William C. Tsonos has spent years climbing the ranks of Rhode Island banking, and now he’s taking on an additional role outside the industry – helping shape the state’s push into the life sciences sector.
Tsonos had been CEO and president of Bank Rhode Island until February, when he transitioned to Rhode Island market president for Beacon Bank, the $24 billion lender that was created after BankRI’s parent company, Brookline Bancorp Inc., merged with Berkshire Hills Bancorp Inc. in 2025.
More recently, Tsonos has been appointed by Gov. Daniel J. McKee to chair the R.I. Life Science Hub, a $45 million effort to grow the biotech sector here. He takes over as the hub has recorded some wins, including the opening of Ocean State Labs, a biotech business incubator in Providence, in February.
But challenges remain, including regional competition and instability. Mark Turco resigned as CEO in March, and Neil Steinberg retired as chairman in 2025, a job temporarily filled by Stefan Pryor before Tsonos’ appointment.
A Cumberland native and longtime Woonsocket resident, Tsonos built his career at institutions, including at the former Hospital Trust National Bank and Fleet Bank. He then moved to Citizens Bank before joining BankRI – the state’s fifth-largest bank – more than 20 years ago. He was also appointed to the R.I. Commerce Corp. board in 2024.
“What’s kept me here are really the relationships,” Tsonos said. “Rhode Island is a small state – people know each other, and those connections matter. That’s always been important to me, both personally and professionally.”
[caption id="attachment_521600" align="alignright" width="443"]
GETTING INVOLVED: William C. Tsonos, Rhode Island president of Beacon Bank, also serves on the R.I. Commerce Corp. and was appointed chairperson of the R.I. Life Science Hub.
PBN PHOTO/MICHAEL SALERNO[/caption]
Bank Rhode Island started in the 1980s as a locally controlled bank, then was acquired by Brookline Bancorp in 2012 but kept the name. Now it has disappeared in the merger with Berkshire Hills. Have there been any repercussions from the loss of that sense of “localness?” Rhode Island is now just a “market” of Beacon. I understand why that question comes up because when you’ve had a brand like Bank Rhode Island in the state for decades, people naturally associate it with something very local and very familiar. And when a name changes or a merger happens, there’s a tendency to assume that something fundamental about the way the bank operates has shifted.
But from where I sit, what matters more is how the organization is actually structured and how decisions are made. And in that sense, the reality on the ground hasn’t changed in any meaningful way.
We’ve always been a relationship-driven, middle-market bank in Rhode Island. That has not changed with the merger. If anything, the emphasis on being close to customers, understanding the market and making decisions locally has remained central to how we operate.
So, while the branding above the door is different, the way we function – the way we lend, the way we evaluate credit, the way we interact with customers – is still rooted here in Rhode Island. That continuity is important.
And I think that’s what people sometimes miss in these conversations about consolidation. The structure can change, but the operating philosophy doesn’t have to.
Aside from the name change to Beacon Bank, how else is the former Bank Rhode Island changing in the wake of the merger? From a day-to-day standpoint, the answer is really: not much has changed.
The most important thing we do as a bank is provide credit. That’s the core of the business. And our credit process, our underwriting standards and our overall credit culture are the same as they’ve always been.
That continuity is not accidental. It’s something we’ve been very deliberate about maintaining through the transition.
I’ve worked with our chief credit officer, Mark Meiklejohn, for more than 20 years. That kind of long-term working relationship matters because it creates alignment around how risk is evaluated and how decisions get made. We don’t need to reinvent that every time there’s a structural change at the corporate level.
And I think that’s the key point: consistency.
We don’t want a situation where a bank turns credit on and off depending on conditions in the market – tightening aggressively when things get uncertain and then suddenly loosening when things improve. That kind of volatility isn’t healthy for customers or for the institution.
Instead, we’ve maintained a steady credit appetite through different cycles. And over time, that consistency has actually strengthened our position in the market.
