Avalon Marina Litigation Lingers; Balloon Release Prohibition Likely

AVALON – Things have continued to worsen with respect to the litigation between Avalon and Travis Marshall, the owner of Avalon Anchorage Marina.
At its July 12 meeting, Avalon Borough Council heard that the municipality is making some moves to possibly bring the litigation to a settlement.
The original litigation, brought by the borough against the marina ownership, has to do with a deal the borough states it had with the previous owner.
The borough vacated land for the marina’s development with the understanding that certain public amenities would be part of that development. The amenities included a fuel dock, public access ramp, and a walkway.
Marshall, who bought the property in 2012, maintains that he was not part of any deal and had no knowledge of it. He received a clear title to the property.
Marshall said it was when he presented site plans to the borough’s planning board in 2015, he was first told of the borough’s expectations.
The planning board turned down his development proposals in part because of the borough’s insistence that the deal with the previous owner carried over as an obligation on the new one.
The borough litigated and lost in Superior and Appellate courts.
In recent meetings, the borough council approved funds to carry the litigation to the state Supreme Court, if the court would agree to hear the case.
Marshall claimed, in public comment, that the borough had no legal basis for further litigation and was purposely causing him increased hardship.
What transpired recently was a new lawsuit filed by Marshall and the marina against the planning board claiming that it had improperly turned down his development plans.
The judge, in that case, has ordered the parties, the marina, and the planning board, to try mediation before the court hears the case.
The borough is not a party to that new litigation, but the planning board is.
The resolution passed July 12 represents an attempt by the borough to enter the mediation process seeking what the borough’s Assistant Business Administrator James Waldron called a “global solution.”
“If it works out,” Waldron said, “we would have a chance to settle both cases, and the borough could withdraw its petition to the Supreme Court as well.”
At borough council’s June 28 meeting, a raised vocal exchange between Thomas Marshall, brother of the marina owner, and council members showed how heated the issue had become.
Thomas Marshall said at that meeting that he was delivering a “legal threat.”
Whether or not the suit later filed against the planning board was part of the fulfillment of that threat is unclear.
Some members of the public, including individuals not sympathetic to the specific development plans proposed by marina owners, have raised concerns about how the borough could have allowed the deal with the previous owner to impose no conditions on the title for a future purchase.
There have also been concerns raised about the borough’s continued legal expense related to the litigation.
Balloon Releases
Council discussed proposed changes to an ordinance that would ban the intentional release of balloons and sky lanterns as part of celebratory events.
With that discussion, Avalon moved a step closer to joining other shore communities which have imposed restrictions on balloon release citing a danger to marine life. 
Cape May took action recently imposing as much as a $100 fine for an intentional balloon release at the resort.
Business Administrator Scott Wahl made clear that the ordinance Avalon is considering would focus on the release of balloons and sky lanterns as part of events such as weddings. “We are not talking about the child who lets go of a balloon,” he said.
The inclusion of sky lanterns came after discussion with the borough fire officials. A sky lantern, often called a Chinese lantern, is a small hot air balloon made of paper with an opening at the bottom where a small fire can be suspended, usually a candle of some sort.
“What goes up eventually comes down,” Wahl said. The balloons can be a threat to marine life, and the sky lanterns can pose problems for public safety.
Members of the public, Martha Wright, and Janet Cass praised council for considering the issue and urged adopting some form of ban.
The two regularly kayak in the bay area near their homes and reported picking up 52 balloons in the first six months of this year. “That’s in a small area of the bay,” Cass said.
It is likely that council will consider a formal ordinance amendment shortly.
To contact Vince Conti, email vconti@cmcherald.com.