The Washington College contribution to the Armory purchase is still not settled based on comments from Town Council Members Marty Stetson, Gibson Anthony, and Jim Gatto at last night’s Council meeting.
The three Council members represent a majority on the Council trying to eke out just a little more commitment from the college—most notably public access to the facility after renovations, funding for Chestertown’s rails-trails project, and a handful of addendum items Gatto presented to the Council.
The three Council members have drawn a connection to the shortfalls in rails-trails funding and the 15-cents-on-the-dollar discount the College will reap from the initial purchase of the Armory. The price is set at $320,000 on an appraisal of $2.1 million. This does not include the cost of renovation of the aging building and clean up of the site.
Washington College submitted their draft of a Memorandum of Understanding at last night’s Council meeting that was negotiated with Chestertown Town Manger Bill Ingersoll.
In light of significant differences, all of the council members expressed appreciation for the deal that will ultimately benefit the Town and raise a phoenix from the ashes to become a nationally recognized environmental center on the banks of the Chester River.
Washington College President Mitchell Reiss attended the meeting and opened his comments with the belief that the concerns of the town had been adequately addressed.
“In working out the MOU with Bill [Ingersoll], he’s come back to us numerous times for clarifications and changes in language [and] we’ve tried to accommodate all the concerns, and we think the MOU now reflects the wishes of the Town Council,” Reiss said from the audience.
Chestertown Mayor Margo said, “I see nothing but an extraordinary plan that is going to benefit this town for a long-long time. When we look for economic development in our future, we want to look for what is appropriate for this community. I think the addition of a waterfront campus with the Armory being restored is nothing short of genius and a perfect fit.”
But Gatto made note that the town was currently lacking funds to complete the rails-trails project and asked for some kind of commitment from WC to contribute more and help connect the main campus with the new Armory campus.
“I’d like to see the college make a good faith effort to come up with and provide for additional funding to connect those two campuses–and have a full hiker-biker connection path through town to the waterfront,” Gatto said.
“I am going to have to avidly disagree with you,” Bailey said. “The burden of [rail-trails] should not fall on the college in connection with the Armory, we should not be cooking that, it is making things very muddy and unclean.”
Gibson said getting buy-in from WC to connect the two Campuses with rails-trails would benefit the WC as well.
“I think we should look at rail-trails connecting the two campuses as something the Town has been planning to foot the bill for, which is going to be an enhancement to [WC’s] campuses…it has financial value to them,” Gibson said. “The town is going to be struggling to get the rail-trails done, and here we are giving the college something that will be of significant value, and I think this is a way of quantifying that give-and-take in a way that everyone is going to benefit.”
Gibson noted the town is $240,000 short of completing rails-trails, and Gatto noted that waiting for federal funding and grants would probably take considerable time.
Stetson asked if the Town was really getting value from the deal.
“You have to look at this two ways, Margo,” Stetson said to Bailey. “That is a valuable piece of property and there is no one I’d rather see have it then the college, but I also represent the people of Chestertown, and we need to get something of value for the town, and not just because it’s ascetically nice for the college to have that whole piece of property there.”
Stetson said he wanted WC to allow rails-trails to run through the LaMotte property, purchased by WC in 2006.
“It would run down on the outside of 291 and 213 to get to the shopping center,” Stetson said. “This is to the advantage of the college to get a safe means for the kids to cross at a crosswalk. At the present time they either drive their cars or walk across the middle of 291. This would be of value to the college and to us.”
Stetson called for much of Gatto’s addendum to be in writing.
“If you remember two college presidents ago, they were adamantly against us having the rail-trails run through the campus,” Stetson said. “What if we get another guy who says ‘we don’t want you having rail trails come through our property.’”
Reiss rose in response to Gibson calling the Amory purchase a gift earlier in the meeting.
“I understand that you feel this is a gift to Washington College,” Reiss said. “There is also another way to look at it: The college is stepping in to relieve the town of expense and unlimited potential liability of which you can’t put a dollar figure on. So viewed through that prism, it is not a gift; as a matter of fact you could argue that the college is actually providing a gift to the town by removing any concern or anxiety over what it would mean for the town financially if the Town inherited the Armory.”
Speaking to the Spy after the meeting, Gatto said that he could not support the agreement if the College “did not assume some financial responsibility for rails-trails.”
“We get one time to do it right,” Gatto said. “And if we don’t, we lose the opportunity. In Chestertown the opportunities don’t come along that often, and to take an extra week to fully discuss a project that will impact this town for 50 years, is not too much to ask.”
Gatto said that he had tried to get some of his addendums on the agreement and was a little disappointed with some of the negotiations–and that the MOU was written by the college attorney.
“We are all honorable people, but this is a significant venture for the town, and we should make sure it is vetted in our interest,” Gatto said. “The college is purchasing the Amory at a good price, and instead of having our Town attorney vet the agreement, the Town used the college attorney, and this puts the town at an automatic disadvantage.”
The Council will take up a revised MOU at the October 17 meeting.
Chestertownie says
I thought the Armory was owned by the State of Maryland? If so, Chestertown has no ownership and is therefore not giving anything to the College. With the decision to purchase the Marina (a more strategic investment, if our local government must become involved in real estate transactions), the Town government should be thanking the College for taking them off the hook with the Armory. Were it not for the College, the Town would be saddled with responsibility for the Armory. After all, they inserted themselves into the process after the STAY movement mobilized. They have a commitment to those citizens to make sure the Armory is preserved and some measure of public access is continued. The College is the only hope to keep faith with this promise if the Town does not take ownership.
In terms of the rails-to-trails, I agree with the Mayor. This is not germane to the Armory question. Why shake the College down because the group Gibson Anthony chaired could not secure enough grant money to complete the project. Sultana was able to raise over $1 million for their boat. Surely there is enough community support to raise $240,000 for the rails-to-trails project. If not, how great a need does the project represent to our community?
How does Mr. Gatto expect the College to accommodate a hotel and conference center on the Armory property?! With critical area and set-back requirements, where would you put it? Is he expecting the Armory itself to be used for a hotel/conference center? If so, what space would be left with the College? Didn’t Mr. Gatto serve as Chair of Planning and Zoning? What could he be thinking with this one?
I do agree with Mr. Gatto on one point, “We get one time to do it right.” Unfortunately, Gatto, Anthony, and Marty Stetson are about to blow that one opportunity.
