Rota Knott

Category: Uncategorized

  • Worcester Officials Outline Water and Wastewater Bill Appeal Process Amid Rising Customer Concerns

    By ROTA L. KNOTT

    Worcester County staff detailed the procedures for appealing water and wastewater bills during a Dec. 2 meeting of the Worcester County Commissioners, responding to a growing number of questions from residents, particularly in Ocean Pines, about unexplained spikes in usage and concerns about the accuracy of their quarterly bills.

    Commissioner Chip Bertino, who represents the Ocean Pines district, said he has recently received numerous inquiries from customers who are unsure how to challenge their bills or understand the review process. He said he has fielded questions and concerns about appeal process for individual regarding amount of usage on bills, prompting him to ask county staff to explain publicly how an appeal question is handled.

    Quinn Dittrich, the county’s enterprise fund controller, provided the first overview. He said ratepayers should contact either the county treasurer’s office or the Department of Public Works if they want to appeal the water and wastewater usage charges that appear on their quarterly bills. Dittrich emphasized that customers should reach out even if their usage appears unusually low or inconsistent, as that too could be a sign of a problem.

    The first step, he said, is for the county to send someone out to examine the meter on-site. During that inspection, if staff find that “the meter is its continuously moving” even when no water is running in the home, that is strong evidence that “was a leak.” Customers who later confirm there was a leak and provide documentation can receive an adjustment, he said. Customers can provide an invoice and show a leak was repaired, then the county would typically reduce their invoice down to the amount typically would be without a leak.

    Dittrich added that if a ratepayer calls the treasurer’s office, staff there will immediately notify Public Works. “Someone goes out and checks meter,” he said, reiterating that an on-site inspection is always the first step.

    Bertino then asked what happens when a meter is found to be functioning normally but the customer still believes the bill is unreasonably high. If the water meter is found to be working fine but the customer still thinks their bill is excessive and it doesn’t resolve issue about a high bill, what’s the next step? he asked.

    Dittrich explained that the next option is for the customer to submit an appeal to the county’s grievance committee. That committee, he said, is comprised of the enterprise fund controller, public works director, treasurer’s office, and the water and wastewater superintendent.

    Public Works Director Dallas Baker elaborated on the committee’s typical review process and what might trigger an adjustment. He said his office examines a customer’s historical water use when determining whether the reported usage makes sense. If a customer has historically been using 10,000 gallons and suddenly they are using 1 million gallons, that may indicate a significant leak. “Those are places where we can do adjustments,” he said.

    Bertino pressed further, asking how often unusually high bills turn out to be caused by faulty meters. He asked if more often than not it is a faulty meter.

    Baker replied that the answer is generally no. Most high-use issues originate from leaks. He noted that it is often due to water leaks, like toilets running or someone thought they turned faucet off and didn’t. In fact, he said, “majority of time it’s a leak.”

    Baker clarified that in most cases, the source of the problem is on the property owner’s side of the meter. “Most of the time it’s behind the meter,” he said, adding that the customer is responsible for those repairs. Still, he urged customers not to rush into hiring a plumber before the county inspects the meter. He encourages customers not to spend money on hiring a plumber until they contact public works.

    There have been instances where a leak was discovered on the county’s side of the system, Baker said. In those situations, “if the problem is on our side we will pay to fix it,” although he cautioned that “they are not going to get your money back from the county” if the customers has the repair made on the county’s side of the meter.

    Bertino also asked about leaks that are not immediately apparent, such as underground breaks that are only discovered when a high bill arrives.

    Baker acknowledged that this can happen, especially if the pipe is in a crawlspace or buried. “It’s not going to be obvious,” he said. He noted that “more times than not” the issue turns out to be “toilet leak where value has stuck,” adding that customers would be shocked by the amount of water wasted.

    When Bertino asked how many gallons a toilet can leak in an hour, Baker estimated roughly 60 gallons. Bertino reacted by saying “that’s a heck of a lot more” and “Who knew a leaky toilet will use that much water?”

    Baker said the county’s new meters may help identify these hidden issues sooner. The upgraded units allow staff to view up to 90 days of usage history. For example, he said the data can show that at 2 a.m. a house was using 120 gallons and that is evidence of a problem. He added that “there are a lot of times where you’re finding leaks with the new software” associated with the new meters.

