close
close

Former Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley is against the redevelopment of Harborplace

Former Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley is against the redevelopment of Harborplace

BALTIMORE – Former Baltimore Mayor Martin O’Malley is making no secret of how he votes on Question F. It’s a resounding ‘No’.

O’Malley said on social media Saturday afternoon that he was voting against the Inner Harbor referendum, going on to say, “It’s a terrible hold by developers on public waterfront parks.”

O’Malley, the commissioner of the Social Security Administration, said he was speaking in a personal capacity.

Earlier this week, “Baltimore for a New Port,” a group that pushed for the passage of Question F, touted support for the plan from three former mayors: Kurt Schmoke, Jack Young and Stephanie Rawlings Blake.

In a press release, all three said it helps build a better future for Baltimore and to vote yes.

Mayor Brandon Scott also supports the amendment.

Question F, if approved, would amend the city’s charter to allow development near the port.

Harborplace developer, MCB Real Estate overseen by David Bramble announced plans last year the realization of four new buildings, including a terraced residential tower with approximately 900 homes and retail and commercial space.

MCB says the plan has been developed following intensive public engagement and includes four hectares of new accessible parkland, a renovated waterfront promenade and more than 500 new trees.

It also includes mixed-income housing and 250,000 square feet of retail space for shops, restaurants and other local businesses.

Last month, the Baltimore group Protect Our Parks launched their “Vote F No” on the Harborplace development.

While members of Protect our Parks say redevelopment is needed, it should not include subsidies to private developers.

A judge ruled in September votes on question F are not countedmentioning the ballot wording was too confusing.

However, the state Supreme Court annulled that decision Last month he said this petition for judicial review was not the right way to challenge the language of the question.