MINUTES
EXETER TOWN COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
MARCH 9, 2023
Town Council Vice President Michael Lefebvre led Council and the Public in the Pledge of Allegiance.
The Special Meeting of the Exeter Town Council was called to order at 6:35 p.m., on Thursday, March 9, 2023, in the Wawaloam Elementary School Cafeteria, 100 Victory Highway (Route 102), Exeter, Rhode Island.
Roll Call: Daniel W. Patterson Present
Michael A. Lefebvre Present
Diane Bampton Allen Present
Olivia DeFrancesco Present
Calvin A. Ellis Present
Also Present: James P. Marusak, Esq., Town Solicitor
Lynn M. Hawkins, Town Clerk
Kenneth G. Findlay, Council Assistant
A. CONTINUED FROM FEBRUARY 27, 2023: PROPOSED AMENDMENT
TO EXETER CODE OF ORDINANCES: APPENDIX A, ZONING; ARTICLE XIII, MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF ALL BUILDINGS AND PROPOSED AMEND-MENTS THERETO ADDRESSING CONCERNS RAISED AT THE FEBRUARY 27, 2023, PUBLIC HEARING, AS FOLLOWS: ARTICLE I. - ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES, SEC. 1.2. DEFINITIONS, 47.A.-C., ADDED; ARTICLE I. – ADMIN-ISTRATION PROCEDURES, SEC. 1.4.1. SPECIAL PROVISIONS; GREENHOUSE TIER II AND GREENHOUSE TIER III /CEA FACILITY, ADDED; ARTICLE II. - ZONING DISTRICT USE REGULATIONS, SEC. 2.4. ZONING USE TABLE AND NOTES, ADDED; ARTICLE XIII. - ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES, SEC. 13-1, MAXIMUM LOT COVERAGE OF ALL BUILDINGS, REVISED:
MOTION made by Mr. Lefebvre to reopen the continued Public Hearing; seconded by
Ms. Bampton Allen; and voted unanimously in the affirmative.
All attachments are attached hereto and incorporated herein.
Olivia DeFrancesco, Council Member: Thanked everyone for coming, no matter where they stand and read from her statement (Attachment A). There are a set of guidelines and procedures for all applicants to follow to accomplish their projects, even the Rhode Island Superior Court has agreed in a recent decision. How can the Council Member who brought
this forth relate it to world hunger? It is for RI Grows who thinks it is above Exeter’s ordi-nances. It is troubling that some Council members are attempting to push this amendment through and circumvent the Town’s process for an applicant that has cost the Town $18,000.00 in court costs. This is not about being for or against the project. It is about doing it in the right way. The Town Planner was tasked, unfairly, with writing tonight’s amendment in two weeks when it should have taken months, all for the sake of RI Grows and its deadline. Never mind,
the cost to taxpayer funds and resources. If they had worked with the Town from the beginning, the tomato greenhouse would most likely be up and running by now. It is scary to think that, without proper due diligence, this amendment could result in unintended consequences and
more lawsuits. The right and fair thing should be done for all Exeter residents.
It was confirmed with the Public that everyone in attendance had a copy of the new amendment.
William DePasquale, Town Planner: As requested by Council at the February 6, 2023, Special Meeting, Mr. DePasquale has amended the amendment presented on February 6 to the best of
his ability, using what he has learned while Exeter Town Planner and through the Comprehen-sive Plan process, listening to all persons in the community, and writing it such that it is in the best interests of all. Mr. DePasquale reviewed the amendment for Council and the Public page by page (“Attachment B”).
Council heard from those who wished to make Public Comment.
Randall Sousa, Esq., RI Grows: Commended the Town Planner for drafting a comprehensive amendment to the amendment. Council has his memo (Attachment C). Concerns and suggestions: 1) supporting areas for a twenty-five acre greenhouse, half an acre? This would
make the project impossible and unfeasible; 2) parking lots – should be impervious and should be removed from the setback requirements; 3) setback of 200 feet is excessive. Could it be less? Where is it measured from?; 4) agriculture use in front of building will be corn or strawberries, not shrubs and mulch; 5) dimensional standards – is 2% a typo? Multiple buildings will be required that will not fit in 2%. Should be 15-20%; 6) Section 9, Pages 6 through 8, Enhanced Development Standards, are not necessary in this zoning ordinance as they will be addressed during site plan review process.
