MINUTES
EXETER TOWN COUNCIL
SPECIAL MEETING
JULY 8, 2026
The Special Meeting of the Exeter Town Council was called to order on Wednesday, June 9, 2026, at 6:40 p.m., in the Wawaloam Elementary School Cafeteria, 100 Victory Highway, Exeter, Rhode Island.
ROLL CALL: Town Council Members: Diane Bampton Allen,
Raymond A. Morrissey, Jr., Jamie S. Schiffer,
Joseph Turner, and Calvin Ellis
ALSO PRESENT: Lynn M. Hawkins, Town Clerk
Kenneth G. Findlay, Town Administrator
Kenneth J. Sylvia, Esq, Town Solicitor
MOTION made by Ms. Allen to send the entire proposed ordinance changes back to
the Planning Board and establish workshops of small sections at a time consisting of
the following people, the Town Administrator, the Town Planner, Planning Board,
Town Council, and Members of the Public, and that the workshops be open to the
public and open to everyone; seconded Mr. Schiffer.
Discussion:
Ms. Allen: The amendments are vast, crazy, and enormous. A lot of people are going
to be hurt if it is passed. The blank spaces in the chart mean many activities are prohibited, especially if you live in a ground water overlay district. The amendments were rushed.
More time should be spent with everyone’s input. Every time she reads the amendments,
she finds something else that needs to be changed. Amendments to the amendments made
at the last meeting are not included. They need to be.
Joe Turner: Following comments he made earlier this week, he reiterated that he hears the residents, business owners, and property owners loud and clear. Many have asked Council
to slow down, be deliberate, and ensure that any changes to the zoning ordinances are thoughtful, clear, and in the best of the Town. For that reason, he cannot support broad, sweeping amend-ments to the zoning ordinance unless they have been thoroughly vetted, are legally sound, and can be clearly understood by those who will be affected by them. He thanked Ms. Allen for proposing workshops. He was going to. The workshops would provide an opportunity for the Council to work collaboratively with the Town Planner, Planning Board, Solicitor, staff, businesses in the community, and residents to develop ordinances that are organized, consistent, and aligned with Exeter’s Comprehensive Plan. The objective is not to put anyone out of business or create unnecessary barriers. It is Council’s responsibility to develop reasonable land use regulations that provide clarity, fairness, and predictability for property owners, businesses, and residents alike. As part of that process, he believes each proposed land use should be carefully evaluated and classified as either a permitted use by right, a use requiring a special use permit, with clearly defined standards, or a prohibited use where necessary to protect the public health, safety, and welfare. He recommended that the workshops begin with the existing ordinance and first improve its overall organization. The zoning use table should be restructured into a more user-friendly format consistent with those used successfully by neighboring communities. This alone would make the ordinance far easier for residents, applicants, and Town officials to understand and administer. Many of the changes that were proposed are substantial policy decisions. Rather than treating them as minor amendments, he believes they should be considered major amendments so they receive the comprehensive review that they are due by the Planning Board, the public, and all the other stakeholders that deserve to have purview over these ordinances. The ordinance before Council contains a significant number of complex revisions. Attempting to adopt them all at once is neither efficient nor practical. The scope of these changes makes them difficult for residents, business owners, and Council members to fully evaluate in a single meeting. Good policy requires careful review, not rushed decision-making. There is nothing wrong with taking the time to get this right. It is Council’s obligation. The residents expect Council to adopt ordinances that are clear, enforceable, legally defensible, and reflective of Exeter’s long-term vision. He respectfully requested that Council defer these broader amendments, establish a structured workshop process, address only those changes that are truly necessary in the immediate term, and thoughtfully work through the remaining revisions in a transparent and methodical manner.
Back to the Motion: Voted as follows:
Diane Bampton Allen, Yes
Raymond A. Morrissey, Jr. Yes
Jamie S. Schiffer Yes
Joseph Turner Yes
Calvin Ellis Yes
Motion passes.
Mr. Schiffer: He appreciated everyone that came out tonight and taking interest. Council has met on this a number of times. More participation means Council can get concerns, understand them, and adapt them into the new ordinances. Due to the overwhelming attendance tonight, the restriction on how long we have to discuss these issues, and the fact that the moratorium expires next Tuesday, it is going to take much longer to accurately review the context of these changes.
MOTION made by Mr. Schiffer to propose an additional 60-day moratorium as the
matter still exists, and at the end of the 60 days, the Town Administrator, working with
the Planner, will have developed new zoning ordinances that are legally sound and that
can be transparently reviewed at a future hearing; seconded by Mr. Ellis; and voted as follows:
Diane Bampton Allen No
Raymond A. Morrissey, Jr. No
Jamie S. Schiffer Yes
Joseph Turner Yes
Calvin Ellis Yes
Motion passes.
PROPOSED AMENDMENTS TO EXETER CODE OF ORDINANACES
APPENDIX A, ZONING
ARTICLE 1, ADMINISTRATION PROCEDURES
SECTION 1.2., DEFINITIONS
SECTION 1.5, ADOPTION
ARTICLE II, ZONING DISTRICT USE REGULATIONS
ARTICLE IV, SUPPLEMENTARY REGULATIONS
Because of the vote taken previously tonight to send the amendments to workshops, there
was question whether to open the public hearing. Ms. Allen polled the public. They wished
to speak.
MOTION made by Ms. Allen to open the Public Hearing; seconded by Mr. Turner.