    Returning to the appeals process, Bertino asked what happens once the grievance committee receives a case. Baker said requests typically arrive by email from the treasurer’s office or Public Works, each containing a specific request to review a situation. Bertino asked whether ratepayers ever meet directly with staff. Baker responded that not typically. Typically they are contacted by phone, but if they would like to meet the county will do so. He added that “most times is a favorable response to rate payer concerns” when a case reaches the committee.

    Bertino then asked about next steps if a customer remains dissatisfied after the grievance committee’s decision. County staff said the matter can then be escalated to the commissioners for review.

    Baker noted that customers can also request formal meter testing. If the meter is working properly, the customer pays for the test. If it is faulty, the county covers the cost. He said the typical fee is “$60 or more,” with larger commercial meters costing  more than $100 to test. He also noted that the county does not have the ability to test larger meters in-house.

    Commissioner Ted Elder recalled that “we had one come before the commissioners several years ago,” an appeal from Ocean Pines,” illustrating that escalated appeals have precedent.

    Bertino said such calls “have been a little more frequent over the last month and half” after customers received bills reflecting the county’s rate increase.

    Commissioner Joe Mitrecic contrasted Worcester County’s system with that of a neighboring jurisdiction. He said that in the Town of Ocean City “there is no appeal process for water and wastewater usage bills.” He added, “If it goes through the meter, you pay,” noting that if usage totals 1 million gallons that’s what the customer has to pay.

    The commissioners took no formal action on Dec. 2 but said the review was intended to help clarify the process for the public.

  • Ocean Pines Proposes $40 Assessment Increase in FY2027 Budget

    New southside fire station, county water and wastewater hikes drive assessment increase; amenities slated for modest fee changes

    By ROTA L. KNOTT

    Ocean Pines homeowners could see a $40 increase in their annual assessment next year to help cover the cost of a new southside fire station and higher water and wastewater charges from Worcester County, while amenity rates would rise only modestly under a proposed fiscal year 2027 budget presented to the Ocean Pines Association Board of Directors on Dec. 19.

    General Manager John Viola told the board the proposed FY2027 budget is the result of a “bottoms up” process involving review, analysis and clearly defined objectives carried out by department heads across the organization. The approach focused on pricing, expense reviews and identifying opportunities for organic revenue growth, while prioritizing service quality. “But most importantly to enhance the customer experience as well as the homeowner all homeowners of Ocean Pines,” Viola said. He added that staff understand “the importance of the assessment and everything we do and it’s part of our norms is to bring forward the most efficient effective assessment for ocean pines.”

    Senior Director of Finance and Controller Steve Phillips said the assessment increase is directly tied to infrastructure and utility costs. “So we have a $40 increase in the assessment,” he said, citing water and wastewater rate increases and the expense of building the new fire station.

    Viola noted the current fiscal year assessment is $875. “There’s a $40 increase proposed in this proposed budget,” he said. He explained that $25 of the increase is earmarked for the fire department to pay for construction of the new southside fire station. “Not pointing and not saying anything was wrong, but we did not have that funded over the years,” Viola said, adding, “$25 this year is certainly, I believe, a reasonable number.”

    The remaining $15 of the assessment increase stems from higher water and wastewater fees imposed by Worcester County, which Viola said have affected Ocean Pines significantly in recent weeks. He noted residents have also seen the increases reflected on their own bills. Some of those higher water costs will be absorbed through aquatics fee increases, while Touch of Italy, the association’s food and beverage vendor, is also covering its share of the added expense, Viola said.

    The proposed budget also includes salary increases averaging about three and a quarter percent for staff and the management team, as well as coverage for medical liability insurance. Viola said the association has relied on outside studies to benchmark compensation. “I truly believe we need to take care of them. We need to make sure just like anything else that we benchmark and that their salaries are within the ranges of everybody around us,” he said, referencing staff skill sets, benefits and overall responsibilities.

    In addition to the general assessment, Viola said the budget proposes a $25 increase in the waterfront differential assessment for properties located along Ocean Pines waterways. The additional revenue would help pay for improvements such as bulkhead replacement and repairs in areas where the association is responsible.