Ted Nataly, 34 Nelson Drive: In favor of the greenhouse. At the February 27, 2023, meeting, Councilwoman Allen introduced an amendment to allow greenhouses in RU-3 and was immediately accused by Councilwoman DeFrancesco of introducing it for Schartner. Again,
she and the Planning Board supports and controls what it wants not what the people want.
Not Ms. Allen’s intention. Once again, trying to turn this around and delaying. Councilman Patterson at the February meeting said no, have to get this done. What does Mr. Sousa have
to do with amending a Town ordinance? Has heard that there is not a facility in New England like Schartner’s; however, there is one in Maine, and recently, at Stop & Shop in North Kingstown, his wife bought a tomato from Backyard Farms in Madison, Maine. Why not
have them come from Exeter? Farming is the backbone of Exeter.
Olivia DeFrancesco, Council Member: Ms. Allen wrote a letter to the Planning Board saying that RI Grows helped craft the amendment.
Frank DiGregorio, Hallville Road: Council has his “testimony” (Attachment D). Commended the Planner for drafting tonight’s amendment in one week. Believes it is the “cart before the horse,” premature, and requires more study. It should go through the proper process, through
the Planning Board. It should be in the best interests of the Town not be made to fit Schartner’s project. Putting it in place would be inappropriate and a violation of the ordinances.
Michael Lefebvre, Council Member: Asked Mr. DiGregorio if he knew who sent the mailing about tonight’s meeting. Mr. DiGregorio also received the mailing and felt that it provided the necessary notification and information to the Town’s residents.
Olivia DeFrancesco, Council Member: Submitted: 1) US EPA Designated Sole Source Aquifers in Rhode Island (Attachment E) and EPA Sole Source Aquifers (Attachment F), which shows the aquifer covering much of Southern Rhode Island including Exeter; and 2) “Rhode Island Grows Advances its Greenhouse Plans,” dated March 8, 2023, which indicates “plans for the new facilities include hydroponics technology, crops irrigated by captured rainwater and solar power for the entire facility” (Attachment G).
Gina Thurn, 555 Gardner Road: Owner, Rhode Island’s smallest CEA (“Controlled Environment Agriculture”) facility, Our Kids Farm: The ordinance is not perfect, but it is a working framework and sets a baseline. Can be tweaked in the future but addresses the main concerns of today. Thank you to Planner for listening to everyone, addressing their concerns,
and trying to find a middle ground. Not only will it allow the Schartner family to move forward,
it also opens the doors for smaller farms.
Scott Millar, 47 Stony Lane, Planning Board Member: The Planning Board has no authority
to deny or delay a use or extend the timeclock. When a project goes before the Planning Board, there are stringent State requirements and timeframes. Commended Planner for improving the ordinance. The original amendment was for lot coverage. Tonight’s amendment is more comprehensive. Cautioned Council to readvertise to be sure it is complying with State law.
The Planning Board’s previous opinion was on the lot coverage amendment, not tonight’s amendment. It is a significant change. Give people ample time to follow. Do it right.
What is the source of energy? Renewable on site? Where did the pilot fee and $10,000 per
acre come from? Has the Tax Assessor been consulted?
James Marusak, Esq., Town Solicitor: The legality of the notice issue was looked at closely. The original amendment was proposed at public hearing held on February 27. There was
much discussion and concerns were raised. The Planner drafted the new amendment. That
was advertised, not in the paper, but on the Town’s website and copies distributed. State
Law 45-24-53, Section 5 states: “…the ordinance may be altered or amended prior to the close
of the public hearing without further advertising” and “…any alteration or amendment
must be presented for comment in the course of the hearing.” Readvertising was not required.
It does not have to go back to the Planning Board. They have had the opportunity to be
involved in these proceedings. The notices have been in accordance with State law.
Olivia DeFrancesco, Council Member: The Tax Assessor has reviewed the amendment and asks (Attachment H): If a project has a 4.5 acre greenhouse, would we prorate the PILOT fee to $5,000.00/half acre? Should a rate per square foot apply instead in order that greenhouses on 4+ acres are taxable? Will it be the same rate for all tiers? Should language reflect that the PILOT fee pertains only to the greenhouses, and excludes land, equipment, assets, and any other taxable property? Will greenhouses under four acres be exempt from taxation completely or just
PILOT fees? Where did the $10,000.00/acre come from?
Daniel Patterson, Council President: The overlay district is $10,000.00/acre. PILOT will be for the greenhouses. Any packing houses, support buildings, will be taxed as commercial buildings.
