This past week, Eustace Mita told us that Ocean City’s iconic Ferris wheel cannot be saved. He went so far as to arrange a press tour, showing off the damage and describing the imminent danger.

The spectacle was galling: an owner inviting the press to highlight deterioration on his own property—one he has owned for five years—as evidence of the urgency to move forward with his vanity high-rise project, and if he has his way, with taxpayer subsidies.

Last week’s Ocean City Council meeting was hard to watch. From relatively simple matters to far more consequential decisions, the lack of foresight on display was enough to make anyone sad.

First there was the continuing effort to find the right lawyer for the city to advise them on redevelopment. Our city solicitor, mired in conflicts, and in my opinion, providing ill advice, became implicated herself in the lawsuit against the city. The second lawyer hired by council was aware of threatened litigation, yet did nothing to help avoid it. We are now on our third. Why?

Among those suing city, he wants council members to put their positions on the record

OCEAN CITY — Bill Merritt of Ocean City 2050, who is among those suing the city over the Wonderland Pier property, told City Council members they should individually state their positions on what should happen at the former amusement park site.

Speaking before City Council during public comment Sept. 10, Merritt asked council to move forward on its vote on the Boardwalk Subcommittee report, which offers recommendations on zoning and the future of the entire boardwalk. 

Filing a lawsuit against your own city is not something anyone wants to do. It is expensive, divisive, and time-consuming. So, when it does happen, it is a sign that something has gone seriously wrong.

That is where Ocean City finds itself today.

When Wonderland closed in 2024, we lost a beloved part of our history. But the city also had a once-in-a-generation opportunity to ask a simple question: What should the next 50 years of the north end of the boardwalk look like?

Instead, the city focused on a different question: What does one developer want to build?

From that point forward, the process largely revolved around accommodating that proposal.

More than one month since City Council adopted its June 25 resolution declaring the Wonderland site an “Area in Need of Rehabilitation",” official communication from the city has been almost nonexistent.

As a result, the public has to piece together conflicting comments made by the city and developer to the press, and is left to wonder if the city will keep its word and truly seek a compromise, or if it was just a mirage all along.

Three years ago, Ocean City had very few organized citizen advocacy groups. Today we have several — some narrowly focused on a single lot or a single decision, others focused on government process, transparency, and long-term planning. In the opinion of those of us working hard for positive change at Ocean City 2050, this increased involvement at the local level is a very good thing.

To the Editor:

Every Ocean City taxpayer and resident should read what Eustice Mita had to say about those who opposed his luxury hotel. It was published in the July 8 edition of the Sentinel. He speaks of how little he thinks people “contribute” to the community who are not members of the Chamber of Commerce, Asbury Avenue or Boardwalk merchants organizations.

The Boardwalk Subcommittee’s final report deserves credit. While the subcommittee did not provide the level of public engagement it originally promised, the report itself rests on a solid factual foundation—business inventories, hotel and occupancy data, parking and beach tag revenue, comparison communities, and stakeholder input. That's the kind of groundwork that should inform any zoning decision, and the Subcommittee should be thanked for doing this work.

Many of us who care about the future of Ocean City are looking forward to the final report from the Boardwalk Subcommittee, which was charged with evaluating the future of the boardwalk, including the former Wonderland Pier site, and developing recommendations to guide its long-term success. When the report is released, we hope it reflects the principles previously suggested by Ocean City 2050: that any zoning changes are tied directly to meaningful public benefits; that the future of the Wonderland property receives careful and deliberate consideration; and that the subcommittee presents unified recommendations that move us beyond division and toward a shared vision for Ocean City’s future.

It has been some time since the public received an update from the Boardwalk Subcommittee that was formed last year to help chart a path forward for the Ocean City Boardwalk. Councilman and Subcommittee Chairman Dave Winslow promised a robust process and significant public engagement for what is one of the most important planning efforts of our city, its character, and its economic future.

Wonderland was not the only issue on voters’ minds. The public conversation — particularly on social media, which has effectively become the city’s primary communication channel — reflected growing concerns about the overall direction of Ocean City: overdevelopment, parking, congestion and the city’s rising debt burden.

I was extremely pleased by our City Council coming up with a winning team approach when they created a Master Planning Subcommittee representing the varied and sometimes opposing interests in the Wonderland situation. Let us all support them in accomplishing their objective in a timely manner and trust their findings. I have faith in their ability to work with careful urgency but with enough patience to explore all pertinent facts and potential outcomes.