“The City of Central Falls, Rhode Island filed a Chapter 9 bankruptcy petition at 9:03 AM, August 1, 2011. The case is assigned bankruptcy number 11-13105. Chief Judge Sandra Lynch of the First Circuit Court of Appeals has designated Bankruptcy Judge Frank Bailey, of the District of Massachusetts, to preside over the case.”

For those readers interested in viewing the actual petition, the Bankruptcy Court has made it available for the public here.

Local news outlets, including the Providence Journal and GoLocalProv have provided excellent coverage on various aspects of the filing as they relate to the political and financial impact on the city and the state. As the case progresses, we too will provide periodic updates and explanations focused on the evolving law of municipal bankruptcy and Chapter 9 under the United States Bankruptcy Code.

On Monday, the Court’s designated Duty Justice is slated to meet with the lawyers and issue an initial ruling on Russo’s request for temporary injuctive relief.

It is possible the full Court will meet to review the Duty Justice’s decision. No other action is expected at this time.

The essence of the home rule provisions of the RI constitution is R.I. Const. Art. XIII, § 2, which provides “[e]very city and town shall have the power at any time to adopt a charter, amend its charter, enact and amend local laws relating to its property, affairs and government not inconsistent with this Constitution and laws enacted by the general assembly in conformity with the powers reserved to the general assembly.”

This section is parallelled by R.I. Const. Art. XIII, § 4 providing:

 ”[t]he general assembly shall have the power to act in relation to the property, affairs and government of any city or town by general laws which shall apply alike to all cities and towns, but which shall not affect the form of government of any city or town. The general assembly shall also have the power to act in relation to the property, affairs and government of a particular city or town provided that such legislative action shall become effective only upon approval by a majority of the qualified electors of the said city or town voting at a general or special election, except that in the case of acts involving the imposition of a tax or the expenditure of money by a town the same shall provide for the submission thereof to those electors in said town qualified to vote upon a proposition to impose a tax or for the expenditure of money.”

If we accept that the new law is a law of general application that applies to alike to all municipalities then the question becomes whether the powers granted to the receiver affect the form of government? . . .  

Additionally, it was revealed by the Court last week that now Retired Chief Justice Frank Williams will continue to serve, in a volunteer role, as an appellate mediator for the Court.

Although in the context of this case, the length of time that has passed since the

agreement was entered into by the parties gives us pause, we decline to hold that the

passage of time, standing alone, is sufficient to warrant a conclusion that the agreement

was abandoned. The duty to make such a finding rests with the trial justice, and we

sustain the finding unless it is clearly erroneous. He declared that, “[t]he record is devoid

of any intent on the part of Keystone to abandon the [a]greement. There was never a sign

of reluctance, Keystone never backed off.” See Fisher, 947 A.2d at 253 (finding that

time was not of the essence in that contract and that any suggestion to the contrary was

incorrect). It is not our function to second guess this determination.