Joe Holt says
As a point of clarification, town officials asked the College to prepare the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU). It is our practice to have legal counsel prepare such documents. The proposed MOU was shared with the Town Office for review and comment in advance of last night’s meeting of the Mayor and Council. In contrast, College officials were not provided an opportunity by Mr. Gatto to review his proposed addenda in advance of the meeting. We appreciate the courtesy of time extended by the Mayor to review the proposed addenda and look forward to continuing the conversation with Mayor and Council at an upcoming meeting.
Joe Holt, Chief of Staff
Washington College
matthew weir says
There is a simple word to describe the actions of the three members of the Town Council: extortion. The town struck a deal and now wants to renegotiate it. The vote was 4 to 1 in favor of transferring the Armory to Washington College. While I do not know why these three members now want to try to renegotiate the deal on terms more favorable to them, I can only assume it is because they have failed to raise sufficient money for the rails to trails project.
It is very clear that the first iteration of the deal to transfer the Armory was in Chestertown’s favor. The College would buy it, pay for the required remediation, reconstruct the facility (which is an outdated almost useless building) and then, having spent millions of dollars, allow the town to use it freely. Sounds like the town would have received a great building to use without having to spend any money!
I have invested significant money into renovating derelict buildings in downtown Chestertown and would love to do more. The unfortunate reality is that the Town Council does nothing to recruit investors like me. Further, when (and if) investors try to go it alone, we are forced to jump through hoops that can make investing less profitable.
I urge the Town Council Members to reconsider their recent actions. If not, I urge voters to look carefully at who they are electing to office and make sure that those they elect will do what they can improve the economy in the Town.
Farmer Boy says
“We are all honorable people, but this is a significant venture for the town, and we should make sure it is vetted in our interest,” Gotto said.
What it appears you are saying is if it involves significant money is OK not to be honorable.
Gotto, Gibson and Stetson are simply trying to extort money from a long time, good neighbor and valued partner in our wonderful town. Mr. Reiss should step away from the table although if he does I am sure he will do it with class. I used to think these three Council members all had that same class.
Gibson Anthony says
Hi Matt,
The South Cross Street renovations look great. Weren’t you involved in that one? One of the tenants (the bike shop) chose that location because of the planned rail-trail. I’m just trying to help him keep his business alive. He is not the only one that equates the rail-trail with economic development. I certainly do. Those who don’t understand how the rail trail is associated with the Armory/waterfront need look no farther than the college’s own master plan. The rail trail benefits both the town and the college, and it’s a great opportunity to work together for our mutual benefit.
Born and Raised Here says
I have to agree with Matthew Weir. The Town nor the County do anything to improve the economy of this county. Anytime there is someone that wants to put anything here to create jobs, they do everything they can to discourage it. Why did the town get involved with the armory anyway? If the building had that many issues that it would be too costly to maintain and use, what was the point other than to “gift” to the college at a lose. I think the people involved with STAY should come up with the $240,000 needed to complete the rails to trails project as a “gift” to the town for saving their precious armory. I think it is time for the town to get back to doing what it is supposed to be doing and that is maintaining the town. Plenty of roads that need fixing, sidewalks that need repair, water and sewage that needs fixing and the like. Tax money needs to be spent on things that ALL of the townsfolk use, not for wheeling and dealing in the real estate market. Besides, selling anything at 15 cents on the dollar, well now we know why there is a shortfall for projects in the town. Sounds like to me not only do we have a shortfall of common dollars, but a real shortfall of common sense!
Billie says
Born and Raised Here sure has it right!!!! Frankly, I’m sick to death of hearing about the College. At one time, Chestertown was Chestertown and the College was the College. I honestly think the College has gotten totally out of control. Instead of buying, buying buying, why not pass out more scholarships to students who only dream of attending Washington College rather then buying up so much more property. I don’t see the purpose of what has to be millions spent but yet doesn’t have enough dormatory room for students. Why doesn’t the College have to obey the same rules us town folks do, I’ve never understood that. I truly believe the College became such a big part of Town when Mayor Baily first came into office. Couldn’t have been cause that’s where her husband worked, could it.
Could be some of our Council have been there way to long and only look at the “money” people and not Chestertown as a WHOLE!!!!!! Think about that when election time comes up!!!!
StellaL says
Gibson – good point. Rails to Trails will be a vital part of life in Chestertown –especially for college students.
Now that this has been brought to the table, perhaps at this point members of the Town Council and the College might agree to further explore the idea…. with less enmity.
Keith Thompson says
It seems to me the thinking on Rails to Trails is a bit backwards. Economic development on the riverfront (spurred by the marina purchase) to raise the business tax base should be the key to being able to afford the Rails To Trails project instead of Rails To Trails being what drives downtown development. Rails To Trails doesn’t have much of an economic benefit if you don’t have an economic draw to tie it into.
Gibson Anthony says
Had some members of the town council and members of STAY not stepped in, the Armory would be in the hands of a private developer. Post 2008 financial meltdown, it doesn’t seem likely that we would be looking at it right now as a renovated multi-million dollar “Boutique Inn” (that was the concept). It would be sitting as it is, waiting for the economy and capital to return. The Armory is available to the college now because of steps taken by a majority of the council members in the past. Councilman Stetson and I both facilitated and supported those actions.
Here is an interesting excerpt from an article I’ve linked below:
“Under the presidency of Judith Rodin, the University of Pennsylvania led the rebuilding of West Philadelphia by pursuing five bread and butter strategies: 1) creating clean and safe streets; 2) increasing housing and home ownership; 3) promoting commercial development; 4) fostering economic opportunity; and 5) fortifying public education.3 Those strategies have paid big dividends, including a 31% reduction in crime, an 88% increase in median home values in five years, 150,000 square feet of new retail space, and new businesses and schools.4 The University’s standing in national rankings is now soaring.”
Source: Campus Compact
Link:https://bit.ly/qYxwH9
Farmer Boy says
As someone who spends most of their winter in University City I can tell you that Penn and the city of Philadelphia have a relationship built on trust, honor and treating each other based on the golden rule. I thought that was how things were dealt with between WC and Chestertown. Obviously that was before this last minute extortion plot was cooked.
Henry says
Several of these issues arise as a result of the country’s current economic situation.
It can be said that the properties along the waterfront are ideal for private investment- BUT NOT NOW. And not in the next 10 years. Look around Chestertown and count the For Sale signs, and then ask the banks what’s coming into foreclosure. A tremendous amount of land, property, condos, houses and commercial sites.
I’m interested by the admission from Matthew Weir that he has renovated several buildings- all along, I had thought that Mr. Kirby led that. Isn’t Weir also on the Washington College board, and the son in law of Kirby? There seem to be competing and parallel interests operating in regard to the entire waterfront/rails to trails/downtown renovation initiative, and after reading this today, I agree that the Councilmembers should reexamine a contract that is so intertwined.