A few years ago, there were plans for BankRI to move to a new headquarters along Interstate 195 in the Fox Point neighborhood of Providence. Now that the merger is complete, might plans to move out of downtown Providence be revisited? That process goes back quite a bit further than people realize. We were actively looking at new headquarters options before COVID-19, and at that time, the environment looked very different than it does today.
What happened, of course, is that COVID disrupted everything. And then after that, construction costs, inflation and broader market conditions shifted dramatically. Projects that made sense on paper before the pandemic became much more complicated financially afterward.
We went through multiple iterations – revisiting plans, adjusting scope, trying to make the economics work. But what we ultimately found was that the cost environment changed faster than the assumptions we were originally working under.
At this point, we’ve stepped back and reassessed. We’re still evaluating our long-term space needs, but we’re being very deliberate about it. There’s no rush, and no final decision has been made.
[caption id="attachment_521602" align="aligncenter" width="2552"]
SIGN OF TRANSITION: The rebranding of Bank Rhode Island to Beacon Bank is so new that some bank branches still have temporary banners displayed outside, such as this one on Pitman Street in Providence.
PBN PHOTO/WILLIAM HAMILTON[/caption]
The Rhode Island banking landscape has evolved significantly over the years. How do you foresee things changing in the next one, five, or 10 years? If you look back over the last decade, the pace of change has been uneven. There were long stretches where there actually weren’t many major mergers locally, and then more recently you’ve seen consolidation pick up again.
But I think the more meaningful change has been on the technology side and in how banks operate internally – systems, platforms, digital capabilities, things like that.
That said, the core of banking in Rhode Island still looks very familiar. It’s still relationship-based. It’s still driven by people who know their customers and understand the local economy.
And that’s particularly important for a middle-market bank like ours. It allows us to stay close to clients, maintain continuity and avoid the kind of constant turnover that can disrupt relationships.
Looking ahead, I think you’ll continue to see consolidation, and you’ll continue to see technology reshape parts of the industry. But I don’t think the fundamentals – credit discipline, relationship banking and local knowledge – are going away.
There seem to be mixed signals about the local economy right now. What’s your read on the situation and what it means for financial services? There’s definitely a sense of uncertainty in the broader environment. That’s not unique to Rhode Island – it’s something you see across regional banking more generally, especially over the last few years.
What we’ve tried to do is position ourselves as a steady presence through that uncertainty.
We’re a well-known institution in Rhode Island, and we have experienced lenders and long-tenured employees who understand both the market and our customers very well. That consistency matters, especially when other parts of the financial system are in flux.
If you look at recent cycles – whether it was the financial crisis, COVID, or more recent banking stress events [such as the 2023 failure of] Silicon Valley Bank and First Republic – those are actually periods where we performed strongly.
Not because the environment was easy, but because consistency, discipline and staying active when others pull back tends to create opportunity.
In recent years, regional banks seemed to be leery of lending for commercial real estate. What are you seeing in Rhode Island? Rhode Island is a smaller and somewhat unique market, and that matters a lot in terms of risk profile.
We don’t have the same kind of large-scale office exposure you see in cities like Boston, New York, or San Francisco. Our commercial real estate portfolio is structured differently because the market itself is different.
We’re not carrying the same level of concentration risk that has been a concern in other markets.
What’s important is that we’ve continued to lend in commercial real estate even during periods when other banks stepped back. That’s consistent with our broader philosophy – we try not to shut off lending channels just because conditions are uncertain.
At the same time, we’re always being thoughtful about risk. We’re very aware that we’re deploying the bank’s capital, and we have to be disciplined about how we do that.
So, it’s not aggressive lending for its own sake – it’s steady, measured and grounded in the long view.
You were added to the R.I. Commerce Corp. board in May 2024. What has been enlightening about seeing things from that perspective? It’s given me a broader perspective on how economic development actually works in the state, beyond just the banking side of things.
You start to see how structured some of these programs are – job creation tax credits, innovation funding, early-stage support mechanisms. They’re very clearly defined, and they’re designed to encourage specific kinds of investment and growth.
