Activists urge voters to lobby MPs over LC resort
(CNS): The decision by the Cayman Brac and Little Cayman Development Control Board (DCB) to hear and grant an application dealing with only part of a controversial resort project in Little Cayman “flies in the face of environmental, social and economic responsibility”, local activists have said.
Amplify Cayman, a group of concerned citizens, described the decision as “salami slicing” because the development has a contentious over-water bungalow component that is still to be decided.
The Little Cayman District Committee of the National Trust for the Cayman Islands is also urging people to contact their MPs. Posting on social media, it said the Marine Park belongs to all of Cayman, not just one developer.
Since Cabinet has not yet heard that coastal works application, there is a window of opportunity for people to lobby their representatives about this unprecedented and unsustainable proposal, the committee said.
“If you do not wish for Cabinet to give away or sell part of a National Marine Park that belongs to all of the people of the Cayman Islands for the enrichment of a private developer, make your feelings known to your MP, minister, or member of Cabinet,” the LC branch of the Trust stated.
While the DCB had no problem approving the land component of the project, the Department of Environment has raised multiple concerns about it, including the decision to hear just one part of the project. DoE experts have already urged the government to refuse the necessary coastal works licence, describing the idea of over-water bungalows in a marine park as “fundamentally unacceptable”.
In an open letter sent to MPs, the media and posted across social media, Amplify Cayman raised a number of issues about the decision of the Sister Islands board to hear this application, as well as the catalogue of issues presented by the proposed development.
The developers have stated that the economic viability of the project depends on the overwater bungalows. Therefore, Amplify said, they had “great difficulty understanding why this segment of the application” was heard by the board in isolation given the obvious interdependence.
In its technical report, the DoE has laid out all of the reasons why the coastal works licence should be refused. This is the first application in Cayman seeking permission from the government, from a single developer for a one-off fee, to profit from the crown, namely publicly-owned seabed in a marine protected zone, an issue that has never been discussed.
In addition to that obvious and extremely contentious issue, there are an array of environmental problems with the project in relation to building hotel rooms over the water.
The DoE advice to refuse the project and develop a policy on over-water development was passed to Cabinet several months ago, but no decision has yet been made. CNS contacted the premier regarding the project and how the application is being handled, but his office explained he was unable to comment as the costal works application has not yet been before the Cabinet.
Nevertheless, the decision to approve the landside of the project appears to be yet another decision in a line of many over the last few months under the planning ministry that directly conflict with the stated PACT policies and Panton’s Ministry of Sustainability and Climate Resiliency, which has responsibility for the Department of Environment.
In its open letter, Amplify Cayman sets out the continued and growing concerns across the Cayman community that, despite claims by the authorities that they are concerned about over-development, climate change and environmental conservation, there is little evidence of any action to address it.
One of the first steps in addressing climate action is to preserve nature. “Considering such a project in 2022 in such a zone seems completely out of touch with the reality of climate change,” the activists stated, noting their concerns about the failure to consult the public on this significant proposed project.
“Not only has public input been restricted as ‘interested parties’ on the land-based aspect of the project, but the DoE’s ‘expert advice’ on the matter is blatantly being disregarded,” they wrote.
Referring to the Cayman Islands Environmental Charter and the Bill of Rights, Amplify said the decision “shreds the spirit” of the Constitution, and called for a review and update of planning policies and for MPs to bring the general question of over-water Marine Reserve development to Parliament for debate.
“The dismissal of expert advice and public concern, the obvious disregard for negative environmental and socio-economic impacts, and the apparent direct conflict with the 2001 Environment Charter, our Constitutional Bill of Rights, the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and internationally recognized best practice for Climate Action, make this project and the DPB decision unjustifiable,” the activists said, as they urged the community to make their feelings known.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: development, Local News, Marine Environment, Science & Nature
To all the commenters apposing any development for the sister islands i surely hope you are not the ones that at the same time commenting that the sister islands people are just “subsidized” or “fully dependent” on Grand Cayman and just a strain on Cayman. Let us have some of the development also to improve our economy here. These projects are no more a threat than anything thats being done anywhere on Grand Cayman! Any development or forward movement causes a trickle down of benefits for the entire economy.
