The Mayor and City Council held a work session on Tuesday, May 26, 2026, starting shortly after 1:00 PM, following a closed session that ran from 10:30 AM to 1:00 PM (legal, real estate, and public security matters). The meeting included public comments, consent agenda items, updates on the 5th Street Post Office demolition and downtown parking, approval of the Racquet Center redevelopment design, and a lengthy discussion on elected official residency requirements and potential charter amendments.
All right, good afternoon, everyone. I apologize for the delay. We're getting started a little late here today. Closed session ran long. Welcome to this work session of the mayor and city council. Today's Tuesday, May 26, 2026. Like I said, just after 1 p.m. First, on the agenda, I have our notice and report on our closed session. Prior to the mayor and city council's open session being held at 1 p.m. on May 26, 2026. A closed session was held today beginning at 10 30 a.m. here at City Hall. The following is a report of the closed session. Not what it normally says. Topics of discussion were legal, real estate, and public security matters. Persons present were Mayor Rick Meehan, City Manager Terry McGean, Deputy City Manager J.R. Harmon, Council President Matt James, Council Secretary Will Savage, Council Members John Garrick, Jake Metrisick, Peter Buis, and Jeff Heiser. City Clerk Diana Chavis, City Solicitor Heather Stansbury. We're also joined by Mark Cropper from her office, police chief Ray Austin, and police captain Dennis Eid, Deputy Communications Manager, Ashley Miller, Ocean City Fire Department, Community Engagement Officer, and the Public Information Officer Ryan Whittington, Government Relations Manager Lauren Davis, Public Works Director Hal Atkins, and our tourism and business development director, Tom Perlazzo. I had a motion from Secretary Savage, seconded by Councilmember Heiser to close the closed session. That passed with five in favor at 123 p.m. With Councilmember Bus out of the room and Councilmember Proctor absent. And for the record, Councilmember Proctor will be absent for the entire meeting today. Moving on, we have comments from the public. Any person who may wish to speak on a matter scheduled for discussion on the work session agenda may be heard during comments from the public for a period of three minutes or such time as may be deemed appropriate by the council president. Anyone wishing to be heard shall state their name, their address, and the agenda item on which he or she wishes to speak. Would anyone like to speak today? Sir. Actual physical occupancy with an ocean city for the majority of the calendar year. Number three, I have is the continue a residency requirement. I believe we have two years right now. I don't know if it's one year or two years. I do think it's one year. I looked around and Berlin has one year to be in the Maryland General Assembly, it's one year to be the Baltimore City Mayor. It's one year. Um clarifying the treatment of outside property owners, obviously, making sure that the ownership outside of Ocean City does not disqualify anyone, but it's just used as their second home, and again, making sure they're not getting any benefits with that property. Uh five, very big one, making sure that the prohibitive rental and claimed primary residence cannot be lease rented or otherwise given exclusive occupancy for that residence. I would like to clarify year-round residency expectations. The intent of service should be that residency within the community is during all seasons, not periodic or part-time. Um I appreciate those that want a snowbird, but that's not what the intent of this charter is. It's that you're here for all the seasons for the residents and the businesses throughout the year. Um is very important to me as well. I think that we need to either one move to the board of Worcester County elected election committee to verify the candidates, or at the very least, the council members that are up for the next cycle for the election, they should be put on an abstention of voting because it's very hard in transparency and optics for someone to vote on someone's ability to run when you may be their opposition in the next cycle of the election process. Also, um, given the importance of effectiveness and effective dates for this, I do think that this should be for the November 3rd cycle. I do not feel that anyone that is a council member now should be put to the the you know litmus test of what what you decide today. It should be started new, and as one half of the people that have actually filed for the November 3rd election cycle, I do believe that we should have to refile and make sure that we're under the same scrutiny of everyone else running. And then is all I have for today. Thank you very much. Anyone else today? Hi, good afternoon.