Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Municipal Liability topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Committee hears municipal liability package proposing lower roadway caps and limits on remedial‑measure evidence
Summary
Representative Felix presented three bills that would narrow when municipalities can be held liable for roadway and sidewalk defects, prohibit use of subsequent remedial measures to show negligence, and limit prejudgment interest for governments. Supporters said the changes save taxpayer dollars; opponents said they would harm injured residents and incentivize deferred maintenance.
Representative Felix introduced a package of bills (H7212, H7213 and H7215) aimed at protecting cities, towns and the state from excessive judgments and clarifying government tort liability.
Felix said Rhode Island is an outlier in allowing evidence of subsequent remedial measures to be used against municipalities and proposed aligning state rules with the federal approach; he also proposed lowering certain caps on roadway and sidewalk defect claims to levels used in neighboring jurisdictions. "Rhode Island is the only state in the country that makes subsequent remedial measures admissible," Felix said, arguing that the current rule discourages municipalities from making repairs.
Municipal representatives (Interlocal Trust executive director Ian Ridlawn) warned of large interest burdens on towns and school districts under current law and urged changes that account for taxpayers' interests. By contrast, Mark Desisto (Rhode Island Association for Justice) opposed H7213 and H7215, arguing the bills would exclude crucial evidence and sharply limit damages; he said the measures would "eliminate almost all claims for injuries on public streets" and would incentivize deferred maintenance.
Public witness Angel Lopez, a Providence resident, urged the committee to hold the bills, calling a proposed $3,000 cap on roadway claims "way too low" and warning of negative impacts on municipal budgets and public safety.
Committee members asked detailed technical questions about federal Rule 407 and the interaction of the proposed statutory changes with case law; no bills were advanced and the package was held for further study.