    Director Jeff Heavner praised the clarity and organization of the budget presentation, calling it “Very easy to read.” He highlighted that the document lays out amenity fees, CPI-related changes, assessment history and boat slip information in one place. He also pointed to what he described as a significant increase in safety-related spending and the challenge of balancing rising costs such as insurance, firehouse expenses, water, salaries and benefits. Heavner said the result is “a really balanced budget,” noting “a modest increase in the assessment and quite frankly modest increases in our amenity fees like racquet sports $5, aquatics $10 to $30, golf $100 bucks, golf carts nothing, uh food and beverage red to black.”

    Viola responded that the budget has absorbed substantial cost pressures in recent years. “We’ve probably covered over $100 worth of increases if not 150 within the budget baked in as you’ve said,” he said, referring to the last couple of years.

    Public Works Director Eddie Wells said the association is proposing a 3 percent increase in marina slip rental fees. “We are proposing a slip increase,” Wells said, adding that the adjustment “still keeps us under anybody that’s in the area.” He said staff regularly check regional pricing and remain competitive. “We’ve been checking on all the prices just to make sure we’re competitive, and we still are well competitive,” he said. With a long waiting list for slips, Wells added, “If somebody pulls out because they don’t like the 3% rental fee increase I don’t think we’re going to have a problem filling them.”

    Phillips outlined several amenity fee adjustments included in the proposed budget. Aquatics memberships for residents and associates would rise by about 5 percent across the board, driven in part by the county’s water and sewer rate hikes that had to be absorbed in the budget.

    Racquet sports memberships would increase by $5, which he described as minimal. Beach parking annual passes would increase by $5 for the two annual passes, while weekly, daily and associate rates would remain unchanged.

    In golf, Phillips said membership rates would see modest increases ranging from $100 to $175. Based on benchmarking, he said, “we still end up being one of the lowest cost per rounds in the area.” Public greens fees would increase by $10, while resident rounds would rise by $5.

    The proposed FY2027 budget will continue to be reviewed by the Board of Directors as part of the association’s budget process.

  • NEWS ANALYSIS

    Ocean Pines Wastewater Plant: Troubles Stretch Back to the 1980s

    By ROTA L. KNOTT

    The current debates over water and wastewater rates in Ocean Pines, including the frustration many residents feel about paying substantially higher fees to address increased operating expenses and capital costs, can seem like a strictly modern problem. But the truth is far more complicated—and far older.

    The difficulties tied to the Ocean Pines wastewater treatment plant and the community’s collection system did not begin with today’s rate adjustments, recent capital projects, or even with the sanitary-sewer overflows of the past decade. Instead, they stretch back to a troubled chapter of private ownership in the 1980s, when deferred maintenance, mismanagement, and the collapse of a Maryland thrift helped set the stage for forty years of county intervention, capital work, engineering reassessments, and regulatory oversight that continues today.

    To understand why the system requires such costly upgrades now, it is essential to recall what Ocean Pines was in its earliest decades. Developed as a planned residential community beginning in the late 1960s, the community relied on privately owned water and sewer infrastructure tied to a network of developers, outside contractors, and lenders. By the mid-1980s, that privately managed wastewater system was in serious decline. Residents and county officials faced chronic maintenance lapses, repeated sewer overflows, inadequate capacity for continued development, and a failing treatment system that was not equipped to meet emerging regulatory standards. The situation grew so severe that Worcester County imposed a development moratorium, halting new building until the wastewater crisis could be addressed.

    The private ownership issues cannot be separated from the broader Maryland savings-and-loan controversies of the era. The wastewater system was tied to Merritt Commercial Savings & Loan and to installations constructed by Maryland Marine, a combination that became entangled in the financial instability and investigations affecting several state thrifts at the time. The failures of these financial institutions reverberated across multiple real-estate projects and utility assets in Maryland. When lenders collapsed or faced regulatory scrutiny, they often left behind underfunded or improperly monitored infrastructure—including the wastewater assets serving Ocean Pines. Wastewater systems require continuous, long-term investment; when private owners pull back or collapse, the effects cascade quickly into public-health risks, environmental problems, and community-wide consequences.