10:08>>
Where do you see a comment opposing “any development” for the Sister Islands? That is pure hyperbole. Justifying careless and irresponsible development for the Sister Islands because it is being done on Grand Cayman is a moronic justification. We who live in and love the Sister Islands certainly do not want our beloved islands to look anything like the traffic-snarled concrete jungle as seen in the over-developed areas in Grand. While economic benefits of development can be positive, they can also be negative. For example: Due to the smaller land mass, developers snapping up land can and will cause the price of land and housing to steadily increase. In Grand Cayman this has resulted in an ever-increasing number of sons and daughters of the soil to lack the ability to buy land on which to build a home much less afford an existing house. It has reached a point critical enough to warrant government now seriously pondering ways to combat the housing affordability crisis. The potential impact will be far more dire in the Sister Islands because we do not have the vast and highly evolved business and job-opportunity base that Grand Cayman has. We are at a disadvantage to benefit from rapid development: already in many segments of the Sister Islands development game we see established businesses from Grand competing with locally established businesses. This is clearly seen in the following industries: land development, real estate agents/brokers, contractors and construction trades, materials suppliers, heavy equipment operators, personal services providers, retailers. This list will expand. It is far easier for an already established Grand Cayman business to establish a location in the Sister Islands than it is for a local aspiring entrepreneur to start up a similar enterprise from scratch. It is plain to see that if we do not carefully control development and if we do not provide a way for Sister Islands businesses and start-ups to effectively compete, we will end up with just the menial jobs and marginal business niches offered to locals while the biggest and best business opportunities will be quickly filled from Grand Cayman. This will greatly accelerate the brain and talent drain we have being seeing for decades. You speak of benefits trickling down. In that light we must insist on a thorough Cost-Benefit Analysis, proposed staffing and local training plan, as well as bonus incentives for all major developments in the Sister Islands. Only then can we ensure that we can prudently match the benefits to the developers with the benefits to the local community.
This is just the tip of the iceberg. North Sound is next. It’s mostly not even a national park. Everything from Starfish point and Caymana Bay northward is at risk of this kind of development.
Unbelievable that this could happen! Greed has already ruined so much of the world. Please let’s keep the Sister Islands in reserve. We don’t even care if we are the “poorer” of the islands! Just leave our natural resources alone!!!
I can’t wait to see the beautiful development!
Let’s Make Cayman Great Again!
Please please tell me that today’s Compass article about 20storey high buildings in GT and others developments is an April 1 joke!
🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯🤯
🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️😼😼😼😼😼🤦♀️🤦♀️🤦♀️😼😼😼😼
It’s a Frank Schilling project so, no, it’s not a joke.
Goerge Town Compass wrote. I remember they fired a person who put a comma in the wrong place. Still not corrected as of now.
Who The Cayman Islands belong to? Are they waiting for the mass protests? Or such a thing isn’t going to happen in Cayman for the fear of losing status, jobs, etc ?
#leggewasright
50 storey building coming to Camana Bay next year too.
Dubai here we come.
Who cares
Me and lots of other people. Go back to bed.
How much is the “one off payment”? If it is somewhere in the region of $950,000,000.00 then just maybe we and the developers can think about this again
They would be setting an exceptionally destructive and shameful precedent should they allow this to go ahead. If they approve this, similar XXXX will argue their plans in marine parks and other reserves should be approved too.
Many places in the world do this with no or minimal impact, but Cayman see this as the end of the world. The lease income will pay stipends. We can stay in the 60’s or provide product that is now relevant. I await the hate mail!
Why does anyone think that both MP’s did not approve of this? Yep, you are not a Bracker, or you would know different.
OK 3:40, show me another National Marine Park where a hotel has been built over the water anywhere in the Caribbean or anywhere else?
George, You obviously don’t know what eco friendly is all about?
Yeah, the impact of extraneous, inapposite development in these other places you describe was so minimal that’s why you are now living in the Cayman Islands, lol.
inapposite ?????
@3:56
Yes, inapposite. A very apposite word in the context used!
Prudent folk in the Cayman Islands want to do the opposite of inapposite and we thus we posit the positive and apposite position lest our tranquility becomes akin to a positronium and quickly go positively poof.
Lease income will pay stipends – oh, you think so.
