NORTH KINGSTOWN — Governor Carcieri this week could sign a bill that would allow the state to take down the last piece of the old Jamestown Bridge.

The state demolished the bulk of the bridge two years ago, leaving a portion that has since “fallen into hopeless disrepair,” said Sen. James C. Sheehan, D-North Kingstown.

Separate bills submitted by Sheehan and Rep. Kenneth Carter, D-North Kingstown, asking the state to remove the rest of the bridge have passed in both the House and Senate. The governor is reviewing a number of bills this week with his policy experts, said spokeswoman Barbara Trainor, and the two bridge bills could be among them.

The bills do not ask for money for the demolition. They ask that state-owned land adjacent to the bridge be used as a parking lot and for access to the water.

Not everyone wants to see the bridge come down –– at least until officials commit to a new state fishing pier.

In a hearing before the House Committee on the Environment and Natural Resources, representatives of Save the Bay and the Rhode Island Salt Water Anglers Association in May argued that the remaining portion of the bridge section should stand until there is a guarantee that a pier will be built at the same spot, just south of the Jamestown-Verrazzano Bridge.

Meanwhile, some North Kingstown residents have argued that the old bridge needs to come down, regardless of whether a pier is built. The location, Plum Point, is a poor spot for a pier, they say. A new fishing pier at the spot could break loose in a hurricane and batter the new Jamestown Bridge, they say.

At the heart of the issue is a 1987 state law that requires the state to retain a portion of the old bridge for use as a public fishing pier.

The Sheehan and Carter bills amend the state law so that preserving a piece of the old bridge is no longer necessary for the construction of a new one.

The bills don’t mean the state won’t build a new pier somewhere, Sheehan said.

The issue is the danger posed by the old one, he said. “The Department of Transportation, the Department of Environmental Management and the Army Corps of Engineers have all determined the remnant of the bridge needs to come, for safety sake,” he said.

pdavis@projo.com