The Little Compton Town Council opened a public hearing Oct. 6 to gather public comment on a draft short‑term rental ordinance prepared by the town planning board; no votes on adoption were taken.

The planning board presentation, introduced at the hearing, said the board drafted the ordinance to require registration, town inspections and a local contact so the town could enforce safety and nuisance rules while avoiding residency requirements. “We did not want to get involved in who was gonna be able to have it, but rather that all short‑term rentals were registered, and safe,” the planning board representative said.

The hearing drew a mix of longtime residents, rental owners and realtors. Dorothy Bedford, who identified herself as the owner of a year‑round property that she lists off‑season, said she “support[s] the introduction of a permit or a fee” to give the town funds for enforcement and education but asked that mandatory inspections not be required in the first year to allow time for owner education and staff planning. Several speakers urged phased implementation, a local representative requirement, and time to address septic capacity and well‑water concerns. Other speakers urged stronger limits and higher fees for nonresident owners, citing neighborhood impacts and housing availability.

Speakers also disagreed on how many short‑term rentals currently exist. Realtor Kristen Silvera said the state database showed 116 active listings, while another attendee cited as many as 185 listings reported elsewhere. Several residents and speakers said the number of rentals concentrated in particular neighborhoods raised concerns about loss of year‑round housing and school enrollment.

Council members outlined three procedural options at the hearing: schedule another public hearing after further work on a final draft; return the proposal to the planning board for revision; or take no action. After public comment and discussion the council chair said there was no motion and “I’m gonna put that under no action right now,” leaving further steps to a future meeting.

What happens next: the council did not adopt the ordinance at the Oct. 6 meeting. The record shows the council will either schedule further hearings, return the draft to the planning board, or revisit the proposal later; no formal referral or adoption vote occurred on Oct. 6.