Ted Nataly: There is misunderstanding and misinformation. Everyone here tonight has concerns. One person on the other side of town triggered the changes and Council rushed
into it. Council tonight wants to extend the moratorium to protect everyone, the wood cutters, the residents who have moved in. Everyone who signed up should tell Council exactly how
they feel and put it on the record. Going forward, Council will have your comments. Let everyone be heard. Everyone is mad. It is not right. This is a friendly town. Let Council
do what they are going to do. They are trying to help and protect everyone. Do not scream
and yell. We are neighbors.
Back to the Motion: Voted unanimously in the affirmative.
Council turned to the list of persons who wished to speak.
Scott Kettelle: Has lived here for 40 years, volunteering in public safety, fire, rescue, and dispatch. He knows many people in attendance, many of whom he has worked with and for,
and whom he has helped and supported. He was going to ask Council to do what they just did, slow down, take this step by step, consider how the potential changes will impact the residents, who pay taxes and vote for Council. The community has to have input regarding the changes. He wished Council’s actions tonight happened sooner, but he thanked them. He urged them
to take steps and coordinate the proposed changes and publicly advertise them, so that not
every meeting will be like tonight. Only the most interested and concerned will attend. He
loves Exeter. He has no intention of leaving, but he feels he is being pushed out.
Rita Cassidy: Has lived here since 1961. She lives on Arcadia Road. There is a lot of
“garbage” on FaceBook. She is being marked for causing the changes and behind this.
She has been dealing with issues on her property caused by her neighbor for a very long
time. She invited all in attendance to visit, walk her property, and talk about the1200-foot channel of erosion, a blocked access, collapsed mobile home, silt (covering a portion
of her property), noise, rats, and poor air quality caused by her neighbor. Who is protecting
her? There will always be wood cutters. We need wood cutters and tree services, but there should be regulations so others are not impacted. There is a lot of misinformation. No one
is trying to take anything away, but things should be done to protect others’ rights, from
people who do what they want, when they want. The wetlands must be protected. It is not
fair to put a target on the Zoning Inspector’s back. It is not fair.
Tammy Lyles: Thanked Council for postponing the amendments. There are people who
are being disenfranchised and not able to move forward in their businesses. After reviewing
the extremely convoluted amendments, probably purposefully, she sees legal challenges.
There are many potentially unconstitutional infringements and contradictions to Federal and State laws and regulations. These will add to the Town’s already numerous lawsuits, which
the taxpayers are paying for and will. There is language saying any use not specifically listed
is prohibited. If there is a blank cell in the chart, the activity or business is prohibited. Having wine or shooting guns on her property is prohibited because they are not listed? There are first amendment and second amendment issues. This is a slippery slope and infringing upon rights. The section on wood processing does not align with the Right to Farm Act. Farming is land service. Setbacks do not align with Department of Environmental Management policies. The community centers around agricultural and forestry. There are several other contradictions.
Why has the Town Council allowed such a document to be prepared? The Town should have hired an attorney to draft an ordinance that would not be as sweeping or hired an attorney who would have caught these oversights and challenges. If the Town attorney is working in the Town’s best interest, why would he allow the Town to present this to the residents? It cost
a lot of money. Council has to be more conscientious of what it is going to put forward.
She thanked Council for rejecting, for the time being, these so-called amendments and having them redone. The amendments seem designed to disenfranchise those who operate home and small businesses on their property as their main source or supplemental source of income.
Why does the Town want to disenfranchise those people by instituting ridiculous restrictions? Or is the objective to disenfranchise people so that they move out of town? Why is the Town interfering with how people live on their property, what they do, what they have, or how they store. Why did the Town take all these zoning changes on at once rather than prioritizing them and taking one section on at a time? She is glad that the workshops will do that. Who is going
to enforce the changes? Why all these changes? Why now? To what end? Re-evaluate and return with something that focuses on common sense and Exeter values. Once the restrictions
are in, it is highly unlikely that they will be withdrawn, modified, or altered. In 2044, the Comprehensive Plan, states that Exeter will remain a peaceful and welcoming small town,
with a strong sense of community, a rural tradition, and a landscape of space and privacy,
fields, wildlife, historic places, conservation lands, working lands, farms, forests, and
enterprises that anchor the Town’s rural character. The environment, wildlife, and clean
water will be protected. Open space will be preserved. Residential developments will be primarily focused in hamlets, villages, or conservation subdivisions. There will be non-residential, balanced development in designated areas. Natural resources and the general,
rural character of the community will remain. Economic growth will offset taxes, build on
the Town’s assets, and enhance small business that serve residents. The economic viability
of farm and forest enterprises will be promoted. What is being proposed tonight, does not
comply. Please reject the amendments and take a more common-sense approach that
maintains rights and keeps with Exeter’s rural character.
The cafeteria had no air conditioning. There were over 200 people in the room. The capacity was 256. There were a few fans. One door could be opened but not the windows. It was very hot. Two persons were taken out for heat exhaustion. Deeming the meeting a public safety
threat due to health issues and quite possibly more health issues caused by the temperature
in the room, Exeter Emergency Services shut down the meeting.
MOTION made by Ms. Allen to close the Public Hearing; seconded by Mr. Schiffer;
and voted unanimously in the affirmative.
MOTION made by Ms. Allen to adjourn; seconded by Mr. Schiffer;
and voted unanimously in the affirmative.
The Special Meeting was adjourned at 7:27 p.m.
Respectfully submitted,
Lynn M. Hawkins, CMC
Exeter Town Clerk
Approved: August 3, 2026