Ocean City, N.J. - A lawsuit filed against Ocean City and City Council seeks to overturn the designation of the former Gillian’s Wonderland Pier property as an Area in Need of Rehabilitation. Filed by several civic organizations and property owners, the 52 page complaint accuses city officials of conflicts of interest, improper influence and bad faith.


The lawsuit’s central legal argument is that Ocean City lacked sufficient evidence to make the rehabilitation designation. However, many of its most aggressive conclusions rely on inference rather than direct evidence. Several claims about the intentions of the property owner and city officials are pleaded “upon information and belief,” indicating the plaintiffs may not possess direct personal knowledge supporting those assertions. This includes a radical theory that Wonderland Pier was intentionally closed to make the property appear vacant or underutilized and therefore more likely to qualify for the designation. The complaint does not identify direct evidence proving that alleged plan.

Other portions of the lawsuit rely on subjective observations about public officials’ behavior. The complaint alleges City Solicitor Dorothy McCrosson made “head gestures” showing agreement with council members and disagreement with members of the public. It also describes officials as “annoyed,” “angry,” “hostile” and “heated.” Those descriptions may illustrate the plaintiffs’ view of several contentious public meetings, but they do not independently establish that Ocean City’s actions were unlawful.


The filing also points out that 600 Boardwalk LLC’s formation documents did not expressly identify operating an amusement park as one of the company’s purposes. However, the language quoted in the complaint broadly permits the company to develop real estate and conduct any lawful activity. The lawsuit additionally argues that an Area in Need of Rehabilitation cannot be used to facilitate substantial redevelopment or now construction. That interpretation is less certain that the complaint suggests. New Jersey law allows rehabilitation to include new construction or enlargement and permits a redevelopment plan to be adopted for an area designated as needing rehabilitation.


Ultimately, a court will determine whether Ocean City had sufficient evidence and followed the law when adopting the designation. For now, the complaint presents only the plaintiffs’ allegations, and several of its most inflammatory claims remain unproven.