19 minute read
Opinion ....................... Pages
COMMENTARY A missed opportunity for compromise
There’s virtue in naming the skatepark and creating a youth award in Gavin’s memory
It’s hard to say precisely what prompted Tiffany Knupp to pull back from what Ocean Pines Association directors Doug Parks and Colette Horn thought was an agreed upon compromise to name a new OPA annual award after her son, Gavin, tragically killed in a hit-and-run accident this past July.
A meeting between the three occurred Nov. 11, with both Parks and Horn believing that Tiffany Knupp had agreed to the alternative to naming the Ocean Pines skatepark after Gavin. The alternative was necessitated by the fact that as many as six members of the OPA Board of Directors reportedly were not in favor of that idea, at least not now, as advocated on social media by Tiffany Knupp and her many supporters.
The annual award idea was a good one, and its subsequent rejection is a missed opportunity to bring some healing to the community affected by Gavin’s death. It would keep Gavin’s name and memory alive in a way that a plaque mounted on the skateboard bowl might not.
An annual award would be bestowed on a deserving Ocean Pines resident in a ceremony at the OPA’s annual meeting, or perhaps in another venue. It would be similar to the volunteer of the year award bestowed annually in the name of the late Sam Wilkinson, an Ocean Pines teenager who died decades ago in a tragic boating accident.
His name is mentioned every year at the annual meeting, appears on meeting agendas and minutes, and in newspaper reports. While it is true that details of his life and tragic demise are not generally known these many decades later, his name survives, co-mingled with those whose good deeds are being recognized by the OPA.
The same would be true for Gavin if his mom had only accepted the alternative offered by the Board.
Accepting the alternative would not preclude a future Board from naming the skatepark after Gavin. It need not be one or the other. That’s a false choice.
But if the Board and the OPA continue to be insulted and pressured by Tiffany and her supporters on social media, then the inevitable consequence will be that the OPA will do nothing to commemorate Gavin.
That would be very sad.
For instance, should the foundation set up by Tiffany Knupp reach an agreement with the OPA over improvements to the skateboard park, an OPA amenity she describes as an eyesore, and should the foundation make a substantial contribution to implement those improvements, upon completion a naming of the park after Gavin would be appropriate and non-controversial.
Unfortunately, there is no such agreement in place, and it doesn’t appear one is remotely plausible at present.
Discussions are not under way, and it doesn’t appear any are imminent.
Insults hurled at seven individuals elected by the OPA membership to represent them and their interests are likely to harden attitudes, making a good outcome unlikely.
As for an annual Gavin Knupp award, the OPA Board is treating it as an option that could still be discussed despite Tiffany’s caustic rejection of it on her Facebook page. She suggested that the directors could shove the idea into an anatomical orifice where the sun doesn’t shine, although she used the more familiar and crude language that made it very clear that the idea has no traction with her and those who are advising her.
She also suggested that the directors had received certain “gifts” from the Matt Ortt Companies, hired by the OPA to manage OPA’s three restaurant and bar operations. The “gifts” were not defined, but corruption was clearly implied.
Again, these are allegations that do nothing to honor and remember Gavin Knupp.
Would Gavin approve of his mom’s rejection of this compromise?
We can’t know that, of course; nor can we know if he’s following the battles being waged in his name over naming the skatepark and on the Justice for Gavin Facebook page.
But the question can be asked: What would Gavin think and say about any of this if he was able? Might he say: “Hey mom, let’s take the win! And enough already with the insults and the pressure tactics.”
Let those who knew and loved him reflect on that, and perhaps in time they will come to accept this compromise offer as a reasonable one. A forgiving and understanding Board of Directors might be willing to consider a way back from the abyss. Forgiveness can be a powerful antidote to the negativity of recent weeks.
Here’s a statement from Tiffany’s post that offers the barest of hints that she might still find a way to accept the compromise.
“I did not leave there [the meeting with Parks and Horn] saying it’s OK,” she said. “I said it’s a great idea and if this is all I can get, then that’s that.”
If indeed this is what she said during the meeting, then it’s completely understandable why Parks and Horn left the meeting thinking there was an agreement. As the meeting was wrapping up, Tiffany hugged Horn and shook Parks’s hand, gestures that suggest mutual good will and consensus on the way forward.
If only that were true.
An OPA press release was issued asserting that Tiffany agreed that a motion to name an award after Gavin would be placed on the Nov. 19 Board of Directors meeting agenda. It appeared on the initial iteration of the agenda, but was removed at the conclusion of Board discussion because Tiffany made unflattering comments about the proposed compromise and those who made it.
There wasn’t much in her post that could be construed as positive.
Inexplicably, she said that an award given in Gavin’s name was “not honoring” him. She offered some reasons why, but none seemed particularly persuasive.
