As I’ve been talking with residents around town, a few questions come up again and again, especially regarding my views on the recent data center proposal and on LMI housing. These topics affect Smithfield’s long‑term character, resources, and quality of life, so I want to share my perspective openly and directly. Below, you’ll find my detailed thoughts on both issues, and I encourage you to keep reaching out, keep asking questions, and keep the conversation going.

Data Centers:

I have concerns about the health and environmental impacts associated with large‑scale data centers. While some will point out that the decibel levels are not technically “dangerous,” what is often overlooked is the nature of the noise. This isn’t a passing disturbance, it is a constant and unrelenting background noise that never stops. That kind of persistent exposure affects quality of life, and it deserves more serious consideration when evaluating where and how these facilities are sited.

Beyond noise, data centers also carry significant implications for power and water consumption. These facilities draw enormous amounts of electricity and require substantial cooling capacity, often relying on municipal water systems. When demand spikes, the surrounding communities can end up absorbing the cost through increased utility rates or infrastructure upgrades. Those impacts may not be immediately visible, but they are real, long‑term burdens on residents and local resources. Any proposal for a data center should fully account for these downstream effects, not just the footprint of the building itself.

Housing:

For me, the conversation around LMI housing is less about the concept of income‑restricted units and more about the broader issue of overdevelopment and the strain it places on town resources, infrastructure, and public services. Smithfield has clear, long‑standing zoning ordinances that reflect thoughtful community planning, environmental limits, and responsible growth, and I respect the rights of property owners to operate within those ordinances. What I do not support is the state overriding local zoning to force excessive density with little regard for the town’s capacity or long‑term planning. Local communities should retain the ability to manage growth responsibly, and state‑level mandates that bypass municipal control undermine that balance.

At the same time, I recognize that Rhode Island is facing a real housing affordability crisis that must be addressed. Increasing overall housing supply can help put downward pressure on costs, and additional units, when properly planned, contribute to that effort. But affordability cannot come at the expense of the character, scale, and sustainability of our town. Growth has to be thoughtful, aligned with our zoning, and supported by the infrastructure and services that make Smithfield a strong community. Responsible development and affordability are not mutually exclusive, but they do require local control and careful planning.