    By 1985, state and county officials determined that the situation had reached a point where they needed to intervene directly. Officials voted to condemn the sewer system. It was a dramatic step but one local officials said was unavoidable if the development moratorium was to be lifted and the health and safety of residents preserved. Condemnation transferred control of the sewer assets to the county and marked the beginning of the government’s long, continuing role in managing wastewater services in Ocean Pines.

    The years that followed were marked by intensive planning and restructuring. Through the 1990s, county water-and-sewer planning documents show a system in transition as previously Balfour Holdings began seeking approvals for the development of previously undeveloped sections of Ocean Pines. Those plans mapped out service areas, documented the system’s weaknesses, identified necessary capital improvements, and described the administrative shift from a developer-driven model to a county-operated utility. Integration into the countywide water and wastewater service area program was not instantaneous; it involved repeated assessments, engineering studies, prioritization of upgrades, and decisions about how to allocate funds among multiple growing communities.

    Despite county control, the underlying physical problems did not vanish. Many elements of the system—pipes, tanks, pumps, and treatment components—were already decades old by the time the county assumed responsibility. As with any aging system, parts wear out and various failures resurfaced, from holding-tank issues to sewer overflows caused by aging collection lines. The county responded with a mixture of emergency repairs and planned capital projects. Some years saw routine replacements; others required larger-scale interventions. In many ways, the county was playing catch-up, addressing years of deferred maintenance inherited from the era of private ownership.

    Beginning in the 2000s, the regulatory landscape shifted as well. The Maryland Department of the Environment, along with federal guidance on nutrient removal, tightened expectations for wastewater performance statewide. Plants were required to reduce nitrogen and phosphorus loads, modernize their equipment, and meet increasingly stringent permit conditions. These new requirements put additional stress and requirements on older systems like Ocean Pines, which for many years regularly met or fell well below the required regulatory thresholds for nutrients.

    In 2016, the county entered into a settlement with MDE stemming from sanitary-sewer overflows that had occurred in prior years. The settlement highlighted how recurring SSOs can trigger formal enforcement and state-level scrutiny, particularly in environmentally sensitive coastal watersheds. In subsequent years, the county also acknowledged that portions of the Ocean Pines system were operating under a framework requiring specific upgrades, deadlines for project completion, and documented corrective actions. The Ocean Pines system was hardly unique in this regard, many older wastewater facilities on the Eastern Shore found themselves navigating similar regulatory paths.

    Taken together, the history forms a long and layered sequence: the decline of private sewer ownership and the 1980s condemnation; the planning, reorganization, and system mapping of the 1990s; waves of capital projects and repairs through the 2000s and 2010s; and the overlapping demands of regulatory compliance, consent orders, and advanced nutrient-removal expectations in the 2010s and 2020s. At each stage, the county has had to weigh competing needs across multiple service districts, making decisions about what to fix first, how to fund improvements, and how to minimize public impacts while meeting legal obligations.

    This history challenges any narrative that attributes today’s rate debates solely to recent events. Instead, the challenges facing Ocean Pines reflect a 40-year arc shaped by the collapse of private developers and lenders, the transfer of responsibility to county government, and the pressures of evolving environmental standards. It is a story of inherited problems, technical complexity, and long-term financial responsibility that cannot be divorced from its origins in the 1980s. And understanding that history helps clarify today’s arguments over rates, capital priorities, and the long-term stewardship of critical public infrastructure.

    While the roots of today’s challenges lie in decades of inherited problems, many Ocean Pines residents have understandably expressed frustration with how the most recent rate increases were communicated. Even acknowledging the long-term nature of these infrastructure needs, the county could have done a better job preparing ratepayers for the significant jump they saw on their latest bills. Ratepayers were left surprised not because the system doesn’t need investment—it does—but because the magnitude of the increase arrived without clear, proactive public explanation. In a community that has weathered decades of water-and-sewer turbulence, transparency about major financial impacts is not just courteous, it is essential for public trust.