What lease income? The developer is asking for a one-off not a lease of the Marine Park. And herein lies one of your problems.
Everyone is entitled to their opinion, however, we do not want to be like everywhere else in the world! That’s what’s wrong now, everyone is seeking to destroy the exclusive. If it’s not like everywhere else that people run from they want to make it suck too! I will keep my small retro rock! You can keep your opinion and hopefully move on.
Mr. Panton has always sold himself as being an environmentalist, now is the time for him to prove it.
That was all hot air to get himself elected bobo. Doesn’t take a rocket scientist to see which issues generate the most comments on CNS. He’s just another puppet for the big founding families. A teaspoon could be premiere and the outcomes would be the same.
Amen, but I’m not holding my breath!!
Can’t take a conch from a marine reserve to feed my family, but mega wealthy developers can build a whole resort bang smack in the middle of one! What the actual f&ck!?
…and simultaneously destroy the prime bone fishing flats and the zen-like fly fishing eco-tourism industry – putting those guides out of business. The prettiest waters in the Cayman Islands.
cayman government already put them out of business by closing borders for 2 years
Zen like, ?
ZEN LIKE ?
Wtf you talking about?
Silly pseudo wannabe somethings are full of 60s garbage speak. Say it in plain language if you have something to say.
Just because you have no idea what ZEN is does not mean you need to be totally stupid.
Read Zen & The Art of Motorcycle Maintenance and open up your brain.
It might help you because you need a type of help. 🤕 🤒 😷
Zen like fly fishing is what you need. Lot of anger there Bro.
Can’t find a legal conch to much trouble for you special K?
“While the DCB had no problem approving the land component of the project..”
Where can I see the documentation of this approval?
Amplify [saying] that the DCB decision “shreds the spirit” of the Constitution is hyperbole along the lines of “The sky is falling! The sky is falling! It hit me on the head!”
The Amplify activists suggest without offering a shred of evidence–that the DCB’s grant of approval is in direct conflict with the 2001 Environment Charter, our Constitutional Bill of Rights, the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals and internationally recognized best practice for Climate Action.
To say that the land-side project approved by the DCB is in contention with the UN’s Sustainable Development Goals is extremist rhetoric. Here is a list of the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals: (1) No Poverty, (2) Zero Hunger, (3) Good Health and Well-being, (4) Quality Education, (5) Gender Equality, (6) Clean Water and Sanitation, (7) Affordable and Clean Energy, (8) Decent Work and Economic Growth, (9) Industry, Innovation and Infrastructure, (10) Reduced Inequality, (11) Sustainable Cities and Communities, (12) Responsible Consumption and Production, (13) Climate Action, (14) Life Below Water, (15) Life On Land, (16) Peace, Justice, and Strong Institutions, (17) Partnerships for the Goals.
If one can make a case that the proposed land-side development is in contravention of the 17 Goals, then one can craft a very strong case that all development we see going on in the Cayman Islands is in contention. The term “internationally recognized best practice for Climate Action” is so subjective that it has no real relevance except as a dog whistle. Next, take a look at the Environment Charter, signed in 2001: Like many a wish list where the items on the list all start with “To…” it is is an idealistic flight of fancy. Then take a look at who signed it for the Cayman Islands: W. McKeeva Bush. Enuf said! This duck ain’t flying.
Why pick on the DCB and this one project? If Amplify wants to jump on a far more urgent activist bandwagon, they should visit Cayman Brac and witness for themselves the rape of the land by those–quite often without proper planning permission–clearing the terrain flat with heavy equipment leaving not twig standing”. Amplify should behold how some bad actors are destroying the beach ridge, lowering the grade by several feet in some cases, removing the rock and inviting coastal flooding.
Again: Why pick on the DCB and this one project? The theory of Low Hanging Fruit comes to mind. According to what I can glean from those with whom I have discussed the matter, it is a given that the proposed over-water portion of the project –in a protected zone no less–will not be given a green light by Cabinet. XXXX
I cannot see where the DCB has violated any currently applicable regulations, standards, or binding policies. Those illegally clearing the land are violating the law, probably as we speak. What say Amplify to that? Crickets. I am not impressed.
