Follow the Details about the Public Hearing with Wicomico County Council

May 21, 2024

To Whom it May Concern at the Wicomico County Council,

There are too many unasked and unanswered questions concerning the lease offered to Wicomico County for the 909 S Schumaker Drive property. I testify today to give voice to some of these questions, and answer with knowledge gained from my working at the property for sixteen years and subsequently following the vanishing of a once treasured cultural property, known as the Ward Museum of Wildfowl Art.  

Why is the 909-property even available?  

The former tenant (who were in a decades long partnership with the Landlord) were ousted from the property due to recent financial issues. Their financial history, recent audit, and financial position failed to meet the requirements of business entities affiliated with the Landlord.

Why were the former tenants in financial distress?

The former tenant had their admission/education/retail business shuttered (most of its earned income) due to a failure of the HVAC systems on the property.

The former tenant had their insurance claims denied during this business interruption due to the failure of the Landlord to address a known HVAC issue. 

Did the Landlord know the 909 HVAC needed repair before the July 2022 incident? 

The July 2012 Landlord sponsored HVAC analysis of the property plan included the HVAC repair recommendation that went unfunded for a decade and then failed in July 2022, leading to the property closure, resulting in damages to the former tenant and the Landlord.  

Will a new tenant ever be able to get an insurance package to cover the contents of this building? What else is on that unfunded repair list for the 909-property? Who will pay for the new roof, the next flood, the maintenance of this facility?

I recommend the county look further into these concerns.

Are there any disputes of title and/or other concerns that could disrupt use over the next 10 years?

Yes, there are several open concerns that are not yet referenced by the Landlord in developing this May 2024 proposed lease to the county. 

Deeds and grants on the property require that the City of Salisbury and the State Board of Public Works approve any change of use from the former tenant's business and could include a repayment of monies to these government agencies by the Landlord.  

Evidence and documents concerning these Deeds and Grants have been provided to the County Council.

What’s left on the property from the former tenant’s activities? Does the Landlord expect the new tenants to keep up honorifics to the members of our community?

Memorials and tributes on the property including, but are not limited to:

·       Sam Dyke Gateway to Outdoor Discovery

·       Richard A Henson Education Center

·       Perdue Courtyard

·       Thomas F Mullan and John A Luetkemeyer Legacy Center

·       Stigler Memorial Garden

·       Lower Shore Land Trust Native Plant Garden

·       Henry Fleckenstein, Eugene Burkett, Margaret Webb, Charles Bounds and others.

What happens to or who will take care of the sculpture (on grounds and in galleries) and the nature trails?  What are the requirements of the City of Salisbury Conservation District– this property is part of that district- Should this be referenced in the lease?

I recommend the county look further into these concerns

Will the Landlords Police Department still have jurisdiction, what about security surveillance - should lease should describe that?

I recommend the county look further into these concerns

Who is this Landlord, what are their interests?  

This Landlord, Salisbury University, has failed to do the basic due diligence in any of its affairs related to the 909 property and state assets housed there.  

The University has failed to uphold its own Standards for Ethics and Integrity, which is clear as it relates to the expectation of the University to communicate in a timely and accurate fashion substantive changes affecting institutional mission, goals, programs, operations, sites, and other material issues. 

This leaves the community guessing as to their motives, and or their consideration of the long-term impact on the assets (state-owned and community owned) under their care and influence.

There is no question that the 909-property should be reopened for the community as soon as possible.  The 8,000 square feet of recently refurbished waterfront event and education space is in good working order; with only a portion of the 909-property, having been unnecessarily closed while the Gallery/Collection spaces are renovated to whatever future use. It is possible to reopen the facility quickly and sequester impacted areas. 

Shame on our community for forfeiting the shared generosity at the 909-property known previously as the Ward Museum of Wildfowl Art. Since the initial gifts of the City of Salisbury and Jean Morris Smith, descendant of N Linwood Morris–documented “the City’s objectives of the use of this site for a museum” the property has been designated for investment for such purpose. 

I appreciate the opportunity to share with the public and the council this information so that those involved in these decisions can review the wider community, legal and ethical ramifications in leasing property.  

I appreciate that others in State and City government will be reviewing the legal and ethical issues raised at this hearing, and do hope that it comes to a better outcome and recommitment to the duty of care for the 909-property, collection of art and community investment that once was known as the Ward Museum of Wildfowl Art.

Thank you for your consideration.

Lora Bottinelli,

Rehoboth Beach, DE

Bottinelli.co