“It was not a good meeting at all. I was completely railroaded. They didn’t care about me. I cried the whole time and they didn’t give a s---.
“We’re doing those things [such as scholarships in Gavin’s name] already.
“The point is to improve the skatepark because it’s an eyesore and to make it more family-friendly. Just make it a better place, but they don’t care. They offered the award to pacify me. By the end of the meeting, they asked me to put up a Facebook post saying I agreed to this, and I said no. They’re trying to shut me up.”
That would be a waste of time and effort, if true, as Tiffany Knupp does not seem to be the sort of person easily silenced.
Parks and Horn were trying to come up with a solution that would resolve a very difficult situation, and they were rewarded by rejection, vulgarity and an allegation about accepting “gifts” that was borderline defamatory.
The two sides are not even talking to one another about possible improvements to the skatepark, and that, too, is a missed opportunity.
Naming the skatepark after Gavin is plausible in the context of the Knopp foundation making notable and long-lasting improvements, such as those made in recent years at the Ocean Pines golf course, racquet center and Yacht Club marina.
The two rooms in the Community Center named following the deaths of Phyllis East, a long-time executive secretary of the OPA, and Anna Foultz, whose Star Charities was a fixture in Ocean Pines spanning decades, honored these two “impactful” individuals whose lasting contributions to the OPA and Ocean Pines were deserving of commemoration.
The same standard should apply when naming the skatepark.
Not long after Tiffany Knupp’s comments were posted, Parks received an anonymous phone call in which he was a called “a piece of s---” and Horn received a text containing a picture of a pig accompanied by a not-too-subtle threat that she was “next.”
Unacceptable, disgusting even. Our elected leaders should not have to suffer such abuse. Tiffany should disavow these actions by her supporters. What would Gavin say about such vileness if he were with us today? -- Tom Stauss
COMMENTARY Cyber-bullying and harassment needs to stop
Board members come together to resist pressure to sever business relationship with Matt Ortt Companies
The Nov. 19 monthly meeting of the Board of Directors was notable for how well the directors came together to counter the toxic bullying and harrassment on local social media in a failed effort to force the Ocean Pines Association to sever its productive business relationship with the Matt Ortt Companies.
Director Doug Parks set the proper tone in his President’s Remarks delivered early in the meeting. He made it abundantly clear that despite an on-line petition and emails demanding that the OPA terminate the MOC management contract, the Board would not even consider it “at this time.”
That was a qualifier designed to lessen the sting out of a line in the sand: MOC is here to stay, and this Board will not be wasting any energy and time to consider alternatives.
Those advocating for the end of the business relationship do so from a deeply flawed opinion that the MOC had some involvement in the tragic death of Ocean Pines teenager Gavin Knupp this past July. What utter nonesense.
Rather than wait out the protracted legal process and the presumption of innocence before guilt is determined in a court of law, these cyber-bullies assume guilt by three individuals formerly employed by the MOC and apply guilt by association to the entire organization, and then attempt to harrass those who don’t cave in to their bullying.
Former MOC partner Ralph DeAngelus is unfairly caught up in the maelstrom. He was the individual who tipped off the state police to the presence of a vehicle in his garage that might have been involved in the hit and run accident that killed Gavin.
For this act of courage and honesty, he’s been pilloried in the local media, print, television and social, only one of which (besides the Progress) has even bothered to report that it was NOT crack investigative prowess that led to the subsequent confiscation of the vehicle of interest.
It was Ralph DeAngelus who came forward, voluntarily, paying a huge price for having done so. He is living in the household with two other individuals of interest, the young driver of the vehicle that might have killed Gavin, and his mom. Contrary to lurid speculation on social media, neither DeAngelus, his long-time companion nor her son fled the scene to Mexico or tried to avoid the authorities.
Lies and calumny abound, speculation hardens into perceived fact, and still no charges have been filed against anyone living in the DeAngelus household.
Also paying a huge price is DeAngelus’ former partner, Matt Ortt, who issued a statement of support for DeAngelus shortly after the accident that was widely slammed on social media. Earlier in November, he issued a sincere apology for having issued that statement of support, and the apparent hurt it caused to those who knew and loved Gavin Knupp.
He issued his apology at the same that he announced the severing of his business relationship with DeAngelus after many years of productive collaboration. That hasn’t been enough to satisfy many of his critics, who assume the partnership will be reinstated once this horrid situation blows over.
That’s the problem with bullies. Appease them, and they come back for more. They’ll never be satisfied.
The best that can be hoped for is that their misguided ardor will soon burn itself out.
The Progress has learned that Matt Ortt’s family has suffered from the fall-out as well, with his teenage son experiencing bullying from school classmates and his wife having to go incognito while shopping or attending football games.
The unfairness boggles the mind.
