Nobody Wins With OC, County Likely Headed To Court

Nobody Wins With OC, County Likely Headed To Court
typewriter

The Worcester County Commissioners had four options before them this week when it came to settling an ongoing tax dispute over duplicated services provided by the Town of Ocean City.

Although the subject can be difficult to grasp for non-government types, the easiest way to understand it is Ocean City property owners, through their property tax, are paying twice for many government services. The Town of Ocean City provides many services — public works, recreation and parks, tourism and planning departments, to name a few — at an expense to Ocean City property owners. These departments are funded primarily through property tax revenues collected annually.

The rub is Ocean City property owners, through their county tax bills, are also funding the same services in Worcester County at large they do not utilize. There is a steep cost to that and consequently a fairness issue for Ocean City property owners.

Four years ago, an Ocean City-commissioned study found roughly $17 million in duplicated services provided by the municipality. A Worcester County-commissioned study confirmed the duplication of services exists and recommended Ocean City ratepayers see their property tax rate decrease by three cents per $100 of assessed valuation to address the issue while increasing county-at-large property owner’s tax rate by almost six cents.

To resolve this issue, the options before the commissioners were to draft a memorandum of understanding to phase in increases over time to Ocean City’s annual grant from the county; issue a tax differential involving an Ocean City tax rate and a non-resident rate; provide a tax rebate of some sort to address the long-term issue; or continue the annual grant process ignoring the tax differential issue altogether.

Rather than doing the right thing, the Worcester County Commissioners took the only unacceptable route this week when they voted 6-1 (with Ocean City-based Commissioner Joe Mitrecic in opposition) to keep on with the status quo. They opted to ignore the tax differential study’s recommendations and insights and disregarded the issue altogether in favor of the antiquated and unbalanced grant system.

This was the year for the commissioners to finally get it right. That seemed to be in the proverbial cards in recent months, as indications were the county was finally going to address the matter, but ultimately the county made a poor decision.

We have long favored a long-term agreement between the county and city that makes up for this duplication of services. The idea is through the annual grant process the county will address the increased cost burdened on Ocean City property owners. We believe this is the simplest way to address the matter, while not instituting two separate tax rates within the county.

With this week’s decision not to address the matter, Worcester County will most likely be taken to court by Ocean City. There’s precedent in Maryland to show the municipality will win and the county will be ordered to account for this duplication of services. It’s a shame it will come to this in the near future. More taxpayer funding will have to be spent on the legal process and those are dollars that could have easily been saved with a fair resolution to all parties involved.

A negotiated Memorandum of Understanding between the two government bodies would have avoided this awkward situation. Now we have a government body about to sue another government entity and nobody wins ultimately when that happens.

About The Author: Steven Green

Alternative Text

The writer has been with The Dispatch in various capacities since 1995, including serving as editor and publisher since 2004. His previous titles were managing editor, staff writer, sports editor, sales account manager and copy editor. Growing up in Salisbury before moving to Berlin, Green graduated from Worcester Preparatory School in 1993 and graduated from Loyola University Baltimore in 1997 with degrees in Communications (journalism concentration) and Political Science.