Owner of the former Pines Motel files suit after being blocked from reopening

Posted 5/31/22

CRISFIELD — When did Crisfield Budget Inn close? The answer may be left up to a judge who could determine the property’s future.

The new owner of what is better known as the Pines …

You must be a member to read this story.

Join our family of readers for as little as $5 per month and support local, unbiased journalism.


Already a member? Log in to continue.   Otherwise, follow the link below to join.

Please log in to continue

Log in

Owner of the former Pines Motel files suit after being blocked from reopening

Posted

CRISFIELD — When did Crisfield Budget Inn close? The answer may be left up to a judge who could determine the property’s future.

The new owner of what is better known as the Pines Motel filed a lawsuit in Somerset County Circuit Court alleging the city and several officials failed to provide a business license or any other permits that would allow the motel to reopen in May 2021, pointing instead to the zoning code that inactive nonconforming uses after one year must follow what’s allowed in that zone.

Timothy Dyson, managing partner of Rt. 30 Auto & Truck Sales LLC of Laurel, Del., alleges that “Even something as simple as stamping the Deed to the Property...was met with resistance and obfuscation by the City of Crisfield and all other Defendants.”

In one statement from the filing it claims now-former public works director Dean Bozman “refused to sign the license for the Pines Motel” and that a remark was made “that ’Mr. Dyson will never open the motel,’ or words to that effect.”

Also named in the complaint are Mayor Barry Dize, Clerk-Treasurer Joyce Morgan, former city inspector Nelson Sheppard and former city solicitor Michael Sullivan in their official and personal capacities.

The complaint asks the court for a jury trial to end the “uncertainty and controversy that currently exists between the parties regarding use” of the property. It seeks relief in excess of $75,000 each for economic damages and punitive damages, return of payments to the city during the time it disallowed operation of the motel, attorney fees, and any other penalties that provide equitable relief.

The plaintiff’s attorney Ruth Ann Azeredo of Annapolis lists several counts of how the rights of the owner were violated and that there was “intentional interference with future business expectancy.”

According to the facts outlined by the plaintiff the property was purchased May 24, 2021 and it was operating as a motel, “though it had suffered financial effects from the pandemic.”

Guests continued to arrive a few months after the pandemic started in mid-March 2020 but by July pandemic-related orders by Gov. Larry Hogan created a financial hardship for the former owners.

Taxes and water and sewer payments were not paid until the property was sold the following year.

Mr. Dyson says he was informed by the city that as the new owner he could continue to operate, and that the prior owners received no notice that their privilege to run a motel had been revoked.

Despite repeated attempts no permits for the motel were issued. An appeal to the Board of Zoning Appeals was scheduled for late July 2021 but the plaintiff was unable to participate and asked that it be rescheduled but no new hearing date was ever set.

City Solicitor R. Mac Baldwin had no comment about the case, and a week after it’s May 12 filing he had not heard that anyone had been served. He did, however, respond in December to several questions listed in a public information act request from the plaintiff’s attorney.

The city’s position on the matter is that the motel, located at 127 N. Somerset Avenue, is a nonconforming use in a Residential R-2 medium density zone. Therefore, according to the code, “any such nonconforming use” if it ceases to be active “for a period of more than 12 months,” must then “conform to the regulations specified” by the R-2 zone.

The complaint counters that since Jan. 1, 1990, the zoning district where the property is located “allows commercial properties, including motels, without the need for special exemptions or reliance on allowed ‘nonconforming use’.”

Meanwhile the city continues to charge water and sewer “at commercial/business rates,” according to the complaint, and “the building continues to degrade due to Defendant’s refusal to issue required permits for maintenance.”

Mr. Dyson, who attended the recent candidates’ forum, remarked afterward that he found it ironic that everyone spoke of being business friendly and in favor of economic development yet his efforts are stalled.

No hearing date has been set.

Members and subscribers make this story possible.
You can help support non-partisan, community journalism.

x
X