Olivia DeFrancesco, Council Member: Submitted “Payments in Lieu of Taxes: Balancing Municipal and Nonprofit Interests (Attachment I). “Pilots are often haphazard, secretive,
and calculated in an ad hoc manner that results in widely varying payments among similar nonprofits…a municipality’s attempt to collect PILOTs can prompt a battle with nonprofits
and lead to years of contentious, costly, and unproductive litigation.” Is the language comprehensive enough in this amendment to cover PILOT programs?
Calvin Ellis, Council Member: Has spoken with Assessor and Planner. Concerned with tonight’s process. (Inquired of Mr. Patterson: Did he write some of the ordinance? Yes,
the PILOT fees, written over two weeks ago.) It seems that this amendment is written to
assist RI Grows. It has been said that the amendment is not site specific, but it is written
to accommodate RI Grows. Some of it would be negotiated with the Planning Board and
should not be in the amendment. RI Grows will pay minimal PILOT fees, $250,000.00,
per year, for the greenhouse. Other buildings will be taxed as commercial. (Inquired of
Mr. Millar, Chair Planning Board: Should the PILOT fees be removed and brought before
the Planning Board? No, they should be determined by Council and the Tax Assessor.)
Loren Thurn, 555 Gardner Road, Owner, Our Kids Farmer: Thanked Council and the Planner for the time taken to bring this amendment forward. As a farmer, does not want to be told how
to farm, but if there is not an ordinance, will be told no. Agriculture needs to move forward
with technology and production. Schartner may have brought the ordinance but it is about agriculture and needed for the future. The amendment is not perfect, but it is a starting point. Reviewed typos found in the ordinance (Attachment J).
Daniel Patterson, Council President: Some of the typos found by Mr. Thurn were discovered and made, some were not and will be. Does anyone have any comments?
Rob Correia, 205 New Road: Commend Planner for doing a great job. The prior one left
too many loopholes. The amendment is to enable a family farm to modernize and be more competitive. What happens to the family farm? Will houses still be allowed on the property?
If there is an industrial site, will houses be allowed including the farmer’s residence? What about the amenities for the workers? How many workers? Will there be overnight accommo-dations? Will farm stands still be allowed?
Calvin Ellis, Council Member: Regarding Mr. Thurn’s remarks regarding typos, this is what happens when something is rushed. The Planner should have had more than two weeks to
redraft the ordinance and the Planning Board more time to review.
Olivia DeFrancesco, Council Member: Submitted: 1) “Inside Green Empire Farm: Upstate NY’s Biggest Coronavirus Outbreak Slams Migrant Workers” (Attachment K). “Oneida greenhouse had always planned to bring in some labor. There is a bunkhouse on the grounds, but it’s not finished.”
Jim Haught, CEO, RI Grows: There will be 80 employees in the greenhouse, year-round, full time. Housing will not be provided. The plants will grow to about 20 feet. Above that, will
be lights, trusses, and roofing. There are various components utilized to control the environment of a CEA. There will be four natural gas-powered engines, which will provide power for the grow lighting, and will be an acre in size. Street power will be pulled for all other buildings. Boilers to heat water will be 6200 square feet in size. The staging area will be an acre. The irrigation road will be 15000 square feet. Locker rooms for the employees will be 4600 square feet. Refrigeration units for storing tomatoes will be 2500 square feet. The packaging line
will be just under an acre. All total, about three acres. Solar is not being planned presently.
If ordinances allow, it may be contemplated in the future.
Olivia DeFrancesco, Council Member: She is not against the project. She has questions that need answers. Have not seen design. Will RI Grows come to Council to change solar ordinance
to accommodate them? RI Grows is not doing things within Exeter’s standards. It is rewriting
them to accommodate them. There are loose ends that need to be tied up. It should not be voted on tonight. This concerns Exeter’s future. How much lot coverage would be left after for solar? Would a solar array, a secondary use, be allowed? How would other buildings fit into the 35% coverage? Would Council be amenable to prohibiting solar?
Mark Lyles, Sunderland Road: Has enjoyed the discussions. This is a phenomenal start.
Need to be sure the rainwater collection system will be sufficient. Lighting and security
should be considered. The project should be looked at as industrial.
Pam Toro, New Road: Thanked Planner for redrafting the amendment quickly. Will the
taxes cover real and personal taxes? (Mr. Patterson: Farm Act taxes are $1,000.00/
acre, agriculture. The Town’s overlay district is $250,000.00 PILOT, annually. All other buildings will be taxed as commercial.) Original notice was for a zoning ordinance change.