What stands out most is how critical early-stage support is. A lot of these companies are very small, sometimes just a handful of people, and they’re trying to bring a product or technology to market.
Without that early support – whether financial or structural – many of them would struggle to get traction at all.
So, it gives you a real appreciation for how interconnected these systems are: banking, public policy and private sector development.
You’ve been on the Commerce board for nearly two years, and you’ve identified some of Commerce’s strengths. What about weaknesses? How could the agency improve in fulfilling its mission? Commerce’s ability to remain nimble will allow it to adapt programs to meet the evolving needs of businesses in the state. And, by continuing to listen closely to stakeholders and evaluate what’s working, Commerce can strengthen its ability to deliver results and advance Rhode Island’s longterm economic growth.
How did your nomination as Life Science Hub chair come about? Did it come through a direct outreach from the governor’s office? I think it really came out of my involvement with the Commerce board and the broader set of conversations happening around economic development in the state.
There isn’t really a single defining moment I would point to – it’s more that over time, through working within that ecosystem. There’s a recognition that certain roles require a certain type of approach. In this case, the Life Science Hub needed stability, and I think that was the core theme that came through in discussions.
What people were looking for was someone who could bring a disciplined, process-oriented framework to how things are structured – how decisions get made, how priorities are set, and how you create consistency over time rather than shifting direction based on short-term pressures.
The governor, in his role as chair of the Commerce board, is part of those broader discussions, and I think there was a shared sense of where my background might be useful. But again, I see it less as a single appointment moment and more as an extension of existing work and relationships over time.
At the end of the day, I think the expectation is straightforward: the Life Science Hub is dealing with early-stage companies, evolving funding environments and a sector that can be very cyclical. So, the value I’m meant to bring is not necessarily about changing direction but about helping ensure there’s a steady operating framework in place – one that allows the organization to function consistently regardless of external pressures.
That means focusing on structure, on process and on making sure there is clarity in how decisions are made and how resources are allocated. If you can do that, you give early-stage companies and stakeholders a more predictable environment to operate in, which is really important in a sector like life sciences.
My role there is really about helping provide that foundation – ensuring there’s a steady framework in place for how the organization operates going forward, and that it remains disciplined and consistent as it grows.
The Greater Boston life sciences sector has struggled in recent years from what appears to have been over-investment. With those struggles in mind, how do you approach building Rhode Island’s life sciences sector? The key is taking the long view and staying disciplined through cycles.
You can’t overextend when conditions are strong, and you can’t pull back too aggressively when conditions tighten. Both extremes create instability.
These are early-stage companies, and they require consistency – not just in funding, but in expectations and support.
If you provide that kind of stability, especially during periods when larger markets like Boston are experiencing volatility, you actually increase the chances that companies will stay, grow and succeed over time.
And that’s really the goal: building something durable, not something reactive.
You mention stability with the Life Science Hub. Where does the search for a permanent executive director stand? What’s the timeline for completing that task? One of the first tasks as the chair of the Life Science Hub, with the help of the Secretary of Commerce Stefan Pryor, was to engage an executive search firm to vet potential candidates. Our goal will be to run a thoughtful, inclusive search to identify the right leader for the organization while proceeding with urgency.
What are some immediate and long-term goals you have in mind for the Life Science Hub? What do you envision it looking like in five years, 10 years? Five or 10 years from now, I would like us to look back and see the Ocean State Labs full with incubator companies that we have worked successfully with Commerce and the I-195 [Redevelopment District] Commission to keep existing life science companies in state while attracting new ones. I would like us to look back and see that we have kept our medical and engineering graduates in state and away from Cambridge or San Diego because the infrastructure, capital and mentorship exist here in Rhode Island. I’d like to see that we have dotted the state with companies that emerged from incubator stage and now drive economic growth in Rhode Island by providing well-paying jobs to its residents. And I’d like to look back 10 years from now and think $45 million was well spent and maybe we should have spent more.
