u/RINewsJunkie

This reads like a love letter between the Mayor’s Chief of Staff and JWU.

The city says it has received a draft memorandum of understanding from Johnson & Wales University about a new Payment in Lieu of Taxes (PILOT) agreement between the university and municipality.
At Monday night’s City Council finance committee meeting, Mayoral Chief of Staff Anthony Moretti also shared that the university has advanced the city a $120,000 check “as a good faith gesture.”
On Monday, city officials said discussions about a deal to have the university make voluntary payments to Cranston in lieu of property taxes had been progressing for several months.

The matter was recently pushed into the public spotlight after calls by local Democratic citywide City Council candidate Steven Stycos for the city to negotiate a long-term agreement

According to city documents, in previous years, JWU contributed about $200,000 annually to Cranston’s revenues until 2023, when the city’s PILOT agreement with the university expired.
JWU is a nonprofit and tax-exempt institution. Of its two campuses in Rhode Island, its Harborside Campus – home to its graduate programs, culinary arts museum, athletic fields and more – is partially in Cranston’s Edgewood neighborhood.
One of the university’s dormitories, Harbor View, is on Narragansett Boulevard.  
City administration stated that any agreement made would be a voluntary contribution by the university, and not something required of the tax-exempt university.

PILOT payments are an option for municipalities to get tax-exempt organizations to help fund city services including fire and police protection and snow removal.

During discussion Monday night, Moretti said that on average annually, there have been around 20 police responses to Johnson & Wales facilities, and in the past year there were 17 calls for rescue and other Fire Department responses.
He noted that the university has its own security, which “probably results in less frequency of calls, too.”
Moretti noted that although the city had not been receiving PILOT payments directly from JWU, it had received PILOT payments from the state, which contributes to municipalities on behalf of all nonprofits.
He said that last year, Cranston had received $258,000 from the state for JWU. Moretti also noted that the university is not the “bad guy,” describing its officials as “good businesspeople.”
“They’re empathetic to the needs of the City of Cranston … we’re dealing with some good individuals that care about the city and care about the reputation of the university,” Moretti continued.

With a draft memorandum of understanding in hand, the city says it will review the tentative agreement, and once details are finalized, it will be presented to the City Council.

The article fails to mention ducks are now using the pool….

CRANSTON, R.I. (WJAR) — After a years-long wait for the opening of the Budlong Pool, the city of Cranston has hit another snag.
This time, the problem comes with closing it.

The city hasn’t received a cover for the 8,000-square-foot pool headed into the fall months.

“We do want to do it just to keep the debris out. It’s newer,” said city of Cranston Chief of Staff Anthony Moretti.

Vantage Builders, the general contractor for the project, ended business operations in September, leaving the city to search elsewhere for a custom-made cover.
Estimates put the cover’s cost at approximately $40,000.
“What we’re in the process of doing is trying to procure it at alternate sources,” said Moretti, who estimated the fabrication would take six to eight weeks.
Moretti said a cover is more of a “want” than a “need.” The old Budlong Pool never had one.
“It’s optional to have. It’s not necessary to have the pool covered,” he said.

Open for six weeks total in 2026, the pool saw more than 7,000 visitors. Daily attendance averaged 250 people.
“At no time did the pool ever hit capacity, though. It was crowded. It was comfortable,” said Moretti.
According to Moretti, the city hadn’t yet paid Vantage Builders for the cover, so it’s not out that money.

The city also secured financial holdbacks with the company to cover any incomplete work.

Cranston citywide city council candidate Steven Stycos is calling for Johnson & Wales University to make voluntary payments to the City of Cranston in lieu of taxes.
 
Styco is a former council member and ran for Mayor in 2020.

 
“Johnson & Wales University owns almost $40 million of property in Cranston,” Stycos, a Democrat, said, “yet it pays the City of Cranston nothing for fire, police and other city services. It is past time for Mayor Hopkins and the City Council to negotiate a long-term voluntary agreement with the university.”
 