A portion of tonight’s draft concerns taxation. It should have been readvertised and could
be challenged. It is disingenuous to the taxpayers. There should have been fair notice.
James Marusak, Esq., Town Solicitor: Did not believe there was a notice issue. RIGL 45-24-53(a)(5) states: if an amendment is suggested, it can be acted on without further publication
or notice, so long as the public has an opportunity before the hearing is closed to comment on
it. The amended amendment was made available to the public and the public is being given
the opportunity tonight to comment.
The stenographer requested a break.
MOTION made by Mr. Patterson to recess for five minutes; seconded by Mr. Lefebvre;
and voted unanimously in the affirmative.
The meeting was recessed.
Council reassembled.
The following motion entered.
MOTION made by Mr. Lefebvre to readjourn the meeting; seconded by Ms. Allen;
and voted unanimously in the affirmative.
The meeting continued with Council discussion.
Mr. Ellis: Suggested that the PILOT section should be removed. The Tax Assessor
advises further review and study.
Mr. Patterson: RIGL 44-5-42(f) states: greenhouses are tax exempt with a class tier farm exemption.
Ms. DeFrancesco: Richmond has a CEA facility (Building Permit #109007) which is categorized as a “factory” (Attachment L). Is Exeter going to ignore what other towns
are doing?
Mr. Lefebvre: Made the following amendments: 1) Page 5, 8A, change “not to exceed 2%”
to “not to exceed 10%”; and 2) increase the setback from 200 feet to 150 feet. These numbers are more fair and reasonable to all parties involved.
Mr. Patterson: Asked the public if they wished to comment on Mr. Lefebvre’s amendments.
No one did.
Ms. DeFrancesco: Where did these numbers come from?
Mr. Patterson: Zoning Inspector Hal Morgan indicates that a 200-foot setback is excessive
and should be 100 and that the 2% should be 15-18% (Attachment M).
Mr. Lefebvre: This hearing is about the ordinance, not Schartner or RI Grows. Schartner
sued the Town. They lost and cost the Town approximately $18,000.00. The ordinance
should be looked at by them as a gift. Council has been more than considerate and fair
of their concerns. The Town is fortunate to have Mr. DePasquale on staff, a valuable
employee. This is a collaboration, despite the emotions. Council cares and is trying to
make the ordinance fair to the community and all companies large and small.
Mr. Ellis: Echoed Mr. Lefebvre’s comments. RI Grows is why this amendment came about, because of its project. Two years ago, when they first came to the Planning Board, they were given advice and direction. They walked away. Tonight’s amendment will put the Town in
a better place. It is not the best. There are flaws, but it is a basis and a beginning.
MOTION made by Mr. Patterson to close the Public Hearing; seconded by Mr. Ellis;
and voted unanimously in the affirmative.
MOTION made by Mr. Patterson to approve Draft No. 5, dated March 6, 2023, heard tonight, March 9, 2023, with three amendments discussed during the Public Hearing:
1) typos submitted to the Town Clerk by Loren Thurn; 2) Councilman Lefebvre’s amendment, Page 5, No. 7, Section D, site must be designed to set back the building parking lot and off-street loading a minimum of 150 feet from the front property line
and preserve the front yard as open field or agriculture; and 3) Councilman Lefebvre’s amendment, Page 5, No. 8, Dimensional Standards, Tier 3, CEA Facility Greenhouse, applications shall conform with all of the following: A) shall not exceed 25 acres under cover excluding the floor area dedicated to mechanical or electrical equipment, packaging area and support facilities, dedicated to shipping and receiving, except that this area shall not exceed 10% of the total square footage of the greenhouse; seconded by Mr. Lefebvre.
Discussion: Ms. DeFrancesco was not comfortable with the PILOT money language and there not being true due diligence in the time this really should have taken and sending it back to the Planning Board.
Back to the Motion: Voted as follows:
Daniel W. Patterson Yes
Michael A. Lefebvre Yes
Diane Bampton Allen Yes
Olivia DeFrancesco No
Calvin A. Ellis Yes
Motion passes.
There were no Other Administrative Issues.
MOTION made by Mr. Patterson to adjourn the meeting; seconded by Mr. Lefebvre;
and voted unanimously in the affirmative.
The Special Meeting was adjourned at 9:37 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lynn M. Hawkins, CMC
Exeter Town Clerk
Approved: July 10, 2023