MOC restaurant venues in West Ocean City and Ocean City have been subject to unhinged “Justice for Gavin” protests, again under the preposterous premise that Matt Ortt personally and the 300-plus employees who work for MOC have even a scintila of responsibility for Gavin’s tragic demise. The cyber-bullying has been epic here, as well, resulting in diminution of MOC’s presence on social media.
Everyone should want Justice for Gavin; but this should not come at the price of injustice toward Matt Ortt, his family or his company.
To their credit, OPA directors won’t be intimidated by these cyber-bullies, many of whom apparently are not members of the OPA, thereby rendering their views irrelevant to any decision-making by directors elected by OPA members. Protests won’t be allowed on private OPA-owned property, so harrassment of patrons to MOC-operated venues wouldn’t be easy to organize.
“Over the last several months, there have been posts and comments on social media to have the Board remove the Matt Ortt company as the management firm for OPA’s food and beverage operations,” Parks said in his Nov. 19 statement. “Recently there have been a number of emails sent to the directors with the same recommendation, along with calls to boycott OPA amenities and veiled threats to the Board if no action is taken.”
Calls for boycotts are unlikely to be observed by the vast majority of OPA members, as MOC-managed bar and restaurant venues are owned by the OPA membership. Boycotting the Yacht Club or Golf Clubhouse is akin to boycotting your own business, or as the adage says, cutting off your nose to spite your face.
Rational people won’t give a boycott of these venues the time of day.
For those irrational people who do, good riddance to them. Let not their toxic vibes enter into venues where people just want to enjoy.
“OPA has a business contractual relationship with MOC that involves specific obligations by both parties,” Parks continued. “At this time, there is no consideration for changing that relationship or the end date of the contract. It is the obligation of the OPA Board of Directors to base any decision to do so on the business interests of the Association.
“Regardless of how some people feel about the matter, major decisions affecting the Association must include consideration for how the overall community will be affected, rather than a subset of the membership. I understand and respect everyone’s right to voice their opinions and boycott facilities as they see fit; however, those actions in and of themselves are not the basis for an important financial decision. I respectfully ask that at this time you consider and understand our position on the matter.”
Whether these people are even capable of grasping the Board’s position is doubtful. Parks’ comments were measured and diplomatic, as is befitting of an OPA president. Parks calling these people a “subset” was perhaps the least offensive term he could have used to describe them.
Here is a sampling of what OPA directors have had to deal with in recent days and weeks.
Colette Horn received a picture of a pig in a message with the words “you’re next” as a caption.
Veiled threat or an actual threat? Nothing too veiled about it.
Parks received a crank phone call calling him a “piece of s...” No context, but the messasge was clear: If you don’t agree with us and act on our demands, then this is what you are.
Former Director Josette Wheatley referred to the Board as a criminal enterprise in a recent social media post, prompting the Board to authorize counsel Jeremy Tucker to draft and send Wheatley a cease and desist letter.
She apparently doesn’t understand the concept of defamation and demonstrates a lack of class by turning on her former colleagues, thereby ratifying the judgment of OPA members in defeating her candidacy in this summer’s election.
She then had the temerity to lecture her former colleagues during the Nov. 19 Board meeting on the necessity of naming the skatepark after Gavin, apparently unaware that she has forfeited any deference to anything she might say about any topic or issue of interest in Ocean Pines.
An irony is that Horn appointed Wheatley to the Board when a vacancy occurred this past year.
Because of the steady ratcheting up of on-line u
42 Ocean Pines PROGRESS December 2022
Cyber-bullying
From Page 41 harassment in recent weeks, the OPA has had to adjust its social media presence, shutting down Facebook functionality that allows OPA members (and non-members as well) to comment. Suffi ce it to say that comments have been highly inappropriate, at times infl amatory. The OPA Website has removed director phone numbers. Member IDs were checked by an Ocean Pines police offi cer at the Nov. 19 Board meeting to ensure that non-member riffraff were excluded.
This is what the campaign to remove the MOC from Ocean Pines has come to.
Similar toxicity has infected a companion campaign to persuade the OPA Board to name the skatepark after Gavin Knupp.
That subject is addressed in a companion commentary elsewhere in the Opinion section.
Tiffany Knupp, Gavin’s mom, in a recent post told Parks and Horn that they could shove their proposed compromise Gavin Knupp award up their collective asses. This, after a meeing in which she seemed to support the compromise.
Tiffany Knupp deserves to be cut a lot of slack because of the unfathomable pain of losing her 14-year-old son, but she needs to understand she crossed a line with her recent post, making it far less likely any Board of Directors will name the skatepark after her son, anytime soon.
In the real world, deliberately antagonizing and insulting those to whom you are seeking a favor is epically misguided.
During the Nov. 19 meeting, Steve Jacobs, a director who has been supportive of naming the skateboard park after Gavin, said he recognised that an opportunity to begin to heal the community had been missed by her disrespectful dismissal, perhaps permanently.