And who is the College’s attorney?
Steve Atkinson says
Keith,
You are totally right. Rails-to-trails will be nice for those who live and recreate in Chestertown, and maybe it will help to bring more College Students to downtown, but it’s not going to bring people into the town. It may help to keep visitors into our town here a little longer though.
As for finalization of the terms with the College. It would seem to me that the correct way to have done the vote was to agree that the Town and the College would begin negotiations to transfer the rights to the armory to the College and once everyone was in agreement of then the actual vote to transfer it to the College would occur.
As I understand it, what has happened is just the opposite.
I do think the college can and will be a good neighbor, but has there been enough communications between the town, the council members and the college? I have my doubts.
Am I the only one who is thinking that things are being done without any plans beyond today?
Progger says
By all means, the Town Fathers should stick to their guns on this one. If the College opts out of the Armory, there is no doubt that other potential buyers will be lined up out the door of Town Hall, just waiting to snap it up. After all, look at all of the great selling points of this property:
• The Armory is a remarkably attractive building, with great curb appeal
• It clearly has enormous historic value, as it’s listed on the National Register
• This listing will ensure big-brotherly support from the Feds, who will no doubt be full of good advice on what can or can’t be done with it
• The older part of the building probably has the same quaint, small and musty rooms of most armories, and the big hall should be perfect for basket ball or close-order drill
• The ground floor has water in it at every high tide – terrific as an aquatic center for the new conference center/hotel
• The big above-ground fuel tank offers the potential to sell gas to guests, and who knows what capacity might lie underground?
• Requiring public access to the building and the grounds will ensure visibility (great advertising!) and no doubt enhance any work that goes on in the building or grounds
• The wide wetlands behind the Armory offer a great opportunity for a long boardwalk , and I’m sure the Council can help a new owner resolve the Critical Area issues and get a dredging permit across the shallows and out to the channel
• If the dock option doesn’t work, the marsh will be a wonderful spot for mud baths in the new hotel’s spa
• With a location in the heart of Chestertown’s commercial district, on a major transportation artery, it’s in a splendid location for just about any business – after all, it’s much better situated than the Board of Ed building, and we all know how frenetic the bidding on it was before the college somehow managed to finagle it away from the county.
With this list of attributes, what bank wouldn’t shell out the loans needed to make it work – a quarter of a million for the property, another quarter million for the rail-trails, maybe 4 million for rehab, and perhaps 1.5 million for any unexpected pollution and clean-up? $6,000,000 should be child’s play in this robust economy.
In fact, why don’t we up the ante even further and ask any prospective buyer to build us a new park, dredge the marina, or pay for an economic development plan for Chestertown? After all, these will all contribute to the town’s economic well-being – surely this is not a stretch.
Joe Holt says
Hi Gibson,
I need to correct the record. Washington College was the first entity to identify that the Maryland Military Department had developed an armory consolidation plan (February 2005) and that the Chestertown Armory was among those to be shuttered. In April 2005, the College’s Board of Visitors and Governors authorized the President to explore the feasibility of acquiring the Armory property. On October 6, 2006, then-president Baird Tipson and I drove to Baltimore to meet with General Bruce Tuxill, the Adjutant General of the Maryland Army National Guard, to express the College’s interest in utilizing the property in support of our academic program. On May 15, 2006, the College submitted a written request to lease the Armory from the Maryland Military Department, until such time as the ultimate disposition of the property was resolved. For a number of reasons, the Guard determined not to enter into a lease with the College. In a July 2, 2007 letter to the Guard, the College reiterated its interest in acquiring the Armory (a copy of this letter was provided to the Mayor and Council of Chestertown). On March 28, 2008, the College sent a letter to the Mayor and Council reiterating the College’s interest in acquiring the property. In that same letter, the College took note of the formation of Save the Armory: YES (STAY) and offered to lease a portion of the armory from STAY should they be able to raise the funds to acquire and operate the armory. Subsequently, it is my understanding that the Mayor and Council voted to inform the State of Maryland that they would like to acquire the Armory through the State’s surplus property program. The Town has now decided that it is not financially feasible to assume ownership and operation of the Armory.
Given the College’s six-year interest in acquiring the property, I am not sure that it is totally accurate to say, “Had some members of the town council and members of STAY not stepped in, the Armory would be in the hands of a private developer.”
In the interim, the College has acquired other property at the waterfront that will enable it to realize the expansion of its academic program. This property, a brownsfield site with petroleum and other hazardous materials, will be cleaned up over the coming winter months. Although the Armory property is no longer a necessity for the College to achieve its plans for the waterfront, the College remains interested in acquiring the property and investing in its renewal as a reflection of the College’s commitment to the Town.
Joe Holt.
Curious Guy says
I’m a litte perplexed why these adendum items were never brought to the WC through the Town negotiator, There are majority of Council people who want just a smidgeon more commitment from the college.
These three represent the majority of people in the town, and their concerns were not taken to WC.
It seems there is a major communication gap with the town representatives and WC. It seems that the agenda has been hijacked by just a few who are ignoring the majority, is this by accident, or is someone not dealing on the up-and-up.
Maybe the majority should postpone a vote and get an independent real esate broker from another part of the shore to negotiate a better deal for the Town. And the college fundrasing arm is a bohemoth,and what the three councilman have requested is small potatos. I see no sense in the college fighting with the town over this amount of money….it is a public relations disaster.
matthew weir says
Gibson, I am happy to hear you are interested in the financial health of the bike shop. We all should be, along with every other business in the Town. Unfortunately, if your strategy of asking the College to pay for the rails to trails project fails, how will your strategy have helped them? There will still not be a rails to trails path and you will have a broken down eyesore on the waterfront that simply turns more tourists away.
I agree with you that the rails to trails project is a fantastic opportunity for the community. The other day I stood by the Tidewater Trader building looking in either direction, and thought that there is nothing more exciting than the idea of people coming to town to enjoy it. The project is truly transformational. I have been speaking with people who might want to put a restaurant on one of the lots that is presently vacant so that people who enjoy the trail and the waterfront might have a place to get a drink, eat and enjoy downtown Chestertown. The problem is I have yet to find someone who is willing to put their capital at risk.
The marina purchase, the rails to trails and the College’s waterfront plans are, in my opinion, the most exciting thing for Chestertown in many years. There is a wonderful opportunity to create jobs, attract tourists, and bring in investors to revitalize the community. I believe that this should all happen. I am eager to see it come to fruition. However, the town and the college must be able to trust one another and work together to close the deal, as it was first agreed to.
