Test Post

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, in vide instructior nec, has dolorem consequuntur ea. Mea et detraxit lobortis, mazim altera mel ne, sit te soleat quidam. At has utroque adversarium. Pri ornatus omittantur cu, putent aperiri constituto has ex. Amet affert perfecto eam ad, mei ne impetus nostrud indoctum, ea zril putant repudiandae est.

Ius quando altera platonem cu, esse clita ex cum, sea eripuit recteque eu. Est te ceteros reprimique. Timeam blandit pro id, cum enim fabellas eu, mei ut quem justo assueverit. Ex tale mazim mandamus vim, an vis adhuc delectus mandamus.

Ut tota corpora commune per, magna mollis voluptaria ut qui, graece recteque sapientem quo ut. Et soleat efficiendi liberavisse est. Pro at causae moderatius interesset, habeo imperdiet molestiae vis te, quo facete latine eu. Ut alii habeo consul est. Vim oblique atomorum ea, virtute minimum vis ex. Eu cibo fugit choro sit, qui possim melius propriae an. His in viderer labitur.

New Website

I'm in the process of putting together a new website for my father's business as a marine surveyor.

Harrison & Associates - Marine Surveyors is a full service marine surveying firm providing pre-purchase, insurance, condition & valuation, cargo, and on/off hire surveys for recreational and commercial vessels (inspected and uninspected). While Harrison & Associates - Marine Surveyors takes assignments anywhere in the world, their primary service area is New Jersey ( NJ ), Pennsylvania ( PA ), Delaware ( DE ), Maryland ( MD ), Virginia ( VA ), North Carolina ( NC ), and Florida ( FL ).

What’s Become of that “TIF” Subsidy Deal for the Old Salisbury Mall

This post was submitted by one of our readers -

The last we knew, Salisbury’s former “Dream Team” City Council – under the “leadership” of Mike (“gone with the wind”) Dunn – was amending the regulations for the special subsidy (“TIF”) for the mall owner to allow Barrie Tilghman to exercise even more power without the need for Council approval of her actions. That was done by means of Resolution No. 1501 and Ordinance No. 2030, both adopted by the Council on March 26, 2007 – just prior to the election when it was still uncertain how the next Council would view the subsidy deal (and who would be elected). Unfortunately, the minutes of the meeting provide no details of the discussion; Salisbury uses the “no embarrassing record” concept.

However, documents prepared for the special subsidy deal, specifically to support the City’s TIF bonds, state that the redevelopment project is “expected to be build out in four to six years,” and a news article last summer said that construction would begin within a year (now down to 9 months). And, the walls are tumbling down as we speak.

Thus, it looks like the TIFbonds must have been issued by now. But the City has not announced that anything has happened or, if it has, who purchased the bonds.

Now, the recent news of a lawsuit against the mall owner (Salisbury Mall Associates, LLP) by the firm that had agreed with it to purchase residential lots for build-out (K. Hovnanian Homes of Maryland, LLC) makes you wonder just who did purchase the TIF bonds because that case does not bode well for a happy outcome. The developer’s “Complaint for Declaratory Relief” states that Salisbury Mall Associates, LLP “has not submitted a Final Comprehensive Development Plan to the Planning Commission, nor completed Phase I Civil/Site Construction Plans, nor recorded either a Final Subdivision Plat or a Final Development Plan.” By letter dated September 27 an attorney with the law firm “Venable, LLP” wrote to the mall owner by way of its spokesmen – the notorious MessrsNatelson and Dzaman – to state Hovnanian’s declaration that their contract “is null and void.”

It looks like that 4-6 year build-out schedule may be delayed, which could cause major difficulty in amortization (repayment) of the bond debt. The bondholders must be wondering what to do, just as we are wondering who holds the bonds. Maybe Barrie Tilghman could let us know, but don’t count on it.

Technorati Tags: Salisbury, politics, salisburypolitics, TIF, development

Planning Commission Decision Not the Problem With Hearne Development

Yesterday's decision by the Wicomico / Salisbury Planning and Zoning Commission to allow the proposed "Orchard" development move forward as student housing was neither unexpected nor wrong. The commissioners had little choice in granting the developers the go-ahead. Who then is to blame for a promised development for seniors being turned into a student apartment complex?

The blame lies squarely on the Salisbury Council members (Gary Comegys, Mike Dunn, Lynn Cathcart and Shanie Shields) who approved the annexation and rezoning of the property. When this property was annexed and re-zoned some members of the public accused the developers of planning to put student housing on this site. Councilmen Dunn and Comegys lectured those in attendance that this surely would not happen. The developers were "locals" and their reputation was "above reproach". These gentlemen could be counted on to keep their word.

Mr. Comegys told the public that the planning commission would see to it that this project was held to the plan. When it was pointed out the new zoning would allow any multi-family housing, Mr. Comegys just shook his head and responded again that these developers were men of honor. We now know differently. The developers and their attorney claimed that they would stick to their plan. Of course the real estate climate has changed since then. Never expect a developer to keep his word if the market changes.

