A long-stalled commercial development adjacent to Ripken Stadium, once envisioned as a way for the city to avoid the losses it is now incurring on the stadium, will not begin until next spring, at the earliest, said a top official with the company that owns the land.
J. Joseph Credit, the former CEO of Nottingham Properties Inc. who is managing the property, said he remains intent on developing the 50-acre parcel as originally envisioned. He also noted that after delays related to the city's water supply, the work on the project's 168-unit residential condominium complex resumed last month.
"We're moving ahead as best we can," Credit said. "We would hope that we could begin the retail part of the project next spring. That's a fairly aggressive schedule, but we still have a long way to go. That doesn't mean we're not committed to moving hard."
City officials are eager to get the project underway. "We're in a hopeful holding pattern," said City Manager Douglas R. Miller.
"It'd be maybe one, two more fiscal years that we have to take the financial hit, and after that we'll be reaping the benefits as the plan was originally conceived," Miller said.
The city had counted on revenue from the project to help defray its costs related to the stadium complex. Early projections had called for more than $800,000 a year in tax receipts to the city from the movie theater, shops and other businesses envisioned as part of a master plan.
But the city's contract with Nottingham contained no penalty for delay. The land remains mostly acres of open fields. Meanwhile, Aberdeen has been forced to use money from different city funds to cover operating shortfalls in its stadium fund, which have totaled more than $1 million since 2002.
"If any of that [development] had been completed within the three to four years that it was anticipated to be up and running, the mayor and city council would've said, 'Look how smart we are,' and would've gotten wonderful credit," said local attorney and banker John S. Karas, who conceived the development as a way to pay for Ripken Stadium. "For right now, the city is stuck in a bind."
Interviews and a review of thousands of pages of records related to the stadium deal show that former officials believed the stadium project would be a break-even proposal, with the Nottingham development serving as a financial safety net.
Between 1999 and 2001, the city bought 110 acres, targeting about 50 of those acres for a development modeled after The Avenue at White Marsh. But a lawsuit, differences of opinion over what could be built on the site and other factors have stalled the development.
How the land would be developed was a point of concern for Ripken Baseball, documents show. What effect would a retail development have on Ripken's nearby youth baseball academy? Would retailers be able to cash in on - and possibly tarnish - the Ripken name? And what if the developers were to launch other youth athletic facilities or another professional sports franchise that might threaten the financial viability of the Ripken ventures?
The city eased those concerns when it signed a covenant in 2000 with Tufton Professional Baseball LLC, a Ripken entity, requiring anyone who purchased the land to clear their plans with Tufton by providing design plans and more.
Among the earliest investors to express interest in the property was a team represented by lobbyist and former Baltimore County Executive Dennis Rasmussen. The team had been talking with the city for years about building a youth activities center and possibly bringing a minor league hockey team to Aberdeen.
Documents show the city and Rasmussen's group were prepared to sign a deal. Donald E. Brand, an attorney who was hired to help the city with the Ripken project and is now an engineer for Baltimore County government, told Tufton in a letter that the city planned to settle on a deal with Rasmussen on May 1, 2001 - as soon as Tufton approved its use.
Notes from a May 21, 2001, meeting show that Ripken's business agent, Ira Rainess, had several concerns about the project. He said Tufton would not agree to any use that would involve another professional sports team and wondered if the city should consider other bidders, the records show.
Rasmussen said in a letter to the mayor that his group was "genuinely enthusiastic" about the project, and willing to work with Ripken's representatives to find a compatible use. But he also requested that negotiations "remain independent" of the baseball stadium and youth academy.
A year later, on May 31, 2002, city officials informed Rasmussen that they were again ready to proceed with the sale of the property. The deal dragged out for months, until the city told Rasmussen that his group would have to submit new plans through an open bid process. By that time, Rasmussen said his group was unsure of its financing and bowed out.
With Rasmussen's offer off the table, the city put out a request for proposals. They received two bids and selected Nottingham.
But the deal would be postponed for nearly two years, while the city dealt with a lawsuit from the other bidder, Christopher Michel, who argued that his proposal - an offer that was $2.3 million more than Nottingham's and had more development - was unjustly overlooked. He alleged "illegal waste of taxpayer funds," among other accusations.
The suit was eventually settled for $100,000, and a $4.2 million land sale to Nottingham closed in early 2005. According to city documents, officials said that Aberdeen lost thousands of dollars on the sale due to the delay.
By the time the city had paid off project loans and recouped other expenses, it had about $800,000 left over from the $4.2 million. That was invested for a year and then cashed in to pay off the city's mounting debts from operating the stadium complex.
Late last year, Nottingham sold a number of properties and merged with another company. Credit, Nottingham's CEO, continues to manage remaining properties - including the Aberdeen parcel - held in a liquidating trust.
Though Credit says he is enthusiastic about finishing the Aberdeen project, the city's contract doesn't hold them to any such goals. The contract provides no penalty for delays and no requirements for what will be built. However, the city has adopted a zoning code for the area.
justin.fenton@baltsun.com
greg.garland@baltsun.com
To Learn More
Ripken Stadium and the IronBirds became an immediate sensation in Harford County when they debuted with the 2002 season. Every game has been a sellout. Companies such as Bank of America have paid to be sponsors. And at an adjacent baseball academy, youngsters learn "the Ripken Way" on ball fields that include one modeled after Oriole Park at Camden Yards.
But the city of Aberdeen, which owns the stadium, has not shared as richly in the success as officials projected, because of critical decisions made over the past seven years. Represented by part-time politicians and advised by businessmen, Aberdeen took on a project as risky as it was ambitious for a city of just 14,000.
In closed-door negotiations , Aberdeen signed over to the Ripken businesses most of the money to be made from the baseball games. City officials had intended to cover the bills in other ways, including fees, taxes and a deal with Nottingham Properties to develop adjacent land. But the city's contract with Nottingham contained no penalty for delay. The land remains mostly acres of dirt.
The result: the tiny Harford County community, which was already struggling to balance its books and last year raised taxes and other fees, owes $6.7 million in stadium-related debt, and millions in interest, on a payment schedule stretching to 2022. The city's stadium fund has posted operating losses that total more than $1 million since 2001, forcing Aberdeen to dip into its treasury to meet its obligations.
For more on the Ripken Stadium project, including the results of a months-long examination by The Sun that involved dozens of interviews and hundreds of pages of documents, go to baltimoresun.com/aberdeen. There you will find an interactive gallery of photographs, original documents related to the deal, charts detailing the project's finances, and maps.