Seeks help to force vote on Public Safety Building; city officials say it is best plan
By DAVID NAHAN/Sentinel staff
OCEAN CITY – A local resident is seeking “soldiers” for a petition drive to force a referendum on Ocean City’s proposed $42 million Public Safety Building, a project the administration contends is the best option for the resort.
Michael Hinchman appeared before Ocean City Council last month, asking the administration to hold a referendum on the project to replace the aging police station and court operation on Central Avenue with a new Public Safety Building at the site of the fire station at Sixth Street and Asbury Avenue. The new building would incorporate the police department, court and fire station.
No one in the administration or on City Council reacted to Hinchman’s comments at the public meeting. Since then, Hinchman said, no one has gotten in touch with him so he decided to go forward with a referendum.
“I’ve concluded since I’ve gotten no feedback from the council or mayor directly that this cries out for a referendum,” Hinchman said earlier this month. “We’re talking with a lawyer to figure out the format and procedure…. We just want to make sure we do it right if we’re going to do it – and we’re going to do it.”
Hinchman, who once ran for mayor and has often commented over the years on financial issues facing the resort, said he is mainly motivated by his belief the proposed Public Safety Building is too large, too expensive, needlessly tears down a functioning fire station and would be located too close to the Ocean City Primary School. The proximity to the school is an issue, he said, because criminals would be brought to the police station and court.
“We don’t like the location having bad guys near the primary school,” he said. “We don’t like that it’s going to overpower the primary school and put it in a shadow across the street.
We think parking is an issue there too.”
He believes the city is putting up a 70,000-square-foot building, but really needs only 41,000 square feet of space for the police station and court and should leave the fire station alone.
The administration had estimated the cost of the building at $35 million, but increased that to $42 million.
“That is way over the top and the price tag has jumped … to $42 million…. We don’t need to knock down a perfectly good 40-year-old firehouse to build a 70,000-square-foot building that is 30,000 square feet too big with a corresponding price tag.”
Hinchman said he is “in contact with various constituencies in the city that are directly impacted by this project at this location. They’re not happy about it. Without mentioning names, some elected officials have reached out to people in my group expressing doubts about this structure, at this location, at this price tag.”
Hinchman also criticized the need for 3,000 square feet for an indoor gun range and using 6,000 square feet for a records room, space he said could be better found offshore.
The administration, asked for comment about the size of the building, said in an emailed response that the cost for construction is “about $38 million. But that does not include demolition and site development of the former firehouse and police station and other costs such as furnishings and equipment. That’s why we announced $42 million.”
The administration noted the estimate was based on high building prices during the pandemic but those could come down and be offset by some “funding through the new federal infrastructure bill.”
The administration also said the total square footage of the proposed building is 86,232, which includes a ground-floor parking area of 18,127 feet, leaving the rest of the building at 68,105, just shy of the number Hinchman cited.
The administration noted the gun range is 2,196 square feet and the records room is 4,547 square feet.
Although those numbers differ from those offered by Hinchman, he questioned why the department would need its own gun range at all and why storage space would be built on the island, where it is more expensive, rather than offshore.
“The range gives us an opportunity for shared services with other police departments, and is much more effective for our officers than traveling back and forth to the county facility,” the administration responded.” As for the records room, “Retaining hard copies of records is required by law. Constructing a separate building offshore would not represent a savings. The extra space also can be used if expansion is needed in a building we expect to use for the next 75 to 100 years.”
Hinchman does not dispute that the police station and court need to be replaced; they’re now housed in a roughly century-old structure, but that the 40-year-old fire station has a long useful life and that eliminating it would represent a waste of $6.6 million – which he estimates as the value of the building.
The administration disputes that number and offered to “correct the ‘replacement value’” of the fire station.
“The building and improvements for the entire city block, including the fire station, skate park and Clothes Closet, are assessed at just $1.44 million – not $6.6 million,” the administration wrote in the emailed response. “Because of the 50 percent rule, we could spend at most about $600,000 or $700,000 to improve the fire station before we would have to elevate the entire structure.”
Mayor Jay Gillian, asked for comment about locating the police station and court across from the primary school, responded via email, “I can’t think of a safer place to be than across the street from a police and fire station staffed by exceptional first responders. There are several other police departments in the state that are located next to schools.”
Asked why he believes it makes more sense for a combined Public Safety Building rather than just a new police station and court, Gillian responded that “doing nothing is not an option, and this is absolutely the best plan.”
“Starting in 2012, we considered concepts and plans at almost every conceivable location in town. The current design is the most effective in terms of both cost and public safety. As (Chief Financial Officer) Frank Donato pointed out in detail in our public town hall meeting, we can complete this project while remaining responsible to all taxpayers,” Gillian wrote.
Hinchman said he welcomes a debate with a member of City Council or the administration about the Public Safety Building project so the city gets additional feedback before the project progresses and citizens can learn more.
However, he is moving forward on the referendum push.
Now he is working to decide the language in the referendum question, whether it will include questioning the need for demolishing the existing firehouse, shrinking the size of the building and/or finding a new location for the police station and court.
“I think it is pretty clear for the last 10-15 years that the 100-plus-year-old building that the police and court operate out of should be replaced,” Hinchman said. “That’s it. There’s no need to replace the firehouses in town. It’s a matter of narrowing the scope of the new structure to police station and courtroom and finding a better location in town that the one picked out by the administration.”
He is seeking support in the community to gear up for a petition drive to force a referendum.
“We’re looking for soldiers to get petitions,” Hinchman said. Those interested can contact him by email at michaelhinchman@msn.com or by phone at (609) 792-3458. He said he also welcomes calls and emails just for informational purposes.