In Providence, Johnson & Wales signed an agreement in 2023 agreeing to $15.2 million in direct payments over 20 years. The agreement and other agreements signed by Mayor Brett Smiley's administration have drawn criticism from State Representative David Morales. Morales beat Smiley in the Democratic primary. 
 
Stycos on J&W
“If I am elected, I will push for Johnson & Wales to pay Cranston its fair share. City residents should not be subsidizing the university,” he says, adding that the institution contributed $200,000 a year to Cranston’s revenues as recently as 2023.

Several buildings on the university’s Harborside Campus are located in Cranston, as well as a dormitory on Narragansett Boulevard, which was previously the Cranston Hilton.
 
Cranston ran deficits of $6.5 million and $10 million in the last two years, draining cash reserves. This year, Cranston taxpayers were hit with a 5% tax increase while programs for seniors and low-income residents were drastically cut and teaching positions eliminated in the public schools. In response, rating agencies recently downgraded the city’s financial outlook from “stable” to “negative.” “The current city leadership mismanaged our money,” Stycos says. “We have a big hole to climb out of.”
 
Stycos, a former chair of the City Council Finance Committee, is one of six candidates for three citywide Council seats in the November election.

The City Council is considering a proposed amendment to an ordinance that could set tighter guardrails on how the city’s Board of Contract and Purchase spends money.
The proposed amendment, sponsored by Council President Dan Wall, would require council approval of any contract, purchase order or change order for $100,000 and up.
The city administration has firmly opposed the measure, citing concerns with separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches.

At Monday night’s monthly City Council finance committee meeting, Wall said that the proposed amendment seeks not to interfere in the bidding process or circumvent the separation of powers, but instead to “have someone who is directly responsible to the taxpayers be involved with the money that we are sending out to bond.”

“We are in a crisis … it is just a fact,” Wall said Monday night about the city closing the last two budget years with deficits. “If we do things exactly as we did it the last two years, logic will tell you we’re probably going to be in a similar place.” 
Wall said it is “inherently wrong” for the council to pass a budget and not have enough detail about how that money is spent, citing the recent incident with the replacement of a fountain in front of St. Mary Church as an example.
The proposed ordinance amendment would also require the Board of Contract and Purchase (BOCAP) to include in its approval requests to the council “sufficient detail and documentation,” including the contract, purchase or change order.
Wall said that in the interest of transparency, it is important for these projects to have the necessary documentation in front of the public “so the public can see what we’re voting on and what we’re looking at.”

Several council members spoke in support of the direction and spirit of the proposed amendment during Monday night’s discussion.
Ward 5 Councilman Michael Traficante remarked that the charter and taxpayers both hold the council responsible for all expenditures, so it “behooves all of us to be knowledgeable of the fact of what’s being appropriated at the BOCAP level.”
But City Solicitor Christopher Millea argues there is a separation-of-powers issue with the proposal, calling the amendment “legally unsound.”
He explained that the City Council, under the charter, has the authority to appropriate funds but once that money is allocated, “it’s up to the departments to spend the money within their department, and the council does not have the authority under the charter, to continually approve those expenditures.”

Millea called the proposed amendment an “overreach” and went on to note that BOCAP has a built-in majority of council-appointed members on the board, which he said means that the oversight function is already there for the council.
Five members of the board are appointed by the council and two members are from the city administration – the directors of finance and public works.
Millea added that the proposal would bring Cranston’s ability to do business to “an absolute grind.”
Local lawyer Bob Murray, who has long experience in local and state government, also opposed the proposal.
In a letter to the council, Murray raised concerns about the language of the proposed amendment, the procedure outlined in terms of implementation, and the overall substance of the amendment. He said that as proposed, it would conflict with the City Charter and violate the separation of powers between the executive and legislative branches.