“Old man yells at cloud”
Yes. That is the point. Much of the development ongoing in Cayman IS in contravention of Sustainable Development Principles. Jus because you don’t understand them doesn’t make it not so.
“Internationally recognized best practices for Climate Action” is not vague, it is literally internationally recognized and there are plenty of authoritative bodies and even countries promoting such principles.
The Environment Charter may have been signed by a charlatan, but it is still a written document signed by CIG.
You saying but what about the land clearing, is a red herring. People and groups like Amplify have been consistently speaking out and making the point that such development practices. Has it occurred to you that there is so much corruption going on in these islands that it is difficult to keep up? So speaking about one issue automatically makes anyone who doesn’t speak about another issue not have any relevance? Get over yourself.
“Why pick on the DCB?” They literally stated why in their release. Go read it.
@3:32
A summary of and light shed on the comment at 2:17>>>
–Nothing in your failed attempt at a refutation establishes that– relative to the Cayman Islands– the Environment Charter is anything more than a wish list and an idealistic flight of fancy. Like wetting one’s pants, one can see what was done, but in the end the warm feeling soon turns cold. Again: This duck ain’t flying.
–The over-water portion of the project in a Marine Park has not yet been given Cabinet approval. In the opinion of rational people close to the issue it will almost certainly not be given a nod by Cabinet. The “Sky is falling” band is being a bit hysterical. People here are commenting as if this portion of the project has been given approval; nothing could be further from the truth.
–If you take the time to critically study the concept of “Internationally recognized best practices for Climate Action” you will admit that it is a very subjective ideal and is interpreted in different ways by different groups and jurisdictions. FYI: I never stated it is “vague” as you allege. Did you bother to carefully read what I wrote before flying to the keyboard? Apparently not. (BTW: Vague and subjective are not synonyms, so you have no excuse for the change of the word.) By your own declaration “…there are plenty of authoritative bodies and even countries promoting such principles”. If you take a careful look at how those many are promoting such principles you will clearly see that they do so in their own way and for their own purposes. There is no unified standard or outcome relative to development. Subjective is indeed an apt description of the global approach to the concept. It means different things to different people. You cannot refute that fact. Regardless of the benefits–and I do see benefits in prudent implementation of the ideals –they remain just “wish list” concepts implemented in a cafeteria buffet style of choices. Considering it more carefully, I see where the indeterminate nature of the beast allows us to call it vague as well as subjective. While on the subject, please show us a globally adopted document entitled “Internationally recognized best practices for Climate Action”. It is interesting what comes up when one Googles the term. (grin)
–Thus far, no one has even tried to make a credible case that all or even most development we see going on in the Cayman Islands is in contention with the 17 UN Sustainable Development Goals. Can you? Since you are positive this is the case, I am awaiting you making that case rather strongly. However, I shall not hold my breath that you shall be successful in doing so in spite of your obvious zeal. I shall proffer that all 17 ideals leave room for much subjective and very liberal interpretation and implementation. This is clear when you study the modes of implementation and development in the UN countries that strongly tout the 17.
–You ask a question that suggests that there “..is so much corruption going on in these islands…”. Can you provide us with some credible evidence of your allegation as it applies to this development and the DCB decision? (No? Thought so!) Perhaps Amplify is barking up the wrong tree if corruption is at the root of the issue of inapposite development. Uncover the corruption and you have cut off the head of the wrong development snake.
Red herring? If Amplify is impotent to stop the very real and continual problem of the average persons being development scofflaws, you might win one battle against over-water cottages, but you lose the war.
Additionally: You cannot refute that in approving the land-based portion of the project that the DCB did nothing against any law, regulation, government mandated development initiative, or binding directive put to them. Your rabid wrath is directed in the wrong direction.
I personally have known every member of the DCB for many years. In my experience, as a body, the word “corruption” applied to the DCB just does not fly. Far too often “Corruption, corruption, corruption!” is the shrill, unsubstantiated screech of those suffering acute posterior discomfiture over an issue. Et tu…?
Until you can address the issue rationally, I shall suggest that you should–using your own suggestion–get over yourself.
Hey there please share more about what is going on in the Brac???
