PROVIDENCE – Mayor Brett P. Smiley on Friday vetoed a rent stabilization ordinance that passed by the Providence City Council on Thursday evening.
It was the second time Smiley has exercised his veto power since taking office in 2023.
In a 9-6 vote, the council approved a measure that would cap annual rent increases at 4%, allowing for certain exemptions to accommodate costs property owners may incur, including provisions for landlords to recover expenses for improvements or property tax hikes.
Providence has become one of the least affordable places for renters in the nation, with the median rent surging by 40% since 2020 and nearly half of renters allocating more than 30% of their income toward housing costs.
Acknowledging the “real and immediate housing pressures,” Smiley in his transmittal to the council said he vetoed the ordinance due to various “policy concerns,” including the fact that half of rental units would be exempt from the policy while there are still “unanswered fundamental questions” about how the authority of the proposed Residential Rent Regulation Board would be exercised “and what administrative structure would be required to support it.”
The City Council can override the mayor's veto with a two-thirds majority vote within 30 days.
After the vote Council President Rachel Miller said that "until tonight, we hadn’t taken direct action to provide stability for Providence residents who rent their homes...Despite the power large corporate landlords wield."
"This council voted to protect this city we love and the diverse residents who call it home," she said.
“Rent control is about who our city is for,” added Councilwoman Mary Kay Harris.
The Rhode Island Coalition of Housing Providers, which has lobbied against the measure, is urging city policymakers to “carefully consider the unintended consequences of the proposal – particularly its impact on renters and taxpayers.”
“Providence residents are looking for real relief from rising housing costs, and Council members are clearly trying to respond to that need,” said Coalition Director Shannon Elizabeth Weinstein. “But this proposal raises serious concerns about whether it will actually help renters – and whether it could create new financial burdens for residents across the city.”
Weinstein said there remains “significant unanswered questions” about the ordinance’s potential impact on the city’s tax base and that a more in-depth analysis is needed.
“When the value of multifamily housing declines, the city collects less revenue – and that gap has to be made up somewhere," she said.
Smiley agreed, arguing rent control would shift the tax burden onto single-family homeowners while driving rents higher overall.
“Based on available data and the experience of other municipalities, policies of this kind do not lower rents and often lead to higher costs and diminishing housing stock across the market over time," he wrote. "They can discourage new housing development, constrain supply, and make it harder for the very neighbors they are intended to help."
Christopher Allen is a PBN staff writer. You may contact him at Allen@PBN.com.