Murray stated that while he understood the premise of the proposal, he doesn’t believe that it can be achieved “without a change to the Cranston City Charter and approval of the voters.”
Despite these concerns, Wall said he remains steadfast in his decision to move forward with the ordinance and its language as is.
Wall said that both he and the City Council’s lawyer, Michael Marcello, disagree with the points raised Monday evening and that they don’t believe the ordinance would violate the City Charter or the separation of powers, or would slow city business.
He said the overall conversation about how the city is spending its money is important to have, and that this proposal would help address the lack of oversight and transparency when money is spent.
No vote was taken on the proposed ordinance amendment that evening due to the requirement that its hearing be advertised, and Wall said more time was needed to have it advertised properly.

Looking ahead, he said it will be on the agenda for the Oct. 5 City Council finance committee meeting, where a vote will be taken.

City officials are moving ahead with an ordinance to ban short-term rentals of outdoor pools and other spaces.
At the City Council’s regular ordinance committee meeting last Wednesday, Sept. 2, members voted unanimously in favor of the proposed ordinance.
It would prohibit property owners, tenants, occupants or businesses with any “claimed or actual right to or interest in” any real property in the city from allowing, for compensation, the use of any outdoor spaces including pools, spas, playgrounds and yards for assembly purposes.

The ordinance is sponsored by Council President Dan Wall and Ward 4 Councilman Frank Ritz.

Ritz has previously said that residential pool parties have long been an issue he has heard about from his constituents.
Back in July, Ritz said that he had received numerous complaints from residents about homes being advertised on online platforms like Swimply – a website and app for renting private swimming pools – and being rented for large parties.
Neighbors cited various concerns regarding these parties, including loud music, excessive traffic and repeated disturbances.
Ritz said this ordinance will create a stricter guideline that protects the city not only against Swimply, but also future such services that surface.

“We’re not looking to interfere with [anyone’s] residential use of their property with any of these other type of activities, but it’s when they become paid event spaces that fall under a commercial use,” Ritz said at last week’s meeting.

He explained that the ordinance is written to regulate the paid rental of residential pools and other outdoor spaces regardless of which app or platform is used.
According to Wall, the proposed ordinance is modeled after an ordinance in Orangetown, a town in Rockland County in Upstate New York that bans short-term rentals of outdoor pools and spaces. Clarkstown, also in Rockland County, has a similar ban on short-term pool rentals.
He noted various concerns with pool rentals including safety concerns with having no lifeguards on the property, the potential for unlawful behavior and operating a business in a residential area with no license.
“So as well-intentioned as perhaps these apps are, this is … not appropriate for our residential area,” Wall said.
With the committee’s vote of approval, the proposed ordinance now heads to the full City Council for review.

Should it pass, the penalty would be a $50 fine for each infraction.
The next City Council meeting is scheduled for Tuesday, Sept. 22, at 7 p.m.

PROVIDENCE, R.I. (WPRI) — Rhode Island’s primary elections are in the rearview mirror, but that doesn’t mean all of the races are fully decided.
The R.I. Board of Elections convened twice Monday to consider any recount requests that were filed.
The most notable request came out of the GOP race for Rhode Island governor. Aaron Guckian was declared the winner late on primary night, but the preliminary results show his margin of victory was just 259 votes.

His opponent, Elaine Pelino, declined to concede and called for a recount the following day.

In Providence, two candidates running for city council have filed for recounts.
Carmen Castillo, who’s looking to unseat incumbent Juan Pichardo in Ward 9, lost the Democratic primary by just nine votes. (It was initially reported as two, but the tallies have since been updated.)

Ward 4 candidate Joseph Casoli also filed a request, having lost the primary to incumbent Justin Roias by 55 votes.
The Board of Elections decided Monday afternoon to recount those three races. Staff will begin recounting the ballots Tuesday morning with the goal of certifying the results later that same day.

“To understand why a Republican mayor’s inner circle is funding a Democratic primary candidate, it helps to stop sorting Cranston politics by party...”

Saw this on their Facebook and thought I would share

Well this is quite something.

PROVIDENCE, R.I. (WPRI) — Rhode Island state Rep. Julie Casimiro is refusing to resign her seat despite moving out of state and facing mounting pressure to step down before her term ends in January.
The longtime Democrat, formerly of North Kingstown, has represented House District 31 since 2017. Earlier this year, she announced she would not run for re-election and has since moved to South Carolina.
Yet despite the relocation, Casimiro continues to represent the legislative district, collect more than $700 every two weeks from taxpayers and serve her constituents remotely, she said.

