OCEAN CITY — The president of the taxpayer watchdog group Fairness In Taxes slammed Mayor Jay Gillian during public comment, claiming he was not transparent in his actions surrounding the proposed, then discarded, plan to buy the former Crown Bank building to use it as the new police station.
David Breeden made his assertion late in the Ocean City Council meeting Thursday evening. His comments drew a rebuke from the mayor and city Business Administrator George Savastano.
During public comment, Breeden told Gillian, “With all due respect, mayor, next time you tell us you’re transparent, save it. Your actions don’t match your words.”
That followed the FIT president asserting that it was remarkable that City Council on Sept. 25 voted to approve on first reading the $12.6 million plan to buy the building at 801 Asbury Ave. for use as the next police station although it offered “little or no documentation.” He said council members gave their approval on a leap of faith from City Solicitor Dorothy McCrosson.
An ordinance can be enacted only after being approved at first reading and then approved at second reading the following meeting, after a public hearing.
The proposal to buy the building took the public by surprise in September because it had not been discussed at previous meetings. A few years ago, city officials said they considered buying the building when it was up for sale, but decided against it.
When it appeared on the agenda at the Sept. 25 meeting, McCrosson made a presentation saying that council would receive the due diligence and reports on the building before it returned for second reading, a public hearing and final vote at the following meeting because the materials were not finished.
Breeden said the solicitor failed to mention the mayor had entered into an agreement of sale back in July and that the owners were supposed to install temporary protection of the sidewalk because of concerns about the building’s facade.
He added that there were seven documents the administration had in hand before that Sept. 25 meeting that should have been available to council. He also questioned where the administration came up with the price of the building.
Days after the Sept. 25 meeting, Gillian and Council President Terry Crowley Jr. issued a press release stating that they would not go forward with purchasing the building to house the police station and the city would instead demolish the existing, aging building at 835 Central Ave. and build new.
At the following meeting in October, council let the purchase resolution die. Gillian had said among the things they found out about the building was the requirement to make it earthquake-proof; that and other factors made the city decide it wasn’t feasible to renovate the building to accommodate the police department.
Although city officials are not supposed to respond to things said during public comment, Breeden’s comments clearly got under the mayor’s skin.
Gillian retorted that he was “sick and tired” of Breeden’s accusations about lack of transparency and that City Council “knows everything I’ve fought for.”
Savastano backed him up on that.
“We’ve worked in lockstep with council. Council is aware of what we were doing,” he told Breeden, council members and the public in council chambers.
The administration met with the professionals who produced the reports to which Breeden referred, he said, explaining, “We’re not going to give you reports piecemeal until we have all the information.”
He said the city didn’t push for the sidewalk protection around the building immediately because the owners of the building presented the city with a report that said it wasn’t needed.
However, Savastano said as a licensed engineer, the city did more due diligence. He noted that sidewalk protection has since been put up around the building as required by the city’s construction official. The owners are now planning on doing work on the facade.
Savastano said the appraisals were never finalized so they weren’t ready to be released, but the administration did discuss with council what the price was based on.
“It’s easy to take information from an OPRA (Open Public Records Act) request. You get the reports, but you don’t talk to the people who do the report, and then you weave a story about not doing things right,” Savastano told Breeden. “You’re not the person in the arena doing the work — and you should know this because you worked in government. If you’re not there doing the work, in the meetings, talking to the people who make the decisions, then you don’t really know how the decisions were made.
“The decisions we made (with 801 Asbury) we worked with the council all along the way and kept them informed,” he continued. “We work well with council.
“I think our transparency is evident with the dozens, if not hundreds, of OPRA requests that have been submitted by one individual,” he said, referring to Breeden, that “put our office through all kinds of work to produce documents to satisfy those OPRA requests.
“We do that because it’s the law. We have no problem doing that. It does get a little frustrating,” Savastano said. “I think it’s absolutely political, designed to cast aspersions on this administration, but it’s not based on the actual facts.
“You can weave a story taken from documents you got from an OPRA request but until you talk to everyone involved, what actually happened, you don’t have the true story,” he said. “If you want the true story, give me a call any time. I didn’t get a call.”
– By DAVID NAHAN/Sentinel staff