    By Rota L. Knott

    Publisher/Editor

  • OCEAN PINES PROGRESS COMMENTARY: As-Built Drawings Requirement: An Overreach Struck Down in Ocean Pines

    The Ocean Pines Architectural Review Committee (ARC) recently proposed a new requirement for homeowners seeking approval for improvements: submitting “as-built” drawings once construction was complete. While the intent may have been to ensure compliance with community standards, the proposal represented an overreach that would have unnecessarily burdened property owners. The Board of Directors deserves credit for taking decisive action to strike the proposal before it ever went to a public hearing, recognizing that practical solutions already exist to address the underlying concerns.

    The ARC is responsible for reviewing plans for new construction, modifications, and renovations to ensure compliance with the community’s covenants and regulations. The committee noted that some homeowners were inadvertently violating community guidelines, often because permits were sought in the wrong order or county regulations differed from Ocean Pines standards. The ARC’s proposed solution was a requirement for as-built drawings documenting every project and was intended to prevent future violations.

    While the measure might appear reasonable in theory, it would have created significant challenges for homeowners. Preparing as-built drawings requires professional drafting or meticulous documentation. Many residents, especially those completing smaller projects, do not have the training or resources to produce such detailed plans. Adding this requirement increases costs, administrative burdens, and delays for projects that may already be complex. It also could discourage property improvements or create disputes over whether submitted drawings meet ARC expectations.

    Fortunately, the Board’s recent action has rendered the as-built proposal unnecessary. At a special meeting on Oct. 29, the Board approved a new sequence for approvals: homeowners must first secure letters from any secondary homeowners association, then obtain Ocean Pines approval, and only afterward pursue county permits. Previously, the order with letters from the HOA first, then county permits, and finally Ocean Pines approval, sometimes caused confusion. Homeowners could obtain a county permit, complete their project, and later discover that it violated Ocean Pines rules.

    The revised sequence ensures that Ocean Pines-specific restrictions are clear before construction begins, effectively addressing the problem the ARC intended to solve. With this proactive measure in place, post-construction as-built documentation becomes largely redundant. Compliance can now be monitored through routine inspections, ongoing communication, and the Board’s oversight, rather than by imposing additional bureaucratic steps that are burdensome for residents.

    Requiring as-built drawings for every project also sets a concerning precedent. Such a mandate could be seen as micromanaging homeowners, going beyond the ARC’s intended role of maintaining uniformity and compliance. Minor improvements, like fences, decks, or landscaping, could become subject to expensive and time-consuming documentation. Larger, resource-rich homeowners might navigate the process easily, while others could struggle, raising questions about fairness and equity.

    The Board’s decision to strike the requirement before it reached an upcoming Town Hall meeting demonstrates an understanding of proportional governance. By addressing the real problem in the order of approvals, the Board implemented a practical solution that protects community standards without imposing unnecessary burdens. Homeowners can receive clear guidance upfront, reducing the likelihood of violations and minimizing the need for post-construction oversight.

    The ARC retains other tools to ensure compliance. Clear guidelines, communications, educational resources, and site visits are all effective ways to uphold standards without encumbering homeowners with excessive documentation. These approaches are more accessible, maintain oversight, and preserve community trust.

    Imposing unnecessary requirements can erode confidence between residents and governance. Rules perceived as punitive or intrusive may lead homeowners to view the ARC as overly strict rather than supportive, harking back to the days of the Environmental Control Committee. By contrast, thoughtful, streamlined processes like the new permit sequence foster collaboration and understanding. Residents are more likely to follow guidelines when they are clear, reasonable, and proportionate to the issue at hand.

    By prioritizing practical solutions over unnecessary bureaucracy, the Board and ARC can maintain the integrity of the community’s architectural standards while respecting the rights and resources of property owners.

    Rota L. Knott

    Publisher/Editor

  • Rota Knott Takes Over as Publisher of Ocean Pines Progress

    After more than two decades of shaping community conversation, the Ocean Pines Progress is entering a new chapter. Following the passing of our founder and publisher, my longtime colleague and friend, Tom Stauss, earlier this summer, I am stepping in to continue leading the publication we built together.

    For so many in Ocean Pines, the Progress has been more than just a newspaper. It has been a watchdog, a chronicler, and a sounding board for the issues that matter most in this unique community. Tom’s keen editorial eye and unwavering commitment to accountability earned the paper both loyal readers and its fair share of critics. His passing has left a void, and I feel a deep responsibility to honor his legacy by carrying forward his vision.