As noted by Parks, she didn’t even have
OPINION Another day in court for Janasek
It appears that the protracted legal saga known as Tom Janasek vs. OPA (and fi ve current or former Board members) is headed for another Court date, this time to determine whether Janasek is entitled to recover any of his legal fees.
It’s rare in state cases, so Janasek has a steep climb to make it happen. Then again, he has Ocean City attorney Bruce Bright in his corner, and if any attorney can make a case for why the OPA should pay for Janasek’s legal expenses, it’s Bright.
The justifi cation for it would be the track record in recent cases of the OPA acting in bad faith, detailed in recent editions of the Progress. Anyone interested in those details can research it in our archives, found at www.issuu. com/oceanpinesprogress.
At this stage in this litigation, it’s almost gotten tiresome to recite the ways the OPA has acted in bad faith in the past year, fi rst in the Rick Farr candidate disqualifi cation case and now in the Janasek amenities suspension case.
Suffi ce it to say defendants in both these cases did not showers themselves nor the OPA in credit. On the contrary.
Janasek seems to have a dual purposes in opting to pursue legal fee recovery.
The fi rst motive is economic. To restore rights that never should have been taken away, he had to hire an attorney. Legal services aren’t cheap.
The second purpose is to send a message to the current Board, not that it really needs the reminder, and future Boards that they ought to read the plain text of OPA governing documents before taking out very personal and political vendettas on OPA members.
This vendetta seems to have been based on the premise that Janasek wouldn’t pursue a legal remedy for the improper suspension of his amenity rights because of the cost.
“Bleed him dry,” is the way Farr put it in a recent conversation, and attributed that quote to Frank Daly, one of the defendants in the case. To be clear, Farr was not ascribing that noxious point of view to himself. Perhaps Daly can be asked about it in the next phase of this case.
It’s possible given the particulars of the incident that led to Janasek’s suspension, the Board feels it can’t politically withstand the heat from unilaterally awarding legal fees.
It may take a neutral party such as a judge to do the right thing. ~ Tom Stauss
the courtesy to notify the Board that she had changed her mind on the proposed Gavin award. All seven directors rose to the occasion and with eloquence and unity pushed back against all of this negativity during the Nov. 19 meeting. Directors Rick Farr and Stuart Lakernick both expressed solidarity with Horn, someone with whom they’ve been politically at odds for quite some time.
Paradoxically, this insidious campaign waged against the Board has brought the directors together in a way that would have been inconceivable even a month ago.
That is the silver lining in the toxic vortex imported into Ocean Pines in recent weeks. - Tom Stauss
Power to control government
Now that Question A has been defeated by the voters of Worcester County, it is time to set the record straight.
The People For Fiscal Responsibility, a ballot issue committee, was formed solely to bring the matter of a specifi c Bond Bill for a Sports Complex to the voters.
From the outset, we made it very clear that we are not opposed to a Sports Complex, per se; but we are opposed to the use of public funds to build it, to operate it and to pay an exorbitant price for the land.
For the County Commissioners to pay nearly $75,000 per acre, when land is readily available throughout the county for $10,000 to $19,000 per acre is ridiculous.
From the beginning, we were repeatedly told that the bond proceeds were to be used for construction of the complex and to purchase the 95 plus acres next to Stephen Decatur High School. It was not until we had met the signature requirement that we then learned that bond funds could not be used to purchase the land.
Later, there was confusion about the language of the bond bill as it appeared on the ballot as Question A. Some insisted that if the Bond Bill was defeated, a Sports Complex could never be built in Worcester County with bond proceeds.
That was never true. Question A pertained to one Bond Bill, and one Bond Bill only. Furthermore, our Committee never had any control over how the language was written on the ballot.
On behalf of the People For Fiscal Responsibility, we want to thank the 71 volunteers who gathered signatures throughout the county. We also want to thank the 5,093 voters who signed the petition to place the issue on the ballot. Finally, we want to thank the 11,760 voters who voted against Question A, thus defeating the Bond Bill. What we learned from this initiative and this tremendous effort is that people still have the power to take control of their government. While we all enjoy the right to vote, the power of the Petition to Referendum allows for citizens to override the actions of their elected offi cials in the passage of an ill-conceived bill.
The founders of our great Nation understood the right of the people “...to petition the government for a redress of grievances.” In Worcester County, Maryland, the Constitution is alive and well.
Vincent Gisriel, Jr.
Ocean City The Ocean Pines Progress is a journal of news and commentary published monthly throughout the year. It is circulated in Ocean Pines and Captain’s Cove, Va. 127 Nottingham Lane
Ocean Pines, Md 21811
ADVERTISING SALES Frank Bottone frankbottone@gmail.com 410-430-3660
