By Bethany Hooper

Associate Editor

(Aug. 27, 2026) Plans to purchase a 193-acre property for the development of a sports complex just west of Berlin fell apart last Monday night, with most of the Ocean City Council expressing concern about the location and the impacts it would have on neighbors.

Dozens of residents in the St. Martins community, armed with a list of more than 1,000 signatures, filled the council chambers to voice their opposition to the city’s purchase of two parcels of land off Old Ocean City Road, roughly nine miles west of municipal limits.

The land, officials announced earlier this month, was under consideration for an indoor-outdoor sports facility, aimed at attracting youth travel teams and their families to the area and, ultimately, Ocean City hotels, restaurants and attractions.

However, before the City Council ever got around to taking public comments, four of the city’s seven council members kickstarted the discussion by voicing their own objections to the site.

By the end of the meeting, a motion to pass the first reading of an ordinance, authorizing the Mayor and City Council to purchase the property, failed for lack of a second.

“I think this project means a tremendous amount to Ocean City, I think this project means a tremendous amount to the county,” said Councilman Jake Mitrecic, who withdrew his second after hearing the community’s concerns. “But without the buy-in of whatever community it ends up in, or finding the perfect place, we’re just gonna poison it so bad that our citizens, that we represent, will never support it again. And it will just be gone. Ten years of work, gone.”

In a work session earlier this month, the Ocean City Council agreed to proceed with an $8.7 million purchase contract for the 193-acre parcel, currently owned by Harrison Farms LLC. The 7-0 vote effectively began the city’s first steps in acquiring land for the development of a future sports complex.

But by the end of the week, a group of council members were out at the property, meeting with nearby residents and hearing their concerns about the city’s chosen location. During last Monday’s meeting, when the council was to vote on the land acquisition, Council President Matt James announced he would not be supporting the ordinance.

“I’ve spent hours on the phone talking to people who support and oppose this proposed location. I even joined fellow council members in a meeting with neighboring property owners who have legitimate concerns with the impact that this property will have on their way of life,” he said at the start of the discussion. “I do not see a way for our vision to co-exist with such opposition to this location. So, in an effort to be a good neighbor, I do not support this location moving forward.”

James was backed by Councilman Jeff Heiser, who likened the community’s opposition to the city’s stance on the offshore wind project.

“You know, we don’t want windmills in our backyard, right? So why do you guys want to support a complex in yours?” he said. “I also think this will be a financial burden on the taxpayers of our city. I want to support the complex too. I’m for sports, I’m for tourism. But I think of the burden this would put on members of our community at this time. So, at this point, I’m not in favor.”

Council Secretary Will Savage also expressed concerns about community buy-in, as well as the local and state approvals needed to make the project a reality. He said his opinions on the property acquisition were the same as those he expressed during the city’s long-running debate over short-term rentals.

“In my opinion, this is a commercial operation in a residential district, and this is similar to that …,” he said. “I want to stay consistent, and I can’t support it at this location.”

Councilwoman Carol Proctor echoed their comments, adding that she also had concerns about the financial projections used by the city to support the development of a facility.

“I actually did speak with some people who own a sports complex, privately, and I also spoke with others, and I just don’t even believe in the budget or pro forma that was presented,” she said. “I don’t think those numbers are correct. I think it’s a lot of forecasting, and I just can’t get behind the project. I don’t agree with it.”

The majority’s comments then kicked off a back-and-forth discussion, in which sports complex advocate Councilman John Gehrig expressed his disappointment over his colleagues’ decision. He argued that rejecting the land acquisition before plans could be presented were “premature.”

“To be quitters now, you guys should be ashamed because we talked about this for years,” he said.

Pointing to the decline in room night bookings, and a change in tourism trends, Gehrig said the city needed to do something to bring “respectful guests” to the resort. Sports tourism, he said, was a way to do that.

“The economic impacts are tremendous, and people spend money,” he said. “These are families that are spending $3,000 to $5,000 a year. They are spending that money throughout our region, and certainly Ocean City is going to be a beneficiary, but the entire county is going to benefit. So, we need an idea that’s going to make real money, that’s going to introduce people to Ocean City, to Worcester County.”

He also argued that the sports complex would be funded with room tax dollars, and not residential property taxes. Proctor, however, continued to express her concerns – not only about the funding mechanism, but about entering into a contract for the property without first seeing the terms in writing.

“We are putting the horse before the cart when we are entering into a contract and signing it,” she said.

Referring to the terms in the contract, City Solicitor Heather Stansbury said the city was agreeing to buy the property at $8.7 million and to make a $250,000 deposit, which would be paid immediately upon execution of the contract. She said that money would only be returned to the city if the ordinance did not pass, or if the sellers could not convey clear title.

Going further, Stansbury added that the city would also need to work with the Maryland legislature, the Maryland Stadium Authority and other agencies to get the necessary approvals for the property.

“If those things occur, you would not have to move forward to settlement and purchase the property for $8.7 million, but you would not get back your $250,000,” she said.

Replying to Gehrig’s comments, James said the argument was not about desire for a sports complex, but about the location.

“Maybe even some of the people here want the sports complex,” he said. “If we can go back and find a property that is zoned for something like this, it may be more palatable for me.”

Mayor Rick Meehan shared his support for the sports complex project but noted that Ocean City did not have the space to accommodate a facility. With that said, he said the city needed to work with those outside municipal limits.

“I think what tonight has proved is, once again, the process has failed …,” he said. “We didn’t have the opportunity or the process in place to hear a lot of these concerns, answer the questions, and rule out this property before it came to this, if it didn’t meet the test. That’s what’s failed us.”

“You shouldn’t have to be here,” he told community members in attendance, “and some of our council members shouldn’t have to be asking the questions that they’re asking tonight.”

James disagreed with Meehan.

“I don’t think it was rushed to an agenda for any wrong reasons,” he replied. “I think we put it on the agenda because we needed to move forward, and this is the process it would take to do so. We needed the public to be aware that we were looking at the properties so they can provide feedback. We also had a timeline, expecting that the project may be petitioned. We wanted to be able to put it on the ballot for the November election, so we had a true representation of Ocean City voters.”

The council’s comments were following by public discussion, during which nearby residents, farmers and business owners shared their opposition to the city taking agricultural farmland for commercial use. They also voiced their concerns about traffic, future development and the appraisal the city used in reaching a purchase price.

While the property is currently appraised at $2.7 million, that number increases to $8.7 million if the land is rezoned as commercial.

“If you don’t want it here, help us find somewhere else,” Gehrig told residents following their public comments.

Ultimately, Gehrig’s motion to approve the property purchase on first reading failed, with Mitrecic withdrawing his second.

“I want this bad, but not bad enough to screw it up, where we can’t make it happen in the future,” Mitrecic told Gehrig. “That’s just how I feel.”