To this Bracker, it appears people from Grand came over for staycations, saw the property prices and bought up whatever they could for investment purposes. Most of the ones with whom I’ve spoken decry how more development has ruined a lot of Grand Cayman and driven up prices, making real estate too expensive for the average resident of Grand Cayman. They don’t seem to see — or they don’t care — that they themselves look poised to do the same thing to the Brac. It will be interesting to see how it plays out.
Sorry to shine light on this… but it is happening most everywhere that has a coastline or lakefront for the past decade. With the largest inter generational transfer of wealth in full steam, the recipient generations are buying and investing in real estate as a hobby. Add in the rising wealthy of countries like China and it is the perfect storm to push prices up-especially along coastlines.
Beginning with Scott Development selling the bluff? Goes downhill from there….
Thou dost protest too much…
2:17, You don’t get it do you? Yes, the sky is falling when we start turning over National Marine Parks over to developers to build over.
I have no problem making a case that National Marine Parks are for everybody not for a handful of developers to make a lot of money on. They are for EVERYONE.
You say that DCB has not violated any standards and binding policies. Since when were our National Parks open for developers? Obviously you have no idea about what National Parks are all about because you are preoccupied by the almighty dollar and really don’t give a damn about our future on these islands.
You should be ashamed of yourself.
This.
MPs, please change the planning laws so that anyone can object to, lets say, tourism developments over a certain size. At some point a proposal is large enough that it becomes a national development issue.
It Is. At Kingston Bite. So in the Marine Reserve/Park. Bobo, if you’re in LC just go over there with the DoE marine parks app on your phone and confirm for yourself.
Bight.
Bight me
Yep, our Marine Parks and National Parks are now fully open to developers.
Barkers is next.
Developers rule completely here.
The politicians and their families are lining their pockets.
Sorry to say, it is time for direct rule to save Caymanians from themselves and please don’t say I am being racist.
You probably aren’t racist, but why is the only solution you people seem to have, to every issue or problem that arises locally is “direct rule”. England (The Country which contains the capital of the UK and British Empire, London) and by extension the wider United Kingdom that is Great Britain, is plagued with its own insular problems from financial, NHS (Health), immigration, and migrant crises. Now add separation the EU/Brexit. In fact, every Caymanian should spend at least six months in England, preferably south, to get a preview of the mess the Cayman Islands will be in. If we don’t get our act together soon. Whitehall can’t get a grip on their own homegrown problems but somehow, will always be the referee and policy driver for the overseas territories? It’s about time some of you start seeking another tool from the toolbox…
3:48, But we are already in an unholy mess here in the Cayman Islands. You are delusional if you believe we are not in that condition.
We are quickly losing Seven Mile Beach and now we are going to lose Little Cayman. But you don’t get it.
Turkey 3:38, racism has absolutely nothing to do with the environment and sustainability. Fact you say the guy is “probably not racist” is ignorant.
So smart ass what tool do you suggest from your toolbox?
This place is going to the dogs very fast.
Direct rule is not the way to go. Responsible voting by registered voters, provided competent and honest candidates step forward, is what’s needed.
Good governance and respect for the rule of law is what’s required. These are not unachievable goals. However, when elected, MPs need to treat their positions as a “public servant” (not a “power wielder”), because it’s supposed to be a patriotic sacrifice for the greater good.
Responsible voting has not done much good with McKeeva the past 25 years.
You call that responsible.
Da de change unna woted fuh !!!
Change de marine park into an amusement park
Change de no-covid in Cayman to 7300 in quarantine
Change out ALT on de board to another developer on de board
Change de no-debt situation into borrowing $500 million
and on and on …
Yea, we felling the real ‘progressive’ moves now.
WTF are you talking about? There was NO change in the representation or MP’s for Cayman Brac & Little Cayman.
Actually DCB has been changed and Ju Ju is PACT. Moses don’t have any clout now.
OH please, you do not really think it’s Bracker’s calling shots over there in CYB/LCM.. wake up Joker .. PoliTricks bigga than that!
You’ll soon be adding increased port charges to the list.
Time for it….
PACT’s version of Sustainable Development is to sustain development anywhere, all the time and at any cost. While the huge windfall from property sales rolls is anyone surprised by their doublespeak?
Sustain the bank balance of their circle.
