Where did I question their motives?

You have consistently, by implication, questioned the motives of the 4 with whom you disagree-- they're all about lawyers, money, and developers, right?

That's what I have a problem with.  The US Supreme Court often splits decisions 4-3, after excellent advocates have presented excellent, reasoned, principled arguments for both sides.  The issues are most often complex and multi-faceted, with very little left to the black and white analysis you so often employ in your commentaries concerning this issue. 

I know you have the best of motives, Joe, though I tend to disagree with what I perceive as your "chicken little" approach to this issue.  Perhaps you could extend the same courtesy to the 4 Commissioners with whom you disagree . . .

I have no idea what their motives may be or not be. I have questioned their decision - a decision that stuck us with a $1 million risk instead of the developer.

It's my understanding that Pennington Commons will pay Ocean Pines $1 million to take that $1 million risk.  Is that correct?  If so, you appear to be giving that fact short shrift in your analysis.

Second, at least 4 commissioners, one of whom is from Ocean Pines, appear to believe that this risk is highly unlikely to occur, and, as such, worth taking.  The existence of the risk is only part of the equation.  The degree of the risk is also relevant.  And I would suggest that the split between our 2 Ocean Pines Commissioners indicates that this issue is far less black and white than you would have us believe.

There are competing visions as to how development should occur in the north end of the County, and how sewer and water services should be allowed to evolve so as to serve that development.  There are risks and benefits inherent in both visions.  The commissioners just made a tight 4-3 decision in favor of one vision.  You are right to point out that their is a risk involved.  You are wrong to question the motives of the 4 commissioners with whom you disagree, when, as far as I can tell, their position is both reasonable and persuasive.  It's just different from yours.

Lawyers represent the people with money. I saw no lawyer there representing the people of Ocean Pines.

Dan Stachurski is a better oral advocate than most paid lawyers I know.  Ocean Pines was well represented.