Now, to the issue of the rails to trails project. What happened to cause the town to not be able to pay for the project? Could a non-profit be started to encourage people to donate to the cause? Can we sell advertising (this mile sponsored by xyz business, for example)? How about the land that the town uses as the storage facility for its plow trucks, salt and other equipment (behind the Sultana yard), could land there be sold or leased to businesses who would cater to the community that is going to use the trail? Perhaps a private operator would lease it to use a parking lot. Certainly ways exist that we can move forward in a win/win for everyone. I simply do not feel that renegotiating the deal at this point is in the town’s best long-term interest.
Oh, to Mr. Henry. Yes, you have me pegged. I am Roy’s son-in-law and just fathered him a granddaughter! I am on the Board of the college and I am an alumnus, as well. However, you should know that I am writing as a private citizen who cares about Chestertown, not as a Trustee. Finally, you are correct, Roy did a great deal of the heavy lifting in the project, as did the other partners. I did far less than any of them. But I invested because I love Chestertown and want to see it do well. (Oh, I do not live in Chestertown, by the way.)
My initial point was that a deal is a deal. We now see that the funding environment has changed for the rails to trails project. Too bad. Let’s look for ways in which we can close the gap and make the project a success. But, to link the two things is wrong, it is going back on a deal and will do nothing to help the wonderful partnership that the College and Town have built over many years.
Simon H says
Washington College is a wonderful “tenant” in the town of Chestertown. It’s one of the biggest draws to the town- but I think it has become clearer in the struggling economy that its tax-free status isn’t helping the Town’s finances.
There are no other buyers for the Armory, or really for any other properties of note in the Town. For Sale signs are everywhere, and most stores are holding their own, if that. Pretty dismal looking. One thing that I think Washington College could do is offer a contribution to the Town each year to compensate for the “gobbling up” of area properties. It’s increasingly absorbing the neighborhood and the town. That may be a good thing just to generate sales and action, but it does very little for the town’s tax base.
The Town’s tax base seems to be in dire shape- real estate sales have virtually stopped. The county is in a recession that isn’t improving. And the College seems to be the only buyer with any money, or financing.
I hope that the environmental educational initiative can help the waterfront property, and will be a success. My fear is that the whole idea has been encouraged by a few people who see it as their financial lifeline, their profit center and their “deal”, when it really should be something created for the benefit of the school. Mr. Reiss has his hands full with the personalities in this deal and Im sure in innocent in this process. He has had the ball dropped in his lap to unwind the intricate ball of thread that a few have woven during their acquisitions and failing real estate ventures. The Armory is a logical acquisition for the College, but the clean deal that it could have been with the town seems to have been affected by the slanted encouragement by “interested parties” who seem to emerge out of the woodwork.
rachel says
“I am going to have to avidly disagree with you,” Bailey said. “The burden of [rail-trails] should not fall on the college in connection with the Armory, we should not be cooking that, it is making things very muddy and unclean.”
i’m with you, margo!
I would love to see Chestertown as a college-town vs a town with a college…WC tshirts are just NOW being sold in town – after how many years? Last year i saw a huge sign on the fence by Emmanual Epis. Church – one of the frats was sponsoring a breakfast (or something of the sort) – I was struck by it – an unusual site – and I was thrilled to see the college in town – merging – i hope to see more of it – but it will not happen if the town won’t be grateful – Thanks, but No Thanks – again?
Not Greed…but Generosity – Hey, Gift-Horse – I say Thanks!
PeteB says
Did the council members survey their constituents? They never asked me…and I see the deal going south. The rails to trails project is great but it is a different project than the Armory. Don’t muddy the water by trying to make them the same thing…if the college sees a benefit to the RTT project it will get involved, but piss them off and you lose everything.
Progger says
So the Town’s in financial trouble and it’s the College’s fault? Hmmm….the Mayor & Council passed their budget not that long ago and said that they expected to generate $3,708,513 in revenue and have $3,035,052 in general operating expenses this year. A 22% surplus and an unchanged tax rate aren’t too shabby. It certainly doesn’t sound like a municipality starving for revenue because the tax base has been whittled away by one of the two or three biggest economic engines in the town. This nonsense about the College’s “free ride” and suggestions that they should voluntarily contribute to the Town to compensate for “gobbling up” taxable properties is almost laughable (should we be asking this of churches and the hospital too?). I don’t have the numbers, but it might be interesting to tally up the value of hours voluntarily contributed to the town by the College’s staff, students and faculty. Then calculate the local revenue from their employees who live in town and pay taxes, who eat meals in our restaurants, and buy in our stores. Then you can crank in the number of visitors who stay overnight and shop and eat here because of kids or friends at the school, or when they come to events at the college. After that, we could figure the value of contracts to local trades and others from the “millions spent” on construction that seems to peeve Billie.Run those numbers, then compare that local revenue generated by the College to the “lost” property taxes that are of such concern. Then ask yourself where our local economy would be without the college and the hospital in these tough times.
I don’t know where this animosity toward the college comes from, but it seems kind of self-defeating to me.
Gibson Anthony says
Hi Simon,
Agreed. You said, “One thing that I think Washington College could do is offer a contribution to the Town each year to compensate for the “gobbling up” of area properties.”
There is a name for this in many other college towns. It is referred to as PILOT. Payment In Lieu Of Taxes. It is implemented when the tax base suffers in comparison to the services burden as a result of non-taxable properties. I’m sure I’ll be corrected if I’m wrong, but I believe that about half of Chestertown is non-taxable (not all college owned). This issue is not unique to Chestertown and other towns have worked through it to the benefit of both parties. I’ve worked hard to help provide a process that in the end could give the college a chance at owning the Armory. This opportunity would not exist without the efforts of members of council and the community.
Curious Guy,
Councilman Gatto and I repeatedly requested an opportunity for agenda time to comprehensively discuss the town’s terms as a council. That didn’t happen and I believe it has caused undue tension. This really is a wonderful opportunity for both parties and it need not be divisive.
Gibson Anthony says
Dear Joe,
With all due respect, I remember a different history. STAY worked hard to get a commitment from the college for a lease agreement that would facilitate their financial model. In the end, their financial model fell apart because they could not get that level of commitment. At the point, because no realistic financial model had emerged, the town agreed to purchase the Armory from the State for the soul purpose of temporary ownership until a viable buyer could be found. We were facilitating a process to find a new owner and never had interest in permanent ownership. Prior to any Town involvement, the Town had signed off on the ability of the college to assume the remaining debt (about $560,000) in exchange for ownership from the State. Then the Town found out that the County was about to turn over the Armory to a private developer without any additional constraints. That is when members of the council became involved. That is when STAY was formed.
