Settlement offer looms in Harford Co. Muslim development dispute

Despite talk of a settlement offer in a lawsuit over a retirement community being marketed to Muslim buyers in Harford County, the parties continue to spar in letters to the court and accuse each other of being uncooperative.

A settlement conference between government officials and the Joppatowne subdivision’s owner, builder and a potential resident was held March 23 and the defendants told the federal magistrate judge they “had a settlement structure that might be productive,” according to a letter from the plaintiffs to the court dated Wednesday.

The plaintiffs claim religious discrimination is behind the county’s refusals to issue additional permits without “burdensome and costly obligations” to the development.

Since the settlement conference, the plaintiffs allege they have not heard from the defendants, and their letter Wednesday included a request for a hearing on their preliminary injunction request.

“Given the extensive delays that Plaintiffs already have endured for the sake of trying to resolve this matter, which include giving up the dates for the previously-scheduled hearing on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Preliminary Injunction, we have been instructed by our clients to request the opportunity to litigate this matter as promptly as possible,” the letter states.

The plaintiffs added their “urgency is not contrived” and they are “sustaining terrible economic paralysis and losses” due to the county’s refusal to issue necessary permits. Ajaz Khan, who has purchased one of the units, has not been able to move into his completed home, according to the letter.

The plaintiffs also claim a county inspector, at the instruction of an assistant county attorney, issued notices that five driveways in the subdivision failed their inspections.

“Assuming the truth of that report, it does not bode well for the prospect of a settlement, and indicates that prompt judicial resolution of this dispute is required,” the letter concludes.

The county, in a written response Wednesday, called the accusation “false and libelous” as well as “highly unprofessional.” The plaintiffs, the county continued, are choosing to “litigate by correspondence and again present misleading and false statements to this Court in a public filing.”

The county’s settlement proposal will be ready by the end of next week, according to the letter, and at the time of the settlement conference last month, the county told the magistrate judge it needed two weeks to ensure any proposal complied with county law. The plaintiffs’ letter came 11 days after the conference.

“But if Plaintiffs wish to forego further settlement efforts and proceed with an injunction hearing, the County Defendants are fully prepared to do so, as they were prepared to do so in February, and Plaintiffs’ filed correspondence… if anything, makes the County Defendants more eager to litigate this matter,” the correspondence states.

A Harford County spokeswoman declined to comment beyond the contents of its letter. Stacie E. Tobin, a lawyer for the plaintiffs, said they would respond to the letter in a filing late Thursday or early Friday. Tobin is a partner with Venable LLP in Baltimore.

In their initial complaint filed in October, OT LLC, which owns the subdivision, and Gemcraft Homes Inc., the builder, asked for an injunction requiring the government to issue necessary permits so construction could continue.

Construction of five townhouses began in last April, and the units were scheduled for completion by the end of September, with closing dates scheduled with buyers. In early September, the county attorney informed OT no more building permits would be issued without conditions being met, and use-and-occupancy permits for the completed homes were not issued.

The lawsuit alleges the county defendants began delaying the project in response to public objections to the development being marketed to members of the Ahmadiyya Muslim Community. The plaintiffs have said the community is open to anyone 55 or older.

The case is OT LLC et al. v. Harford County, Maryland et al., 1:17-cv-02812-GLR.