Loading record
Public disputes concerning political parties, public officials, institutions, political conduct, and governance in the United States.
Counts show individual statements. They do not assign an overall position.
2 statements on this page. Dates: April 17, 2026 to September 15, 2026
2 matching statements. Dates: April 17, 2026 to September 15, 2026
2 published statements. Dates: April 17, 2026 to September 15, 2026
2 published statements. Dates: April 17, 2026 to September 15, 2026
2 statements on this page. Dates: April 17, 2026 to September 15, 2026
Role at the time: Mayor of Providence and 2026 Democratic mayoral-primary candidate
Statement summary
Brett Smiley said he still believed his rent-control veto was the right decision and argued that the policy would worsen home affordability in Providence.
“I do believe it will make things worse and not better in Providence for home affordability.”
In this post-primary interview, Smiley says he studied comparable policies, continues to think his rent-control veto was the right decision, and argues that the policy would worsen rather than improve home affordability in Providence.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)The case asks whether Providence should adopt a 4% annual rent-increase limit. Smiley says the policy would make home affordability worse and reaffirms his veto, which is a direct substantive objection to adoption.
Role at the time: Mayor of Providence, explaining his veto in a signed letter to the council president.
Response to this claim
Providence's proposed rent stabilization ordinance would constrain housing supply and shift the tax burden onto single-family homeowners.
“In Providence, this ordinance would also shift the tax burden onto single-family homeowners...”
Reports the veto and Smiley's argument that rent regulation would discourage construction and shift taxes onto homeowners. It also describes exceptions and proposed eviction assistance. Those predicted effects are attributed to Smiley.
Archived copy (opens in a new tab)Relative to adopting the proposed 4% rent-cap framework, Smiley rejects it through his veto and argues against its expected effects. His opposition addresses the policy itself.
