A great deal of discussion has taken place, both by those for and against Washington College’s proposed plan for the Armory. As I have stated repeatedly in public, Washington College does not dispute the Armory’s status as a historic property, nor do we lack empathy for the passion expressed by those who believe deeply in preserving this building. Unfortunately, some recent publicly aired opinion has been ill-informed, and so I feel obligated to correct information that misrepresents Washington College and perpetuates false narratives. It has always been the College’s intention to respond fully to the due-diligence requests of the Historic District (HDC) and to update the community on our actions. Based on what I have read recently, I feel compelled to provide that update today.
During the HDC meeting in October, commissioners requested additional information regarding a third assessment for mold remediation issues, a structural engineering report, and insurance estimates if the existing structure were retained and remediation were implemented. Following our presentation, we thanked the commissioners and let them know that we would gather the requested information and submit it to them for review at a subsequent meeting, as the process stipulates.
To comply with these requests, Washington College has reached out to members of the HDC for their recommendations on firms to conduct mold remediation and structural engineering assessments. The College will contact these firms, arrange the appropriate assessments, and cover the cost of the work, and will provide the full reports to the HDC and the greater public.
I was disheartened by some community members’ suggestions that they should be the ones to retain the firms to do the assessments. As can be seen from their letter, which they have posted publicly, they made no attempt to work collegially with the College but instead suddenly informed us that they had retained a contractor without our participation or consent, set a date and demanded entry to the Armory. Furthermore, inherent in this effort is the assumption that any firm the College has engaged or might engage in the future would conduct their assessment with bias. I am equally saddened by the insinuation that my staff and I lack the integrity to hire a firm to conduct a fair, complete, and unbiased assessment and that the information provided to date has been somehow altered or manufactured to support our proposal. In fact, our proposal to the HDC has been—and will continue to be—a result of the information the College has obtained from these objective assessments.
The College is committed to completing the tasks requested by the HDC and compiling the additional information necessary for our second HDC appearance. All our documentation will be submitted to the HDC in advance and made available to the public. Until that time, Washington College will respond to respectful requests and engage in meaningful, constructive dialogue with all members of our community who engage with us in good faith and collegiality.
Mike Sosulski is the President of Washington College
Jenn Baker says
Thank you for posting this response. As a private business owner, I was shocked that a small group of private individuals would engage in a contract – with an outside organization – regarding a privately owned building, in an attempt to influence the HDC process or catch the college in a, “gotcha!” moment.
As a business owner, this process has raised fundamental questions regarding the balance between history, and our critical need for economic growth and development. Unfortunately in a small town – history must blend itself with modernity. The physical footprint of our town demands such.
If we nod our heads and say, “we need affordable housing, better retail amenities, a stronger tax base, medical care, jobs…the list is endless” and then roadblock smart growth – we will continue exactly as we are today. We will see empty retail on the outskirts of town, tiny town budgets to fix essential needs, an underutilized Main Street, and a tax base that must figure out how to cover essentials like our new middle school.
I am wildly biased too. As a business owner of almost 10 years in Chestertown, who is only in her early 40s, I am looking ahead to Chestertown in 2044 and beyond.
We see our future by looking back. Twenty years ago I completed my BS in Computer Science & Information Systems. At that time, companies were still deciding how much they needed to invest in a website. Rapid adopters thrived while those resistant to change failed. Online shopping was a fad. Those “fads” became a rapidly evolving engine that shuttered many independent brick & mortar stores and completely changed the nature of our global economy. Including the composition of small town Main Streets.
Even today, folks roll their eyes about Instagram & TikTok. They fail to see the billions and billions of dollars generated by those platforms as an economic engine.
Looking ahead, we must consider the, ”thing,” that cannot be drone-dropped into our backyard. That is, the “experience” of being, “here.” Chestertown has this in spades. This is where the discussion about this project/building transforms into a debate over the future of economic development in Chestertown.
How many angel investors saving falling down yet beautiful old buildings can one town wish for? How fortunate are we that several of those wealthy good samaritans have purchased and renovated buildings to enable the businesses within them. That is not the norm. Remember the Lemon Leaf? Most small businesses cannot keep up with the scale required to maintain many of the spaces within the boundaries of Chestertown’s Historic District. The same could be said for housing, and why we see a lack of diversity (age & race), in the downtown.
As a self-funded business owner, starting a small business is both challenging and exceeding expensive. We know that Millennials and Gen Z community members are struggling to pay for their future, make a home, and seek meaningful employment here. Without a strong economic backbone for our community, the risk to take a job, open a business, buy a home, or start a family exponentially increases.
So, if you like going to, “The Club,” and having someone serve you at the Dock Bar – we need to take action now.
In a town with many smart people and countless expert opinions, perhaps we should all stand back and let the college and HDC do their job….or at a minimum, schedule their own meetings and complete the requested HDC follow-up to their last hearing.
Respectfully,
Jenn Baker
Chester RIver Wine & Cheese, Chestertown
Welcome Home, Annapolis
Quaker Neck homeowner with a million expert opinions.
Beryl Smith says
Thank you Jenn for saying what needed to be said to the sceptics who abound. Mike’s letter was honest and straightforward. Perhaps finally there will be a resolution on this white elephant that has kept the airwaves steaming lately.
richard keaveney says
thank you President Sosulski. Please know that the majority of our community trust in your leadership and support a successful resolution, hopefully within my lifetime.
Bobby Sutton says
Well said President Sosulski!
Ginette L Corney says
Indeed! Could not agree with you more.
Rev. Joel Tolbert says
Thank you Mike for the careful diligent intentional leadership you are showing through this process.
Gerry Levin says
As always . . . A bunch of talk and no action. Why didn’t the college suggest working with the outside firm that was suggested by community members? What exactly are they trying to hide?
Tom Steele says
Let me turn that question around: what do you think they’re trying to hide?
The college made a bad investment decision, albeit with the best of intentions. Now they’re stuck with a building that they can’t use and that no one will buy because the remediation and renovation costs are simply prohibitive (as the new studies will no doubt reveal). There’s a lot of wishful thinking with regards to what *could* be, but one need only look at the ongoing saga of 98 Cannon to realize that the market for damaged commercial property is severely limited.