The Rhode Island Public Expenditure Council (RIPEC) today released a policy brief highlighting issues with the design and operations of Rhode Island’s Housing Resources Commission (HRC). RIPEC found that the HRC has wide statutory authority over housing policy and programming and shares many of the same top-line responsibilities with the Department of Housing. Conducting a 50-state analysis, RIPEC also found that the HRC’s combination of membership size, responsibilities, funding authority, and persistent issues with conflicts of interest makes it unique among housing stakeholder agencies nationwide.
“The HRC has wide statutory powers, and has been responsible for housing policy, rulemaking, and programming in Rhode Island since its inception in 1998,” said RIPEC President and CEO Michael DiBiase. “However, under current law, the HRC shares many of these same responsibilities with the Department of Housing and it is unclear which is the state’s lead entity for housing.”
Governor McKee recently submitted a budget amendment that would reimagine the HRC as an advisory body.
More Key Findings Highlighted in the Brief
- With 13 of 28 seats (46.4 percent), the HRC’s membership is weighted toward representatives of non-profit advocacy groups and service providers.
- The HRC has historically struggled with membership and currently has only 18 of 28 seats filled, with ten seats awaiting gubernatorial appointment.
- Meeting attendance has declined every year since 2019, with fewer than half of sitting members (47.1 percent) on average in attendance in 2024.
- Members holding statutorily designated seats often have matters before the HRC, leading to frequent abstentions.
- Since 2016, three community development corporations with representatives on the HRC received $17.0 million of $90.0 million available in bond funds administered by the HRC.
Policy Recommendations
RIPEC recommends policymakers:
- Change the HRC’s statutory authority
- Remove all HRC funding authority
- Reconstitute the HRC as an advisory body
- Reduce HRC membership and ensure members adhere to term limits
DiBiase added, “No other states have stakeholder housing bodies that are organized or operate like the HRC. With declining membership and attendance, conflicts of interest, and lack of transparency, our research demonstrates that the HRC is not the appropriate agency to hold decision-making authority over housing policy, programming, or funding—not when it was formed in 1998, and particularly not now, as Rhode Island faces especially steep housing challenges.”
Find the full policy brief here. Find the executive summary here.
