Submits the state's 2025 capital development program requesting the issuance of general obligation bonds totaling twenty five million dollars ($25,000,000) for approval of the electorate at the general election to be held on November 3, 2026.
H6006 is a bond referendum bill that places a single capital project before Rhode Island voters at the November 2026 general election. It asks whether the state should be authorized to issue up to $25 million in general obligation bonds, refunding bonds, and/or temporary notes to fund a statewide bicycle mobility plan. The project is described as creating a seamless off-road and on-street bicycle network intended to provide transportation and recreational connections across the state.
The bill sets out the ballot question, the approval process, and the financing framework if voters approve the measure. It authorizes the general treasurer, with the governor’s approval, to issue and sell the bonds, manage any refunding bonds, deposit proceeds into a dedicated capital development bond fund, and use the money only for the approved bicycle network project. It also includes standard provisions on bond terms, tax exemption, investment of funds, debt service appropriations, and the use of federal or private funds if available.
If approved by voters, the bill would amend Rhode Island’s capital development program for 2026 by authorizing a new $25 million state debt obligation dedicated to bicycle infrastructure. It would create a specific funding stream for planning, acquiring property, construction, rehabilitation, and related costs needed to build the statewide bicycle system, while also pledging the state’s full faith and credit for repayment. The measure does not itself build the network, but it establishes the legal authority and financing mechanism for the project and ties implementation to the capital development bond fund and state administration oversight.
The available record shows no committee transcript, recorded vote, or formal opposition in the materials provided, so there is no documented debate to indicate broad support or resistance. Based on the bill’s structure, it appears to be presented as a straightforward infrastructure and transportation investment proposal for voter consideration rather than a contested policy change. The caption and text frame the project positively as a statewide mobility and recreation network.
The main potential points of contention are likely to be the use of state general obligation debt, the $25 million price tag, and whether bicycle infrastructure should be prioritized over other capital needs. Questions could also arise about the scope of the proposed network, how funds would be allocated across regions, and whether the project’s transportation benefits justify the borrowing. Because no committee discussion or votes are included, no specific legislators, agencies, or stakeholder groups are identified as taking opposing positions in the available record.