“I’m doing the work right now as we speak,” Casimiro told WPRO host Tara Granahan in a radio interview Thursday, describing the criticism against her as politically motivated and “a whole lot of fuss over nothing.”
The lawmaker’s unusual arrangement was first reported by The Boston Globe, and Casimiro has not hidden the fact that she’s living out of state.
Rhode Island does not call special elections to fill vacant seats this far into an election year, and there is no mechanism to fill a vacancy with an appointee on a short-term basis. Casimiro said she will not resign out of concern that her leaving the post would leave the district’s North Kingstown and Exeter constituents without representation until the new year.

“Who is going to do the work for District 31 if I resign?” Casimiro said on the radio, downplaying the fact that she continues to collect a paycheck. “We get paid peanuts. I think people are not understanding the whole picture.”
Casimiro did not immediately respond to a phone call seeking comment Friday.
The decision to move out of state before her term ends has caught the attention of House Speaker Chris Blazejewski, who is now calling on her to consider stepping down early.

“After building a strong record of advocating for children and families, Rep. Casimiro decided not to run for re-election,” Blazejewski, a Providence Democrat, said in a statement. “If she is no longer a permanent resident of the State of Rhode Island, in order to address legal questions about her eligibility to serve the balance of her term and in an abundance of caution, she should consider resigning her seat.”

Helena Foulkes, the frontrunner in the Democratic primary for governor, has been endorsed by Casimiro but said through a spokesperson she agrees.
“Helena appreciates all that Rep. Casimiro has done for Rhode Island and agrees with Speaker Blazejewski that Rep. Casimiro should resign now that she lives in South Carolina and not Rhode Island,” said the spokesperson, Angelika Pellegrino.

State Rep. Jason Knight, a Democrat who is running for attorney general, went a step further by calling for her resignation outright. Casimiro fired back at Knight, pointing to the fact that he’s currently holding his position in the House while campaigning for a different office.
“If anyone should resign — it’s Jason Knight,” Casimiro said.

Casimiro living in South Carolina also raises questions about whether the arrangement is even legal. Whether anyone will enforce the law is a different question.
Article III of the state’s Constitution, which defines the qualifications for office, is fairly straightforward: “No person shall hold any civil office unless that person be a qualified elector for such office.”
A qualified voter under state law is someone who’s eligible to vote based on residence, among other things. Casimiro cannot vote in her district now that she no longer lives there, suggesting she’s no longer eligible to hold office.
But there appears to be no mechanism short of the House reconvening and expelling her from office or someone at the state level enforcing the Constitution. The R.I. Secretary of State’s Office deals with residency issues, but primarily when they come up when people declare their candidacy for office rather than after they’re already holding it.

“Our office’s responsibilities have more to do with the laws related to candidate declarations and eligibility, as well as filling vacancies when applicable,” secretary of state spokesperson Faith Chybowski said in a statement, although she pointed to the state’s Constitution.
“However, the Rhode Island Constitution and General Laws address the issue of who is eligible to hold civil office as follows,” she added.
John Marion, executive director of Common Cause Rhode Island, said the issue under the state’s Constitution is clear.
“You could make an argument that if Rep. Casimiro has moved her legal residence to another state she is no longer a qualified elector in her district and therefore is not qualified to hold the office,” he said.

But he said short of anyone enforcing the Constitution, there was little that can be done. Even if Casimiro stepped down, it’s too late to call a special election to fill the position, as that deadline passes in February each year.
“Unless Speaker Blazejewski wants to bring the House back to expel her, there is nothing that can likely be done,” Marion said.
R.I. Attorney General Peter Neronha told The Globe his office is reviewing the situation, saying he thinks she should resign. On Friday, he took his suggestion a step further on social media.
“Stated somewhat differently – I’d advise her to resign,” Neronha wrote on X, formerly known as Twitter.