There was a huge ourpouring from the Little Cayman community, and many other supporters, urging Cabinet to deny the Coastal Works Application when the original overwater bungalows planning permit was filed. Hopefully that unamimous community semtiment will be remembered and taken into account if and when it comes before them.
You can hope but I think deep down we all know that there will be huge pressure and potentially other forms of incentives used by powerful Caymanians to get this approved by other Caymanians.
So doesn’t Grand Cayman have wooden docks/piers all over the place? We have private piers like what is planned for this project already in Little Cayman, but just because it to do with developing the sister islands its a major issue?? I don’t see how this will affect the eco system.. sorry, if anything it will make more safe habits for them. Look at the Seychelles islands. They have them all over the world!
11.51am Do you not know the difference between a private pier and an overwater bungalow rented out to tourists?.Please see your doctor.
Yes. One has pipes to a sewage system, the other does not. Or are you naive enough to think the waste goes in the water? Both have pipes to run water. Only the tourists won’t be throwing fish guts into the water after cleaning the fish or setting illegal lobster traps underneath.
2:13pm Yeah, here are the real differences. If you are referring to a private home pier, that is for the private rich people to do as they please without regulations, and ban Caymanians from stepping foot on it! Other private piers are for tourism products that will inject money into our economy via flights/jobs etc. Please enlighten us on the negative difference from a Ecologic standpoint between a Pier/Dive boat dock, and these bungalow rooms.. which is the main cause of the lobby against this project. Government just built a wooden pier on the northside of the island, is that causing ecological damage. People better look at that government cement boat dock they built at blossom village in front the government building! NOW THAT is doing the real damage! no more beach in that area.
Why the hell are we allowing private developments in a National Marine Reserve?
Have we completely lost it in the Cayman Islands?
Are National Marine Reserves now open to private developers?
They should be open to poachers too if that’s the case!
They will be. All those walkways and pilings, the snorklers will take every living thing.
LC has been open to poachers for years. DOE just looks the other way. Caymankind.
Look at FIN. Exceptions are made for certain people and not others.
Why would anyone think this is a good idea? It’s not like Little Cayman needs a gimmick to make it more popular. Shame on Mr. Bodden, of all those involved he should appreciate it the most as he spent many days fishing there as a young man.
Peppercorn Investments is owned by bankruptcy-fleeing (former) billionaire Bill Maines (Endicott Interconnect/Huron), Matthew Wight, and Naul Bodden. These applicants don’t deserve to retain any anonymity in persisting with these noxious ambitions.
Amplify Cayman should be drilling into the Endicott Interconnect/Huron’s business/environmental track record of dumping 80,000 gallons a day of leachate waste into the Susquehanna River. Bill Maines was overseeing that operation after being given Caymanian Status by Cabinet Grant in 2012 under then Premier Bush.
https://wnbf.com/endicott-residents-are-told-leachate-release-into-river-is-safe/
https://www.caymancompass.com/2012/11/30/first-la-approved-cabinet-statuses-granted/
Bankruptcy with 5000 creditors, and the end of a 101 year family dynasty:
https://lawstreetmedia.com/news/agriculture/maines-paper-food-service-files-for-bankruptcy-amid-acqusition-lawsuits/
And the nonsense just keeps flowing 😠
About time these projects and people behind tbem are are publicized. Thank you! Destruction of these Islands needs to stop and those long time ole families ‘born and bred’ Caymanians should be ashamed of yourselves.
The ole Caymanian families “born and bred” have sold out their children and grandchildren all for the almighty $$$. Not as if they don’t have enough already.
You are right about how they should be ashamed of themselves, however, they are totally blinded by $$$.
This place really needs a Green Party to counterbalance the developers but do Caymanians really want to save these islands? I really don’t know anymore.
Excellent point. A leak along the roadsides and beaches after a weekend or holiday reveal a lot.
A walk, not a leak, but I’m sure there are lots of leaks taken on the public beaches at night, along with discarded condoms and other disgusting rubbish
Cayman loves fleeing billionaires!
Thank you for this insight.
My main question would be, why should we be following up on this as volunteers?
Don’t we have official agencies, with well paid officials and experts who should be following up and acting on it?