The irony is that the college was willing to pay off the $560,000 debt back in 2007. Now the debt on the Armory is about $320,000.
Linda Kuiper says
I’ve read all the comments posted and not one mentions the increase in tax base WC has supplied to the Town. I don’t know the exact boundaries, (and please correct me if I’m wrong about my approximate boundaries) but at one time the College owned the land to the corner of route 20 and the bypass, over to Philosophers Terrace and down Washington Avenue to at least Kent Street. Those who built homes leased the land from the College. I believe it was in the 1970’s when the 99 year lease was up and home owners had the option to buy the land. How many privately owned homes are within that area contributing to the tax base.
When the Still Pond Coast Guard Station closed and the Coast Guard houses were available to nonprofit Residential Programs the M&C was in an up roar, “We need those houses and land in the tax base.”
NOW, how much is the Town excluding from the tax base by purchasing prime waterfront property (in foreclosure)?? Guess we’ll find that out when we get the tax bills next year.
I also haven’t read any Councilmember comments that there is actually a line of investors knocking on the Town Hall door. Maybe the word’s out. For Sale with Strings Attached “MOU’s.”
And, a correction to the comment that the last 2 president’s at WC were opposed to the rails and trails, I remember reading that Dr. Toll was not opposed, he didn’t want rails and trails thru the campus to deter expansion within the campus.
The Town has use of Wilmer Park during the Summer months. Does the Town pay a portion of the Liability Insurance?
To the 3 Councilmembers who have appointed themselves to guard the Fort: 1.Scrap the MOU. 2. Pack up and move on.
StellaL says
Mr. Weir: FYI – the redevelopment around Cross Street is just amazing. Perhaps the rails-to-trails project
can be a community-wide endeaver, not just the Town’s. As with the Sultana, the key is getting those with
clout behind it. Maybe some cool fundraiser, such as a grade-school tri or bi-athon with all the K-8 students in Kent County…..would shed light and raise $ for this important project.
John M says
Matthew Weir posted
” I am Roy’s son-in-law and just fathered him a granddaughter! I am on the Board of the college and I am an alumnus.”
With all the work that Roy Kirby and Sons does for the college would this be what someone could confuse as a conflict of interest?
Progger says
PILOT is more often a payment from Federal or state government to local jurisdictions to make up shortfalls from govt-owned tax base, or there are instances of states reimbursing the locals. It is relatively rare for payment to come from the non-profit itself, and check out the endowments of those few colleges that can afford to do it. But more to the point, Councilman Anthony and Simon, do the math! Linda has it absolutely right – Chestertown gains far more from the College in revenue than it would take in if the entire area was in houses. She’s also correct that the residential neighborhoods all the way down to Kent Street were owned by the College until the turn of the century and then sold off for development with 99 year leases that the College relinquished for nothing in the 1970s. They’ve turned over more land to the town in the last century than they’ve taken out off the tax rolls.Regarding the earlier involvement of STAY, etc., I seem to remember the College voluntarily stepping back from its effort to acquire the Armory once STAY raised a ruckus. They agreed to let the Mayor & Council go through a public discussion of who it should go to, rather than press their own pretty strong claim. In other words, they acted like a good neighbor.
If there is any irony that the College was willing to pony up $560k in 2007 and the price is now $360, Mr. Anthony (I assume your point is that the difference would pay for your trail), this just shows the dangers of inaction. In the meantime, we’ve seen a lot of new buildings go up on campus, they bought the Board of Ed building, and they bought two brown fields waterfront parcels they’re cleaning up. That’s a tidy bit of cash. Do you seriously wonder why they might balk at the attempt to shake another quarter of a million or more out of them? We’re talking about a very small college here, not Penn or Tufts.
For you conspiracy enthusiasts (re the Weir/Kirby connection, etc., etc.), check out the College’s list of board members. Do you really think they’d roll over for sweetheart deals like you’re implying? Or that the town manager is in cahoots the mayor and the college? Seriously? Next we’ll be hearing about black choppers circling the armory….
Progger says
I just did a quick calculation. Looking at MDAT, it looks like the Lamotte parcel is assessed at $1.4 million. That should yield taxes to C’town of what, $5000? That’s what you’re concerned about? Again,do the math on what we get in return for the College’s presence.
We taxpayers don’t own the armory, Middle Class, so how is that we’re giving the college a deal? The Council apparently doesn’t want to own it, even momentarily to transfer it. This is really a sale from the state to the college. So the town has no skin in the game, other than ensuring appropriate use, but wants to put it’s thumb on the scale and shake down the folks taking the risk and putting up the cash.
I predict this deal goes south and we have an enormous white elephant on the waterfront for many years to come – without ANY revenue to the town.
matthew weir says
A few things to highlight:
1. Washington College bought the Lamotte property from a willing seller — the Town of Chestertown! As a town owned property, it was not on the tax rolls. The college helped out the town in a time of need, when the town needed to unload the property. Ask your Town Council members about the transaction.
2. The armory is not, and has never been, on the tax rolls of the Town.
3. No developer has been interested in the armory. That is the reason it is available now.
4. If the town could find a developer to purchase the property for $1, it would cost the Town roughly $320,000 because they are obligated to pay off the mortgage.
5. I have said this once and I will say it again. A discussion about the college’s role in the community is a fair one to have. But, it is not appropriate to merge with this deal. They are not linked. (By the way, it is equally fair to have a discussion about the Town’s role vis a vis the College.)
6. Finally, the process this deal has taken is sure to scare off potential investors and developers interested in investing in the Town. Talk about a blow to the tax rolls, phew!
Many good people, other than the College, have made an attempt to do something productive with the Armory. Frank Rhodes and the others behind STAY are very dedicated, bright people. Even they had trouble raising the money for the opportunity. From a private development standpoint, you must know that severe restrictions have been placed on what can and can not be done to the structure. These restrictions mean higher costs and less return on investment. I know one developer who looked at it and walked away after running the numbers.
The economy in the local area is dead. How many houses for sale sit without being sold? How many businesses are closed or closing? Look at Great Oak which is going up for auction this weekend? You want a developer to buy the armory when an operating bed and breakfast can’t even find a buyer?
We need to think about what we can do to attract jobs and investment to Chestertown. In order for that to happen, you need to take advantage of every opportunity to lure investors. Like it or not, Washington College is an investor. The town needs to court them and help them to create a higher quality of life through employment and by creating things people want to enjoy.
Separate the issues, sell the Armory and begin a dialogue about what really matters, creating jobs.
