Residents’ Object to Bond for Bayfront Building Buy

OCEAN CITY – A divided City Council approved a $700,000 bond ordinance to fund the purchase of a bayfront building Oct. 12 over the objection of several of the building’s neighbors, and two council members.
The vote went ahead after the city attorney recommended tabling the ordinance.
The ordinance is to fund the purchase of 50 Tennessee Ave., a now-vacant former industrial building near the municipal boat ramp. While some who spoke during the hearing on the ordinance questioned the city spending the money, across the board the main objection was that the city had no specific plans for the building.
After the meeting, Mayor Jay Gillian said he did not want the building to either fall into disrepair on the bayfront or be bought by a developer to make way for more residential construction.
Council members Robert Barr and Keith Hartzell voted against the bond ordinance, saying they did not have enough information to support the project. They both wanted the vote delayed.
“I just want to say how uncomfortable I am that this is moving forward. I’m extremely uncomfortable with this process. This is not what we normally do,” said Barr.
The building is next to the Ocean Reef Condominiums and falls within the condominium association. Several Ocean Reef residents spoke against proceeding with the vote as well.
Because of a fluke in Ocean City’s voting wards, Ocean Reef falls in the 4th Ward, which Barr represents, even though it is farther north than the 26th Street boundary with 3rd Ward.
Tony Wilson, who represents the 3rd Ward, voted for the ordinance.
The ordinance does not oblige the city to buy the building. That would be decided in a separate resolution. The bond ordinance does not mean the city will necessarily borrow the money. It will allow the administration to move more quickly if a deal is reached.
City Attorney Dorothy McCrosson said the municipality is still doing its due diligence on the property, and has not made an offer. From the discussions at council, it sounds that many questions remain.
Hartzell wanted to wait to get answers before approving the ordinance. Not only is that the right way to proceed, he said, doing it the other way sends the wrong message.
“I think perception’s reality to people,” he said. “I do feel like you hold off until you have all the facts until you borrow the money.”
“There’s a public perspective that borrowing the money puts us significantly closer to buying the property,” said McCrosson. “And it does, from a timing perspective. But putting the money in place does not require you to sell the bonds; it does not require you to approve a resolution for the purchase of the property.”
The administration could still abandon its move to buy the building, she said.
“Whatever we do, we’re going to do it with you guys,” Gillian told council members at the meeting. “You have my word on that. Council knows that.”
He said he was unsure what use the city could have for the building. He added that he did not want to discuss possibilities “because if then we don’t do it, we’re going to get killed for it.”
It would cost far more for the city to build a new building, he said, and down the road, it would likely prove a benefit.
Hartzell and Barr sought to table the ordinance but were voted down.
Both suggested the building would end up costing far more than the purchase price, as the city tried to bring the building up to code.
“I tried to get into that building,” said Barr, who uses a wheelchair. “It is not an ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990) compliant building. Not only is the building not ADA compliant the curbing outside is not ADA compliant.”
It would be an expensive process to retrofit the building, he said.
Others on council indicated they were excited about the purchase, and what could happen with the building.
“Everybody is saying they’re excited about the project. Well, what project?” Barr said. “We don’t even know what the project is. I might get excited about it, too. If it’s for kids, great. Let’s say that before we move forward like we always do. This is a dangerous precedent to set.”
Several neighbors spoke against proceeding.
Ed Price, an Ocean Reef resident, helped organize residents of the condo community to attend. He said council did not know anything about the ordinance when it was introduced, a charge that council members denied.
According to Price, no one from the condo board let the owners know what was happening with the building. The owners are upset, he said.
“We didn’t know a thing about this. We still don’t,” he said. “I don’t want to see the city move any closer until you talk to the residents.”
Price was a 2014 unsuccessful candidate for mayor, challenging Gillian. He and others said Ocean Reef residents have put up with a lot from the city, including being used as an area to store mulch and salt, and as the neighborhood closest to the city property behind the municipal golf course, where there are soccer fields, the city recycling yard, the Humane Society building and others.
“I just want to know, what is it for?” said Paula Angelo. “We don’t know what’s going on. Somebody mentioned something for children, which no one would be against, with the proper supervision. We just need more information.”
“We don’t know what the city’s going to do with it. Those are our tax dollars that the city’s talking about spending, on a building that’s going to impact us tremendously,” said Kathleen Leonard, who said her home overlooks the boat ramp parking lot. “We’re not being consulted when it’s going to have such a tremendous impact on our lives.”
According to a real estate listing for the property, the two-story building was built in 1964 and is more than 7,200 square feet. Gillian said he was not sure what the building had formerly been used for, but he believed it was a scientific group.
After the vote, council went into a closed-door session, which included an update on negotiations for the building’s purchase.
While most council discussions must, under the “Sunshine Law,” be held in public, there are exceptions. Those include negotiations on contracts and purchases.
To contact Bill Barlow, email bbarlow@cmcherald.com.