A Providence federal judge on Tuesday invalidated the town of Johnston’s 2024 attempt to seize 31 acres of land by eminent domain from a family-owned homebuilding company in order to build a new public safety complex and town hall.
Rhode Island U.S. District Judge Melissa R. DuBose ruled that the town failed to meet basic constitutional requirements when it sought to take over the site of a planned 252-unit affordable housing complex on George Waterman Road. Dubose wrote that Johnston officials acted without pledging “the public faith and credit” to provide just compensation and without establishing clear enforcement procedures.
“When a municipality elects to invoke the power of eminent domain, it must proceed in the manner prescribed by law, and the town did not do so here,” DuBose wrote in her 20-page ruling.
On March 10, 2025, the Johnston Town Council voted 5-0 to begin the legal process of condemning the site after obtaining an appraisal that found the property was worth $775,000. Two days later, the town transferred title to the property to itself by eminent domain and filed a petition in Rhode Island Superior Court seeking permission to deposit estimated just compensation into the court registry.
A Superior Court judge later ordered the town to change the land records back to the family-owned homebuilder corporations of Santoro and Salvatore Compagnone — whose families have owned the land since the 1980s.
The town maintained that its eminent domain authority derived independently from its home rule charter, which was ratified by the Rhode Island General Assembly.
“The town proceeded to condemn the property relying on nothing more than a charter provision that, standing alone, cannot bear the constitutional weight the town has placed on it,” DuBose wrote.
On the same day in December 2024 that the Santoro family met with the town’s Planning Board for a pre-application meeting for their income-restricted apartment complex, Johnston Mayor Joseph Polisena Jr. issued a public letter opposing the proposed housing development. Polisena warned that the town would “fight back” using “all the power of government” available to stop the project.
Polisena made no secret of his desire to move forward with plans for a new public safety complex and town hall to replace the town’s aging buildings.
The Santoro family claimed neither they nor their lawyer received constitutionally adequate notice of the filing, the transfer of title or the proceedings in state court before the transfer was recorded. They filed a federal lawsuit against the town, identified as SCLS Realty, LLC, and Sixty Three Johnston, LLC.
“Eminent domain is one of the most powerful tools a government may wield against a property owner, but that power comes with real legal limits,” said Kady Valois, an attorney at Pacific Legal Foundation, which represented the Santoro family in the case. “The Town of Johnston didn’t follow those limits — it tried to seize private property by making up its own procedures, exercising a power it does not possess under both Rhode Island law and the U.S. Constitution. A taking without lawful authority is, as the court concluded, ‘void ab initio.’”
Rhode Island Current reached out to Polisena for comment about the town’s plans for the site after Tuesday’s ruling. An email response from his deputy chief of staff, Dominique Turner, had a statement attributed to Polisena.
“On page one of the decision, the court states that it ‘does not question the exercise of that authority,’ thereby acknowledging the town of Johnston’s power to exercise eminent domain,” the statement reads. “The town will follow the court’s guidance regarding the proper procedure moving forward.”
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd,
racist or sexually-oriented language. PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK. Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another
person will not be tolerated. Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone
or anything. Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism
that is degrading to another person. Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on
each comment to let us know of abusive posts. Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness
accounts, the history behind an article.
(0) comments
Welcome to the discussion.
Log In
Keep it Clean. Please avoid obscene, vulgar, lewd, racist or sexually-oriented language.
PLEASE TURN OFF YOUR CAPS LOCK.
Don't Threaten. Threats of harming another person will not be tolerated.
Be Truthful. Don't knowingly lie about anyone or anything.
Be Nice. No racism, sexism or any sort of -ism that is degrading to another person.
Be Proactive. Use the 'Report' link on each comment to let us know of abusive posts.
Share with Us. We'd love to hear eyewitness accounts, the history behind an article.