Council members Dean Burrell and Shaneka Nichols were vocal about their opposition at this week’s meeting about a recent decision to allow a developer to finance four EDUs to complete a housing project.

By Tara Fischer

Staff Writer

The Berlin Town Council this week voted to abandon a previously existing policy that allows developers to finance up to five equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) over five years.

At a Berlin Mayor and Council meeting on Monday, March 24, the municipality’s governing body unanimously voted to eliminate a 2017 policy that allows developers to finance up to five EDUs, to be paid in full within five years, along with a 3% annua; administration fee to cover staff costs.

Three contracts under this agreement will be grandfathered in. Town Administrator Mary Bohlen maintained “one or two” are near finalization.

The motion to terminate the financing policy comes after a meeting last month in which Berlin Mayor Zack Tyndall broke a tie vote to permit developer Zachary Grauer to finance four EDUs in his project to repurpose a vacant structure on the north side of his Bay Street parcel.

The initiative would see the construction of five new apartment units. One unit will be a two-bedroom space, while the remaining four will be one-bedroom, at around 700 to 800 square feet.

Per last month’s vote, broken by Tyndall, who by code is given the authority to offer his vote in the case of a stalemate, the developer will finance four EDUs from the town for $66,774 at 525 Bay Street. The developer will pay a 10% deposit of $6,677 and be charged a 3% financing fee to cover administrative and staff costs.

Tyndall and council members Steve Green and Jay Knerr voted in favor of Grauer’s financing request. Council member Jack Orris and Vice President Dean Burrell were against the ask. Council member Shaneka Nichols was absent when voting took place.

Last month’s heated debate initiated a conversation about whether the policy should exist in the first place. Tyndall, Green, and Knerr voted in favor of Grauer’s financing agreement due to the mere existence of the guidelines and precedent.

“We have financed a lot of projects,” Green said last month.  “… I feel that we need to be consistent.”

Tyndall concurred, arguing that since the standard is in place, the governing body must honor it. In the past, the town has entered into previous deals with groups like Sonrise Church, Twisters, Renaissance Plaza, Strawberry Fields, and others.

Orris and Burrell opposed Grauer’s request. Orris maintained that Berlin is “not a bank,” while the vice president opposed the area for the planned project, citing a congestion issue.

Thus, the policy was brought forth earlier this week, and the governing body discussed its legitimacy. Ultimately, the town council agreed to eliminate the financing option. Nichols made the motion to abolish, and Orris seconded.

The vote was preceded by a discussion in which the council members and the public were given the opportunity to share their thoughts and concerns regarding the standard.

Nichols said that she does not believe Berlin needs to be incentivizing developers.

“I can’t speak to what happened before I sat here, but today, in 2025, we don’t need to be financing anything,” she said. “When you come and sit at the table, ready to play like a big boy, you need to bring your big boy game with you and not come to us asking the town to finance that … Maybe at the time it was in place, it was needed. In 2017 when there wasn’t a lot of growth in Berlin. But right now, I think we are in a healthy place of growth.”

Tyndall and Bohlen argued that the town’s growth rate is a matter of perspective and is difficult to determine definitively.

Nichols also expressed her concerns about the impact continued EDU financing can have on affordable housing. She noted that Grauer’s request “pulled on the purse strings” of affordable housing and what the governing group wanted to hear, yet the units will likely be too pricey for many.

“Berlin is outpricing the folks who live here, the people who want to live here, and only making it affordable for the developer and those from the outside coming in,” she said.

Green argued that while he agreed the policy was poorly written and did vote in favor of its abolishment, he is open to flexibility, especially if developers are bringing in projects prioritizing the town’s overall strategic plan. The council member noted an individual interested in creating a mixed-use facility on Old Ocean City Boulevard as an example.

“[The developer] wants to put in a mixed-use project,” Green said. “We say we want mixed-use projects. He said he wants to put commercial on the bottom and apartments on top. He may need as many as 20 EDUs. I have no problem showing flexibility to that developer. I think we say we want mixed-use development, and not everybody is going to be able to come in and swing a $300,000 EDU expense in addition to the construction cost … I am not against government financing EDUs, but I don’t like this policy. It’s outdated. I’ll abandon the policy, but I do think we should consider working with the right kind of development we say we want in town.”

Burrell reiterated his concerns about the congestion issues financing EDUs could exacerbate, particularly Grauer’s project, which was approved last month.

“My primary reason [to vote against Grauer’s request] was because the developer was adding multi-family dwellings to what I feel is an already exhausted area related to multi-family dwellings,” he said. “That was my biggest issue with that project…we should not further impact the quality of life on the east side of Berlin by jamming more multi-family dwellings in that limited space.”

Resident Gabe Purnell attended Monday night’s meeting. He argued for the continuation of the financing policy, maintaining that minorities and those without an excess of money should be given the opportunity to develop things for the town and its citizens.

“I’m trying to develop something on the east side, something I think we could use, and I’m going to need some EDUs,” he said. “And now you’re telling me I got to come in with the big boys…we gotta get back to where I want to get to — giving people an opportunity to pay for EDUs on time. I can’t afford to bring $100,000 in here and drop it. We like to be in the game, too. We like to offer some things to the community, too.”

Nichols disagreed with Purnell’s point. The council member maintained that developers asking for EDUs take these opportunities away from Berlin locals, as it increases housing costs.

“The folks asking for EDUs take people out of the running,” she said, addressing Purnell. “They can’t afford what these people are putting on the table. [Grauer] said that to put this housing on the second floor, he will have to charge at least $3,000 a month. Who is going to afford that? These people who want to overdevelop, the same developers asking for these EDUs, are going to put the people you think want to live there out.”

She also argued that this type of practice may impact minority representation.

“If these folks don’t have an address where they can vote, we won’t be sitting here because they won’t have an address that says Berlin proper to vote,” Nichols continued. “The more you give EDUs away, you push those folks out. You’re pushing out your vote. You’re pushing out your voice.”

The policy permitting developers to finance EDUs was ultimately eliminated. While no formal action was taken to create new guidelines, a few ideas were mentioned.

Berlin Finance Director Natalie Saleh, for instance, suggested that developers be given two options: they can pay for their EDUs outright or, if they choose to finance, pay the entire amount owed before construction can begin.

As it currently stands, financing EDU requests will no longer be accepted for consideration by the Berlin Town Council, and no new policy is on the table. Grauer’s project will remain intact, as will other financing contracts agreed upon before the elimination of the guidelines.