Smithfield council backs resolution to explore legal options over recent state housing laws

The Smithfield Town Council voted March 17 to adopt a resolution directing the town solicitor to explore collaborative legal options with other municipalities to clarify the reach of state housing laws enacted in 2024–25.

The measure, listed on the agenda as sponsored by Councilman Ayon, Council Vice President Angela Boves and Council member Rachel Topi, urges planning and zoning boards to exercise “heightened scrutiny” on applications submitted under the comprehensive-permit statute while legal options are considered. Council members and speakers emphasized the resolution itself does not commit the town to pay litigation expenses; any final decision to join a lawsuit would require a subsequent council vote and appropriation.

A council member who introduced the item told the meeting that, while Smithfield recognizes the need for more affordable housing, the recent wave of state legislation imposes a one-size-fits-all approach that conflicts with the town’s comprehensive plan, zoning ordinances, infrastructure capacity and environmental constraints. The speaker cited the town’s planning department report (as of Jan. 28) showing 27 projects approved from 2023–2026 versus 22 approved in 2007–2020, described in the report as “a 123 percent increase in the approval rate,” and noted roughly 794 units approved but not yet started.

Larry Fmoris, president of the Portsouth Concerned Citizens, told the council that several municipalities have already adopted similar measures and that a joint municipal agreement would allow towns to pool resources and coordinate filings, solicitors and litigation strategy. He said the intent was to share costs among participating towns and that the resolution before Smithfield would direct its solicitor to “explore legal options” rather than obligate the town immediately to pursue litigation.

Residents who spoke during public comment urged the council to act now to protect local control over zoning, citing traffic, school capacity and flood risk as local impacts of large, dense developments. Several speakers asked for clarity on cost responsibilities; presenters and Fmoris reiterated that litigation costs would be subject to future council approval if the town chose to participate.

Town officials clarified the practical effect of the resolution: it authorizes the solicitor to investigate collaborative approaches and report back; formal entry into litigation or commitments of funds would return to council for approval. The council approved the resolution by voice vote.

The council also passed a package of related resolutions supporting specific state bills that the town says would give municipalities alternatives to comprehensive permitting or otherwise address density and affordability (see “Votes at a glance”).