Thanks to those who have tried to defend me against those who question my credibility. I think it is not worth the effort, though. I find it interesting that some of us choose to use our real names and operate in the open. The critics, though, like to hide behind monikers that keep anyone from knowing who they are. I will continue to hold my head high.
rcg says
how many homes/businesses are owned by WC grads/families? where do the parents stay and eat when visiting? where to the students and parents shop/buy gasoline? $$ comes to Ctown in many forms from the college…i was going to suggest the same as Matt…have fundraisers for RTT…if there,s enough interest, the $$ will come…i agree with Keith Thompson that RTT isn,t a $$ generator, rather an additional attraction for the town…and extra cherry on top.
rcg says
how many homes/businesses are owned by WC grads/families? where do the parents stay and eat when visiting? where to the students and parents shop/buy gasoline? $$ comes to Ctown in many forms from the college…i was going to suggest the same as Matt…have fundraisers for RTT…if there,s enough interest, the $$ will come. i believe that RTT isn,t a leading $$ generator ~ more of an additional attraction for the town…and extra cherry on top.
rcg says
sorry..i tried to correct my words b4 posting but am typing via phn today…i don,t think i properly conveyed Keiths thoughts…on the radio he mentioned RTT wouldn,t be a primary $$ maker…but would be an asset…just not the Star of the show…that was my take on his commentary and i agree.
Progger says
RCG and Weir have it right. And if there’s a “fight” going on, it seems to be in this comment section, although I’d call it a debate. I haven’t seen anything from Reiss or in Holt’s comments above that suggests that they’re fighting yet – I think they’ve been pretty polite for two guys who were sandbagged with an 11th hour addendum they hadn’t seen.
If it weren’t for the fact that this is such a great opportunity for our town, I’d say to the College WALK AWAY! Sounds to me like you’ve got what you need already, and once you cave on this, you can expect the screws to tighten – PILOTs, free services, and god knows what else. It’s pretty easy to see where this is headed.
Gatto, Stetson and Anthony – I’m a taxpayer here too, and MC’s math doesn’t make any more sense than your stance. Many of us see the economic activity generated by the College and the other non-profits here in town for the huge advantage that it is. Try doing a comparison of the economic conditions in similar sized towns without a college and see how they look – not great. You’re already under fire for having no economic plan for Chestertown – you’d be foolish to compound it by blowing this one. Shaking down nonprofits ain’t an economic plan, fellas.
Keith Thompson says
To continue rgc’s thoughts…if Rails & Trails is viewed as the primary economic draw, then why is the town negotiating to purchase the marina? I was under the impression that the town was interested in designating the riverfront as its primary economic draw. I’m with the mayor on this one in that tying Rails to Trails funding to the Armory muddies the waters because the riverfront should be the immediate economic investment focus. If Rails to Trails is the immediate economic investment focus, then the marina purchase begins to make less sense.
Keith Thompson says
@Middle Class,
Here’s the difference between you and Washington College. How many jobs do you provide in the community? How many people working those jobs live here, eat here, shop here, etc. How many weekend visitors do you have that rent motel rooms here, eat here, shop here, etc. If your contributions to the job market and to the economic infrastructure equals that of the college, you can look to get the same breaks that the college gets.
rcg says
MC – My Goodness – that was a mighty spin!
My view – mine – is that I see how many people live in Ctown as a result of attending WC – so we all benefit financially and socially from them choosing to stay – buy a house, pay property taxes, open businesses and pay taxes, support local businesses, support local causes…
you may call it trickle down – you may call it Anything you want – put it in Capital Letters ’cause that’s kinda Fun –
but from where i am sitting, i see the town benefitting from WC in many ways (even their education dept uses our public school for student teaching – at least they did when my son attended Garnett) and i think it would be a damn shame to ruin a relationship over RTT.
Joe Holt says
A number of individuals who have posted comments to this story have implied that the College does not pay property taxes. This is not entirely correct. The College properties used for its educational purposes (its academic buildings, dining hall, residence halls, and athletic facilities) are exempt from property taxes. The exemption is granted by the Maryland State Department of Assessment and Taxation. However, the College also owns a number of properties that are not utilized in direct support of its educational mission. These properties remain on the tax roll and, for the current year, the College has paid property taxes totaling $74,115.58. As an example, the property at the corner of Routes 213/291 (the former LaMotte property) remains on the property tax rolls. The same is true for the residences the College owns in the 300 block of Washington Avenue, on College Avenue, and on Prospect Street.
I hope that you will also permit me one further point of clarification. In my initial posting, I stated that the MOU was drafted and provided to the Town Office for review and comment. To be clear, the MOU was drafted by the College. It was not crafted in any way by anyone in the Town Office. An earlier document, a mission statement for the Armory that was requested by the Mayor and Council, was developed in consultation with Town Manager Bill Ingersoll. I believe this is the document to which President Reiss refers in his comments at Monday evening’s meeting. Mr. Ingersoll conveyed to the College the Mayor and Council’s sentiments for the mission statement. To reiterate, and contrary to what some have posted to this site, the Town Manager played no role in drafting the current MOU.
Joe Holt
Chief of Staff
Progger says
Thanks to Mr. Holt for setting the “free ride” fallacy straight and clarifying the LaMotte property’s status.
Middle Class, governments award tax exempt status based on a generally accepted notion of the public benefits provided by those institutions. If you or some of our elected officials don’t see that value, then why don’t you try to change the exemption laws instead of trying to circumvent them by holding up organizations on an ad hoc basis? That’s just bad policy and downright dishonest.
Born and Raised Here says
Ok, so I read these comments and have determinded that the that:
1. The town finds MANY ways to help figure out how to help fund projects that benefit the college and spinning it to justify it by saying it will benefit the town.
2. The College pays property taxes and, as with any good business, finds ways to pay as little as possible using the crazy tax codes, which is legal.
3. The Town wants to spur economical growth by coming up with the ideas of buying the marina and helping the college purchase the armory.
4. We should be thankful because the college students and their families spend their money here.
5. Everyone likes the job Mr. Weir did with the development on Cross Street and Cannon Street.
So, with this said, sounds like the college gets the good end of the stick while locals get whats left over. Where are the jobs that the locals need? Where are the businesses that the locals need to shop in to buy the things they need to survive? Where is the “energy” that should be put into finding ways to get things done for the local people of Chestertown?
