Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Ethics Development topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Resident alleges conflict of interest over Stony Lane and development‑rights rules; council hears denial
Summary
A public commenter alleged a local property owner’s active application to sell development rights and proposed ordinance changes could create a conflict of interest and shift taxpayer funds; a second commenter disputed the claim and said the Rhode Island Ethics Commission issued an advisory clearing.
Aceh Davis urged the Exeter Town Council to examine what he described as a potential conflict of interest involving an applicant seeking changes to rural residential and compound rules while pursuing a separate application to sell development rights.
Davis told the council the combination of an active application to change ordinance provisions and a concurrent application to sell development rights could raise the theoretical developed value of the property and ‘‘stinks of conflict of interest,’’ adding that the matter ‘‘will be the third ethics complaint’’ if not handled carefully.
Resident Scott Moore responded during public comment to deny that he sought to gain frontage or other private benefit from the town’s abandonment of Stony Lane. Moore described the lane as an unmaintained, hazardous roadway that presented wildfire risk and liability, and he said abandoning the lane would not grant private frontage. Moore also told the council he requested and received an advisory opinion from the Rhode Island Ethics Commission finding no conflict that would prevent him from participating in ordinance revisions.
The exchange left the council with no formal action on the ordinance text during the meeting. Members noted a legal report would be discussed later on the agenda and that any final step to change road status or ordinance wording should consider access, title and potential ethics complaints before being advanced. Council members also encouraged staff to ensure official records and maps reflect prior council decisions about road abandonment and road acceptances so title questions are clear for residents and potential applicants.
Next steps: the council did not vote on ordinance language at this meeting. Councilors said the forthcoming legal report and any advisory opinions or filed ethics complaints would inform whether the council should take further action.