    Tom was the original and longest-serving publisher of new media in Ocean Pines. From the Independent to The Progress, he set the standard for what local journalism in this community could and should be. His legacy of fearless reporting and dedication to truth will continue.

    Tom and I, along with a team of contributors, built this paper together from the ground up, and I intend to ensure the Progress remains the trusted, independent voice he always envisioned.

    My professional relationship with Tom goes back more than 30 years. In 1992, fresh out of college, I joined him at the Ocean Pines Independent, a community paper he owned and published. It was my very first reporting job, and it set the foundation for my career. I was lucky to work with Tom so early because he modeled what community journalism should be — thorough, fearless, and committed to the people it serves.

    Tom sold the Independent in 1999, but his passion for covering Ocean Pines never faded. Within a few years, he and I returned to publishing with the launch of the Ocean Pines Progress, designed to fill the gap for residents who wanted clear, fact-based reporting about the Ocean Pines Association and the greater community.

    Around the same time, I also served as the OPA’s Public Relations Director. That role gave me firsthand experience in the complexities of community governance and communication. Having worked both as a reporter covering OPA and later as its spokesperson, I understood the challenges of telling the story of Ocean Pines. That dual perspective shaped how Tom and I approached the Progress.

    From the very first issue, we staked our reputation on deep coverage of the OPA, bringing transparency to board decisions, budgets, and programs. Residents have come to depend on us for fact-based reporting in an environment where rumor and speculation often run wild. Tom believed this community deserved a paper that didn’t shy away from tough questions, and so do I.

    In addition to my journalism roots, I’ve built a career in nonprofit management, serving as chief executive for several organizations in Maryland and Maine. That experience brings not only editorial expertise but also organizational leadership, fundraising, and community engagement skills that will help sustain the Progress into the future.

    For me, stepping back into this role is both professional and personal. This isn’t just about keeping a newspaper alive. It’s about preserving Tom’s legacy and making sure the Progress continues to be a trusted voice for Ocean Pines residents. That’s what he wanted, and that’s what I want to deliver.

    I know community journalism faces tough challenges today — shrinking advertising revenue, rising printing costs, and competition from social media. But I also see opportunities. People still crave reliable, well-sourced reporting, especially at the local level where decisions directly affect their lives. Social media is full of opinions, but what Tom built — and what I intend to continue — is reporting that separates fact from speculation. That’s not going out of style.

    Tom was more than a publisher; he was an advocate for accountability and a sharp observer of the quirks of Ocean Pines politics. He could recite sections of OPA bylaws the way some people recite sports stats. He took it seriously because he believed residents deserved to understand how their community was being run.

    Under my leadership, the Progress will continue its core mission: covering OPA governance, finances, and programs with depth and clarity. We will continue our established delivery within Ocean Pines and remain focused on in-depth coverage of Association matters.

    At the same time, I want to broaden our reporting to shine more light on the people who make Ocean Pines special — the volunteers, the business owners, the neighbors who look out for one another. Tom’s strength was holding institutions accountable, and that will never change. But I also want to harken back to the original days of the Independent and balance that with stories that celebrate the spirit of this community. That may include more profiles, features on local history, and coverage of regional issues that affect Ocean Pines.

    I also plan to explore digital expansion to meet readers where they are. Print is still valuable, but digital platforms are essential. The Progress has the opportunity to grow in both directions.

    And I won’t be doing it alone. We have a team of local advertising sales, contributing writers, and photographers working with me to produce the paper each month. It will remain a true community effort — that’s what makes this publication special.

    Three decades after first reporting on Ocean Pines, my connection to this community has come full circle. From covering it as my first job at the Independent, to serving as its PR director, to helping launching the Progress, I’ve chronicled its evolution from every angle.

    Tom and I started this journey together, and now I’ll carry it forward. My hope is that when people pick up the Progress, they’ll feel the same sense of trust and connection they always did. That’s the best way I can honor Tom’s memory.

    I have worked in or owned property in Ocean Pines for decades, and I look forward to returning to the community as both publisher and soon again as a neighbor. With me at the helm, the Progress will remain what it has always been — a vital, independent voice for a community that cares deeply about its future.

    Rota Knott

    Publisher/Editor