Everyone wants to talk about economics, sooooooooooooo, how much money per hour is the armory project going to pay a local person? How many jobs will it create? What is the wage going to be to work at the marina and really, how many people does it take to run the little place, 2 or 3? Truth is most local people can’t find a job here thats begins to cover the cost of living here. Whats the average wage here in Chestertown? I can tell you this, $8 to $10 an hour dosen’t cover the cost of what rent or property sells for. Benefits? Yah right. A few have some, but nothing to brag about. If the town is serious about economic growth, how about putting some energy into finding some good paying jobs to bring to the town and the county! How about bringing stores that sells products other than antiques and high, over priced foo-foo. Although I do agree that these types of businesses have a vital role in the town, it is not the only thing this town needs.
As for the College, if it is all about the community, then what percentage of money does the college offer to local kids as far as scholorships? Why does it aways hire companies from out of the community to do the work and maintenance that is always happening around the campus? How about donations to the local fire companies and EMS providers that serve you? Roomer is that the college took it apon itself to disconnect the siren because it “disturbed” you. Where was the colleges’ regard for the community when there was a tornado in the area and no siren to sound the warning? How about putting those numbers up here?
Bottom line is that the town and its chosen few along with the college both benefit from the economics that they use for each other while the locals are left with what ever scraps accidently fall from the table!
Gibson Anthony says
Hi Joe,
Perhaps you would be willing to post the value of the tax assessments on properties for which the college does not pay taxes? Perhaps you would be willing to post the amount of the annual college donation to the fire company? Perhaps you would be willing to quantify the cost of police response to student related issues? Perhaps Dixon Value should not pay taxes? Perhaps Benchworks should not pay taxes? Please give me a call directly because I won’t be posting again.
WC Board Member says
I am saddened by the enmity coming from some of the writers in this debate because, I’m afraid, there are many more who share their opinion and either don’t read the Spy or choose not to write. I honestly believe that in my 40 years of association with the College and Kent County that the College has been, and continues to be, a good neighbor and an asset to the community. The College, if not the largest employer in the County, is close to it. It provides culture, entertainment, sports, and a beautiful campus that helps makes this town a wonderful place.
The College is no different from your church, your library, and your government in that it is partially exempt from real estate taxes. That is largely true across America. The public policy reason for that is that these institutions rely on charity and, in the case of government, taxpayer dollars to support them.
In the instance of Washington College, tuition covers only a fraction of our costs; the remainder comes from donations and grants. I expect my donations to assist students unable to pay for a Washington College education like the wonderful Kent County High School graduates–one who works for me–who have gone on to great success.
I am less enamored with the concept of purchasing a piece of property that the College does not need and will ultimately fall into the liability ledger of the town.
Washington College’s Board followed President Reiss’ recommendation that we purchase this property on the basis that he believed it was an important statement of the College’s commitment to the town, that it would result in a space where students, faculty, and residents would mingle together. That is an admirable intention and the Board followed his advice despite the fact that, unlike capital expenditures for building dorms or installing geothermal on the front lawn, there was no revenue upside or savings….just a cost with presumably aesthetic benefits to be enjoyed by students and the town.
As one having a fiduciary responsibility to the College and one whose financial commitment to the College has been for students who need help getting a great education, I frankly would not be disappointed jf the millions involved in purchasing and rehabbing the Armory were given back to our students who need the money. Annually, we go through the painful process of balancing the budget, providing pay increases to faculty who haven’t had raises in years, and supporting our students. We get there ultimately but it requires Board members, friends of the College, alumni, and others to help pay the bill.
President Reiss’ intentions for the Armory and his commitment to Chestertown are noble, and he enjoyed support from the Board going down this road with the town. But, that road was clearly defined and I strongly doubt he would enjoy the support of the Board with further modifications.
I am generally loathe to engage in these discussions but I am profoundly disappointed and, again, saddened, that there is such a misunderstanding of the College’s intentions, its role in our community, and how we really and truly want to do whatever we can to make Chestertown a better place for everyone.
Clearly, we need to get together more often.
Jim Gatto says
WC BOARD MEMBER. I too am discouraged with the tone and comment surrounding Washington College and the armory discussion.
The college is a major economic, social and cultural presence in Chestertown and Kent County. As a society we have become fixated on taxes- who pays or how much they don’t pay. If the college were a ‘business ‘ with the number of employees and the economic benefit they inject into our community, people would be falling all over themselves to exempt them from property taxes.
Simply look at the number of state and local programs exempting businesses from property taxes. Put this issue to bed, the tangible and intangible presence of Washington College far out weighs any tax differential they may get.
As noted, unlike some other states, they are required to pay taxes on property not directly associated with their principle function. At this point I would like to address some of Mr. Holt’s comments.
I along with a majority of the council were under the impression that at Monday night’s meeting we [the town council] were going to further discus and solidify our requirements as they relate to the disposition of the armory. It was to be an intra council discussion, hence no prior arrangements to inform the college.
Apologies should be extended to the President and staff of Washington College, who attended the meeting and were ultimately injected into the discussion.
The list of ’positions’ on the armory addendum were drawn from my notes from previous discussions held by the council There was only one item on the list not included in any general Council discussion: the statement guaranteeing the college access to the trail from a mid campus location., to be built at the college discursion at some indefinite future.
I took an additional liberty in coupling any additional required remuneration for the armory into the armory project itself, and not into the town’s general fund. I seem to be getting some discussion as to the trail being an extension of the armory and the river campus. It really is the umbilical cord between the two campuses
Born and Raised Here says
Well, I am impressed that everyone wants to “discuss” the matter right up to when people ask specific questions. If the town and the college are truely wanting a discussion, then why are the ones defending these actions dancing around the questions being asked here? If there is nothing to hide, then the answers would be clear and everyone would understand and the issue would be put to rest. Fact is when people aren’t straight forward and answer questions with sob stories like I have read here, then there is more to it than is being told. Middle Class is correct with his/her statements in that the college is not going to turn down waterfront property. The notion that the college is doing it out of kindness to the town is BS, and I don’t mean a degree! The more land that the college purchases and “used” in a manner to which it is non-taxable greatly benefits the college and shifts the tax burden onto the rest of the towns people. As for Mr. Jim Gatto, the reason “we have become fixated on taxes” is because “we” are the ones paying them! The college, like churches, is a business and should be taxed like one. You both are in it to make a profit and you both like to dictate public policy. Now I know that the tax thing is not your fault, but it is why “we” are fixated on the issue. As for WC Board Member, most of the reason you are now one of if not the biggest employer is the fact that you (the college) help with the discouragement of any type of employment coming into the town and the county. Now, do I think the college helps make the town a wonderful place? The answer is yes I do. But I also think that the college has an agenda that doesn’t have the towns or the majority of its people at heart. So, with this said, there are plenty of questions posted here that can be answered and discussed. The choice is yours, answer them with solid facts, or continue with rederick that “Washington” is known for.
