Last Line of Fast Tracked Legislation Would Change Law For RI Property Owners
Tuesday, June 25, 2019
A bill up for review at the Rhode Island House Finance Committee that is supposed to help the city of Pawtucket has a provision buried in the last line of the 19-page document that would have a profound impact on property owners throughout the state.
According to the legislation's description, the bill is intended to help local development just in Pawtucket “would authorize state and local incremental tax revenues generated in the arts district, the growth center district and the ballpark district in the city of Pawtucket to be allocated to finance improvements in the districts."
But, in fact, the bill would dramatically change the law in Rhode Island as it related to property rights and takings.
GET THE LATEST BREAKING NEWS HERE -- SIGN UP FOR GOLOCAL FREE DAILY EBLASTThe bill is being pushed by Pawtucket Mayor Don Grebien, but the bill goes far further than impact Pawtucket. The bill would impact property owners across Rhode Island.
The legislation is up for consideration on Tuesday in House Finance. There are two versions of the bill H 6153 and S 673.
House Minority Leader Blake Filippi is calling foul on the bill.
“This is an outrageous, shameful attack on private property rights that will accelerate the transfer of our homes and businesses to private monied interests,” said Filippi in an email to GoLocal.
The impact of the legislation would impact Rhode Islanders by the following, according to legal sources:
• Property owners are subject to “quick take” eminent domain procedures that permit redevelopment agencies – who are largely made up of unelected local officials – to move quicker than normally allowed to take property by eminent domain.
• Property owners are stripped of their “Kelo” protections in the Rhode Island Home and Business Protection Act, which, among other things, provides for 150% compensation for economic development takings. The legislation makes Kelo v. New London the new law of Rhode Island.
• If a property owner challenges the valuation of his or her property and loses, the property owner is required to pay the redevelopment agency’s attorneys fees – that is not a risk most people can afford.
• Property owners are required to submit to environmental testing of their property, which is abnormal.
• Redevelopment agencies can evict property owners and businesses immediately before owners can even challenge how much they are paid.
“Post Kelo, the State should have banned takings of private property for solely economic development - as multiple states did. Instead, property owners were promised 150% of their property value as compensation for an economic taking,” added Filippi.
“Not only does this bill seek to expand the authorization for economic takings to those projects receiving tax increment financing, but it then reduces the compensation to the property owner to only 100% of the property value,” said Filippi.
GoLocal's inquiry sparked the immediate response from Speaker Nick Mattiello's office. "The House is aware of the concerns in the bill regarding eminent domain. The bill is being amended and will be re-posted tonight for consideration tomorrow by the House Finance Committee," said Larry Berman, spokesperson for Mattiello.
