Joe --

First, thanks for establishing and maintaining this forum. It is particularly helpful for those of us who prefer to remain out of the mainstream of our OPA noisy and often nasty political debates, but like to remain informed nonetheless.

As I read these comments regarding the marina expansion, I don't believe I have read even one which expresses a neutral or positive position on the subject.  That said, I will express my biases now...I am a boater, have been for 30 years and will remain so until I can no longer do it enjoyably!  I am a licensed 50 Ton Ocean Master in the US Mercant Marines (USCG License).  I currently own a 22 foot boat which is kept on a lift right behind my home.  I therefore do not directly, and uniquely benefit from the proposed expansion.  I am a retired officer of a large public corporation where I ran a billion dollar plus international division.

I love my home in the Pines and deplore the short-sighted NIMBY hysteria I have seen with nearly every neighborhood undertaking, whether it be the proposed expansion of the marina, the YMCA construction etc.

Among the comments I have seen in this forum are these: Why spend comunity money for the benefit of only a few?  My response...I don't play golf, tennis or swim at the community pools, but I strongly suspect that the initial construction and continued operation of all of them were somehow subsidized by our OPA assessments.  Do I mind?  Not at all, because the existence of these and other amenities such as the community center and parks areas are attractive to all and DO enhance all our home values.  These and other items are part of what makes Ocean Pines more attractive than other nearby communities, and thereby increase one's wilingness to pay to live here.

Clearly we have a very large population of real estate agents who reside in the Pines.  Has anyone asked them for an opinion as to whether the existence of boat slips in the community has increased a buyers interest once he or she learns of them?  It was largely the basis of my decision to purchase in OP, versus less costly alternatives.  I intended to save money and purchase a non waterfront home, but when I learned that the waiting list for a slip was over 100 persons, I opted to pay a great deal more for a waterfront lot.  Had the list been shorter, say 50 or less, I would have purchased the inland home I wanted.  That home seller lost out because of the lack of available slips!  Clearly such thinking is not scientific, but I suspect that no pubic amenity could endure much in the way of purely scientific scrutiny.

We, as homeowners have every right, indeed obligation to insure that any such  proposed expenditures are carefully managed.  That is not the same as suspecting that the support of any proposal from which we do not receive DIRECT and MEASUREABLE benefit is the product of some sinister maneuvering.

Respectfully,

Stan