Carla Massoni says
Mr. Gatto,
It is my hope that the district I reside in finds a new representative. You do not represent my views and you have not surveyed your constituents for their viewpoint. Have you looked around the town lately? Have you seen the shuttered stores and homes? I am so tired of these arguments. When people come into our community and want to add to the growth and development based on the things we have all agreed are the most important areas – education, environment, history, and culture – why are we making it so hard for them? I do not have a sign on the front of my gallery for the last year – why? because the guidelines do not allow Lauren Ames to have a sign and for me to have a sign – and since we both are currently sharing the same space – my sign came down. We were worried people would not be able to find her when she moved her location. So, after 20 years as a business owner in Chestertown, I do not have a sign. Not your fault – not the Town’s fault – just a regulation. But it speaks to the same issue – we should be doing everything in our power as a town to support those willing to invest in our community – not make them jump through hoops just because WE CAN!! I am disgusted by this last minute power play.
Linda Kuiper says
I am very disappointed in Gibson Anthony’s (Councilmember Ward 2) recent posting. This is not the kind of exchange nor the tone of hostility (for whatever reson) I expect from my Councilmember. I am a homeowner/taxpayer in Ward 2. AND, as the mother of a son who is a Washington College graduate (with honors) and the mother of a daughter who is an employee and student of Washington College I have a great appreciation for Washington College. EDUCATION AND JOBS right in the Heart of Chestertown, right in the Heart of Ward 2.
Peter says
Good Morning, Carla!
After reading the article on The Spy about the armory issue, I struggled through all of the commentary, thinking to myself, most of it I don’t agree with, and there’s much distasteful in tone.
However, my overarching thought is: how wonderful to see the issues of public policy out on the table for discussion. We can all thank Jim Gatto (and The Spy) for that. If the Council had rubber-stamped the deal “negotiated with Chestertown Town Manger Bill Ingersoll” we wouldn’t even know enough to comment, let alone frame opinions grounded in substance.
We should be enormously grateful Jim Gatto, Gibson Anthony and Marty Stetson are insisting the deals be addressed by the council, at a public meeting as required by state law. Regardless of the details of the deal, it is clear from what those writing for the College say above – including how Joe Holt “doth protest too much” – that the College thought they had a deal with the Town Manager. A deal, which the Mayor may have known about, but the rest of the Council certainly did not. Is this democracy? Or is it back-room politics?
As Jim Gatto’s Letter to Editor points out, the “addenda” are not surprises to the College, but points the College had, in principle, agree to previously working session. Apparently, the College found the Town Manager (and Mayor?) willing to vacate this earlier agreement, but obviously the majority of those who are elected, and have a vote, were left out of the loop.
How innocent should we believe the College to be, that they are shocked their sweet deal gets voted down?
It seems we might be entering a new era of democracy. If so, we can thank Jim Gatto and the Councilmen who voted with him for that.
Alex says
If the town wants more of the money associated with the college, how about having some places for the kids to spend their money? How about more places where a college kid can get a part time job? Before we cry about having a college in our town, shouldn’t we try to be a college town?
Progger says
What’s up with the self-righteousness, Middle Class? Where do you see someone trying to “run roughshod” over the Mayor & Council?
This is a transaction that has been in the works for a long time. It looks likes this has been talked about for six years, and not until July of 2011 was any mention made of a price that would exceed what the state wanted for the Armpry.
In the July 18 M&C meeting, according their minutes, Councilman Anthony wanted to add a condition that the College pay for planning costs ($100-200k) associated with Stepney and provide serices of some kind to the town. The Council debated it. They then voted 4-1 to execute an MoU turning over the Armory to WC for the state’s price, plus costs incurred by the town, with the requirement of public access and a river walk, and that WC coordinate their planning with the Town. That was it. That was the process, and that was the result.
What so many people commenting here seem to object to, myself included, is that:
1. Three council members are now trying to change the deal at the last minute, despite the earlier vote;
2. They are not only trying to put additional conditions onto the Armory (hotel, etc.), they’re attaching unrelated issues such as the rails to trails; and
3. In doing this, they and others are implying (and in some places openly stating) that WC should be asked for this additional, unrelated money because they don’t pay taxes.
Many of the comments above have pointed out how completely devoid of economic common sense that stance is. And Peter, please note that this was voted on in an open council meeting in July, not behind closed doors, and that there is nothing I can see in the public record that indicates that the College had agreed, “in principle” or otherwise, to any of these items.
So to many of us, this doesn’t look like a college trying to run roughshod over anyone or trying to subvert the democratic process. In fact, I’d say it’s quite the other way around.
Carla Massoni says
Progger: Well stated. Thank you.
Progger says
Middle Class, if you’re interested in providing informed commentary on this issue, you should read the minutes of the M&C meetings. THEY agreed to the basic terms of the MOU, including cost, at the July 18, 2011 meeting.
The point you’re missing is that the Town has no intention of owning the property, they’re merely giving their “blessing” to a transfer from the state to the college. Therefore they can’t be, and never previously expressed an interest in, making a profit this deal. Again, the town is NOT the seller. Hence the attempt to extort money for a separate purpose, the trail.
And you’re also missing the point that the unknown clean-up costs and conditions imposed by the Town make it less attractive to any buyer, not just the College. In any deal, there will be a projection by the buyer of return on investment. The more the initial transaction costs, the less $ that can be put into the property.
But back to your main point about the process. All members of the Ciuncil participated in the earlier discussions about the MOU, including the price, and they did that this year when the state’s costs were $240,000, not back in 2007 when the costs were $560,00. THEY voted on it. This wasn’t some conspiracy by the Mayor and town manager to subvert the process. Read the minutes – they’re easy to find online.
If WC does walk on this deal, I’m guessing you’ll be waiting a long time for someone else to step in. And keep in mind that state wants to get rid of it now. Do you think the Town should put up the cash for it and hold it until a white knight shows up? Can we afford to do that and also buy the marina? Is real estate speculation
really a proper role for local government?
Chestertownie says
My understanding of the $560,000 versus the current amount is that it relates to an outstanding loan from the Federal government to the State of Maryland to make repairs/upgrades on the Armory. When the Armory was first up for grabs back in 2006 or so, the outstanding debt on the Federal loan was over half a million dollars. In the intervening years, the State government has been servicing the debt on the property. It now amounts to about a quarter million dollars. At this rate, perhaps the property will be debt free by the time our local leaders figure out what to do.