Personally, I don't care what they build there. What does concern me is that citizens were deceived. They were deceived by Messrs. Comegys and Dunn. They were deceived by Mrs. Cathcart, who now appears to be planning a political comeback (possibly as an opponent to Councilwoman Debbie Campbell in 2009). Mrs. Shields just does what she's told, so we won't accuse her of anything.

A sadly amusing footnote to this debacle was the decision of Councilman Comegys (now a member of the planning commission) to slither out of town rather than perform his duty on the Planning Commission. Of course this was after Mr. Comegys attempted to make political hay out of his past deceit by claiming to be opposed to the new project, when he knew that there was nothing that could be done.

Mr. Comegys now claims that the council has "learned from their mistakes" and that the new annexation policy will take care of this in the future. Of course we are already seeing cracks in the facade of this supposed cure.


Technorati Tags: Salisbury, Wicomico, politics, salisburypolitics, wicomicopolitics, development

Sabbatical Over, For Now

We're still trying to fix our server problems so we'll start posting here on Blogger. We'll start with new posts after this afternoon's Salisbury Planning Commission meeting.


Technorati Tags: blogging, technical

No, We Haven't Moved Back

No, Delmarva Dealings hasn't moved back to its original site. We're just keeping the account alive in case we need it again later. You never know.

We've Moved!

Delmarva Dealings is moving to its own site! We hope that you will enjoy the new format.

I've moved over the existing posts to the new site. I'm in the process of moving the comments over. They are greatly appreciated!

Thanks for reading. I hope that you enjoy us at www.delmarvadealings.com

Happy Halloween … or is it April Fool’s Day?

On the front page of Sunday’s “Daily Times” we got to experience something unusual. Both Salisbury and Wicomico County Councils will finally address growth (rather than merely rolling over for residential developers) or they are giving us a bold new version (at least for local politicians) of political spin. Which is it? Only time will tell.

The bottom line is that the Councils have done nothing of merit to date. At last week’s Salisbury Council meeting, Mayor Barrie Tilghman went on (ad infinitum) about all of the things they have done to help neighborhoods. Passing ordinances may make for great press releases and sound bites, but without enforcement they do the citizens of Salisbury no good. Just ask the folks who report disturbances to the police or call the Department of Building, Housing and Zoning to report junk cars or dilapidated housing in their neighborhoods. They haven’t even shown any pretence (other than press conferences) when the subject is residential development.

City Council President Mike Dunn tells us that “Growth Pays for Growth”. Well, let’s start with utility hook-up (capacity) fees. After much fanfare, City Council implemented “stiffer capacity fees”. These “stiffer” fees still don’ cover the full cost. Why should taxpayers pay for them? Residential developers want to be annexed into the city because they can more easily market their units and charge more because they have city water and sewage. They can also pack more units onto a given plot of land with city water and sewage. Why can’t they cover the full cost?

If developers have to pay for any road construction costs, they still are off the hook for maintenance; yet their development is the cause of increased traffic and the need for increased road maintenance costs. Where are the impact fees to cover these costs? Mike Dunn states that City Council “has been talking about growth challenges for a year”. Discussion is great, but how about some action.

What about schools? Wicomico County schools are already over capacity. Where will we find the additional funds to pay for needed school renovation and new school construction? According to developer Henry Hanna, “there was a consensus that we wanted to be a part (of the solution).” Well, do I expect to see Mr. Hanna at Tuesday’s County Council meeting asking that the County adopt a strong APFO (Adequate Public Facilities Ordinance)? I hope not, because I’m too young to keel over from a coronary.

One issue that ties development to our neighborhoods is affordable housing. Since City Council wants to back the slumlords in single family residential neighborhoods by claiming that enforcement of the 4-2 ordinance was discriminating against the poor, are they going to force residential developers to put aside units for affordable housing? I doubt it, but I might be surprised … someday.

According to area developer Jack Causey, “the problem should've been addressed 30 years ago when the last new school was built”. He’s right. But guess what guys, the Councils didn’t do there job then or since. The only thing that everyone seems to agree on is that something needs to be done. The questions are when and how.

County Council President Tony Sarbanes is opposed to an APFO. They have the legislative authority to enact one and just won’t do it. Mr. Sarbanes wants the revenue cap repealed. Good luck, Tony! Why should the average taxpayer have to pony up more when you are letting your buddies get off on the cheap? Theses guys don’t even pay the full boat on the real estate transfer tax (more on that another day).

Most Americans are capitalist by nature. We’re for making a profit. We’re definitely for property rights. The problem is our property rights, and our hard earned money, are being forfeited so that a relatively few residential developers can make a fortune while we suffer in traffic and our children suffer in the classroom.