I’d love to tell you that Rascals are gonna get to the bottom of this, but hasn’t enough verifiable input been presented by us and other concerned citizens and organizations for reasonable action by those we’ve hired by our vote and official agencies? EH
Eden, if you’re asking if the CIG can competently open a fresh browser tab/window and search the internet, the answer continues to be no. Too hard.
Among that Billionnaire’s great deals of public service cited by Franz Manderson in justifying his Cabinet Status Grant to the LA in 2012, was the donation of a AEDS defibrillation pack to a local soccer club.
To put that in perspective, this individual was at the time around #139 on Forbes Billy List, and the full retail cost <$2k. Imagine that for forever CI Status, and now this.
https://www.forbes.com/profile/maines/?sh=e5962cf634e1
https://www.medicaldevicedepot.com/Defibrillators-External-Defibrillators-AED-Difibrillators-s/200.htm?utm_source=BingAds&utm_medium=cpc&msclkid=f222cdece3ba15b96451afee006ae4f0
Matthew Wight and Naul Bodden. Caymanians. Not the fictitious overseas developers some people love to get angry about. Your own people trashing the island for personal gain.
Bill Maines is not fictitious, and he is also Caymanian, having successfully acquired Cabinet Status Grant for the price of one portable AEDS unit (MSRP <$2,000) in 2012. Those two well-known others, have their own associations and records, and it seems doubtful they care what anyone thinks of them at this point.
Can somebody confirm for me that this development is planned to be in the National Marine Park?
I had originally thought that the development was outside of the National Marine Park.
Yes! We need to take a stand against this. Go to your MP, MAKE them listen to you, WE are the voters, our voices MATTER!
Wont do anything , the MP’s you Woted for last year will just tell you want you want to hear , then do what they want anyway to the detriment of not just their electorate , but as we are now seeing the territory as a whole. * Unless you are a developer with drums stacked with Cash.
This is definitely where Central Government needs to intervene and DIRECT its Development Board to rescind the approval. It also needs to deny the application for the application for the marine park destruction.
Forget about who these Developers are and to whom they are related or who they voted for. Do it for Cayman!
Mr. Premier time for you to step up to the plate now and do something about the platform you ran on. If not its then time for you to step OUT!!!
Nike!
10:44 am Cabinet does not direct the DCB or the CPA. If some is aggrieved by a decision of the DCB or the CPA, their recourse is to appeal to the Planning Appeals Tribunal. You may not like Cayman’s laws, but they do need to be followed. And if you don’t like the laws, don’t blame the Boards or the Planning Department – lobby your MPs to change the legislation.
10.44am Yet it has been quoted in the press that Cabinet will need to approve the over water bungalows.
Maybe you should check the statute properly.
Yea I’ll write to my local MP David Wight, I’m sure he’ll get right on that for us….
He might. Can’t know until you write him.
Why should he wait until somebody writes to him – if he disagreed witb hus brother he should have spoken up, but why make work for themselves!
Proactive then.
And what exactly is the family relationship between David Wight and Matthew Wight?
4.14pm If you were from here you’d kniw they’re cousins not brothers.
Not taking up for any politician but Matthew is a first-generation Caymanian and not related to MP David Wight. If I’m not mistaken. The name probably originates from England but David’s Wight family goes back a few generations in cayman islands, mainly in the South Church Street area.
The Matthew Wight I knew was born and raised in the Cayman Islands.
Some people really talk rubbish- or maybe you don’t know who your friends are. David is from Derek. Matt is from Ian. The two fathers were brothers. Both fathers moved to Cayman and married Cayman society.
Thanks 10:09. Guess I will not waste my time writing to David.
When will be enough for these developers?? Are they not satisfied with the work they have done in fundamentally gentrifying and capitalizing on Caymanian shorelines?
Once this gets approved there will be more clamouring to get their piece and our Marine Park protections will be worth as much as Mac’s apologies.
And please, spare me the disingenuous claim that overwater bungalos will be a benefit to the environment, so convenient that you stand to make millions off of exploitation of the Marine Park AND you can do a better job of maintaining the wildlife than God.
It’s ridiculous, and these SAME people have been calling the shots for the last two decades. Get out of the way of a sustainable and equitable future for Caymanians, your “vision” does not mean anything other than your own personal enrichment.