city’s public notice channels and urged better communication. Other speakers raised safety and quality-of-life concerns and urged the council to block any tax exemption that would reduce nearby homeowners’ protections.

Council members and staff clarified the narrow scope of the vote: the council was being asked only whether to send a recommendation to the General Assembly on tax-exempt status under the cited state statute. The council does not have authority to permit or prohibit the sale of residential property or the state-authorized operation of residential programs; those matters are governed by state law and by other municipal and state processes. The city solicitor and committee chair reiterated that residents seeking changes to state law should address their general assembly representatives and the governor’s office.

After public comment, a motion to deny the resolution passed. Supporters of the property’s proposed use had sought the tax-exempt designation from the state, but the withdrawal of the initial sponsor and the vocal opposition from neighbors shaped the committee and council votes.

The council encouraged residents and the property owner to meet directly; Representatives and municipal staff indicated they would help arrange a community meeting to allow neighbors to ask questions of the property owner and any service providers. Several council members repeated that the proper forum for broader land-use and programmatic concerns would be community meetings, planning or zoning venues, and state legislators, given the limits of municipal authority under state law.

No change to the state law was made by the council; the denial means the council will not forward a recommendation to the General Assembly regarding tax-exempt status for 85 Westview Avenue.

Residents said they expect follow-up outreach; the council also recorded that the community should be given clear information going forward.