RELATING TO GENERAL ASSEMBLY -- COMMITTEES AND STAFF
This bill amends Rhode Island General Laws chapter 22-6, which governs legislative committees and staff, to add a new nonprofit funding transparency requirement. Any nonprofit entity that receives more than $50,000 in grants or other funding from the General Assembly, whether directly or through the state budget, would have to submit detailed compensation information within 90 days of receiving the money. The disclosure would cover the highest paid directors, officers, and employees, including names, salaries, benefits, and other forms of compensation such as health insurance, retirement or pension benefits, rental cars, lodging, and communication devices. It would also require disclosure of other funding sources such as fundraising, endowments, trusts, and memorial gifts.
The bill also requires a separate disclosure for the five highest compensated employees earning at least $100,000 in reportable compensation during the prior fiscal year. For those employees, the nonprofit would need to provide the position description, total compensation, and benefits, but the employee names would not need to be disclosed. The act would take effect immediately upon passage.
The bill would expand state-law reporting obligations for nonprofits that receive significant legislative or budgetary funding, creating a new transparency condition tied to public money. It would affect nonprofit recipients of General Assembly grants or appropriations above the $50,000 threshold by requiring them to compile and submit compensation and funding-source disclosures, and it would give the legislature more detailed information about how funded nonprofits compensate top personnel and structure their finances.
Based on the bill text and available context, the measure appears to be framed as a transparency and accountability proposal rather than a spending or programmatic expansion. No committee transcripts or recorded votes are available, so there is no documented debate history to indicate broader support or opposition. The caption and statutory changes suggest the sponsors are seeking greater public oversight of nonprofit use of state funds.
The main likely point of contention is the scope and intrusiveness of the disclosure requirement. Supporters would likely view the bill as a safeguard for taxpayer-funded grants, while critics may object that it imposes administrative burdens on nonprofits, requires disclosure of sensitive compensation information, and may discourage organizations from seeking public funding. The bill also contains an internal tension between the caption/explanation, which refers to the ten highest paid directors, officers, or employees and names, and the operative text, which refers to the highest paid director, officer, and employee plus a separate five-employee disclosure without names.