Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Housing Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Smithfield council continues resolution opposing state housing changes amid split views
Summary
After lengthy debate, the Smithfield Town Council voted March 3 to continue a resolution criticizing recent state housing laws to the March 17 meeting so sponsors can add specific bill numbers; public commenters urged immediate passage while some council members preferred waiting to strengthen the resolution.
The Smithfield Town Council continued a proposed resolution opposing recent state housing statutes after council members split on whether to act now or wait for specific bill numbers.
Sponsors listed the resolution as coming from Councilman Ionati, Councilwoman Boz and Council Member Rachel Topi and argued the new state housing laws constrain local planning authority and conflict with Smithfield’s comprehensive plan. The sponsor said the resolution would ask planning and zoning boards to apply heightened scrutiny to applications submitted under the comprehensive-permitting statute and call on the General Assembly to collaborate with municipalities.
Several council members said they share concerns about state changes but differed on strategy. One councilor argued that passing general letters often has limited effect and urged councillors to work directly with state legislators; another said including bill numbers would strengthen the resolution. After discussion, a motion to continue (instead of tabling) the resolution to the March 17 meeting passed so sponsors can include bill numbers and additional language.
During public comment, Grace Stoppy of Alpine Ridge urged the council to approve the resolution immediately, saying it would raise visibility with the General Assembly; she noted Portsmith Concerned Citizens has filed an injunction in superior court seeking a stay on the laws. Other public speakers thanked council leadership for work on charter-review and performance-assessment issues.
The council did not adopt the resolution on March 3; members set a continuation to March 17 to allow sponsors to add specific legislation references and finalize language.
