Activists call for referendum on B3 choice for EWA
(CNS): Sustainable Cayman, the Cayman Islands’ leading environmental advocate group, is calling on the government to ask voters what they want regarding the East-West Arterial Road extension. Cabinet has said that it picked Route B3, but given the planning ministry’s misleading claims that the government selected the “environmentally optimal” choice for the road, the activists want the people to decide.
Sustainable Cayman said the decision was “politically motivated” and potentially disregards the needs of Caymanians, and argues that large-scale infrastructure projects should always consider the wider impact on the environment, economy and social fabric.
“With immigration growth projections upwards of 250,000, there is a real danger of Caymanians becoming an even smaller minority in their own country, risking erosion of their cultural identity,” a spokesperson for the eco-activists stated.
“Given the lasting impact of the EWA project, this decision should not proceed without direct public input. We call for a referendum question to be added to the ballot, allowing the people to choose the most sustainable option between Routes B2 and B3, based on the expert Shortlist Evaluation Report.”
The group contends that this would ensure that the “decision reflects the will of the people” and considers the community’s genuine needs, not just political or private interests.
The EWA project has raised significant concerns from the get-go, given the implications for the Central Mangrove Wetlands and, in the absence of any other traffic mitigating measures, that it will not resolve Grand Cayman’s congestion problem for commuters from the Eastern Districts.
Those concerns have grown significantly over the last few weeks after it was reported that the CIG had chosen Route B3, which will pose a greater threat to the environment than B2, a slightly shorter, cheaper and greener choice.
“While we recognise the complexity of these decisions, the claim that Route B3 is the best environmental option feels incomplete and prompts critical questions about the decision-making process,” the sustainable spokesperson said in a press release last week.
“The government’s assertion lacks essential hydrology and peat depth assessments, making it difficult to accept Route B3 as ‘environmentally optimal’. While the government claims that Route B3 offers favourable construction conditions, this assertion is unsubstantiated without complete design and hydrology analyses,” the activists said.
Given the threat to the wetlands, which are an essential part of Grand Cayman’s ecological system, providing flood protection, carbon sequestration, and species habitat, the decision to route through these sensitive areas, even if skirting direct impact on National Trust land, raises serious concerns about the government’s commitment to environmental stewardship.
Labeling Route B3 as environmentally optimal is “misleading and irresponsible” amid a global climate emergency, the activists said, noting that it prioritises short-term infrastructure goals over long-term environmental sustainability, as highlighted in the RSPB Route Corridor Optioneering Report.
“It risks irreversible damage to our island’s natural resources and undermines our resilience to climate change,” they said.
Sustainable Cayman believes it is crucial that the long-term consequences of fragmenting the central wetlands are properly considered. The activists warned that the decision will shape the Cayman Islands for generations and urged the government to reconsider and conduct comprehensive assessments.
“This moment calls for collaboration, partnership, and a commitment to true democracy,” the non-profit organisation said, and called for the road to be part of any referendum government plans. Topics that have been floated as potential referendum questions include the proposed cargo port.
“We ask the government to engage with the public, value transparency, and choose a path that ensures the well-being of our islands, communities, and future,” they said.
The government’s claims that the road will be environmentally friendly because of less greenhouse gas emissions are contrary to the findings of the EIA and the work of various experts. Sustainable Cayman is not the only one asking for a more comprehensive analysis.
The potential reduction of traffic emissions has to be weighed against the environmental cost of peat removal and potential industrial activity along the route, which opens up the wetland for more development, a stated aim of a number of leading members of the community and former politicians, as noted in a recent case before the Central Planning Authority.
- Fascinated
- Happy
- Sad
- Angry
- Bored
- Afraid
Category: Local News
We are NOT building a dock in Breaker!
We ARE building the EWA extension!
Cut that canal straight inland at Breakers puts you back to one single track or one bloody great big detour with more roads!
This EWA is about a cargo port, plain and simple and no it is not just roulette opinion it is all the people who should make this decision.
The Bayers lost their right of ways and their land. B’Towners and E’Enders get woke!
And a road straight to North Side. To benefit a couple families.
Referendum this. Referendum that. Y’all think this is California? Or Switzerland?
Go sit down, Kenneth. You’ve already had your say. Let those who still care about Cayman talk.
Yes. The Switzerland of the Caribbean – with its people fighting to prevent us becoming yet another regional #s***hole.
More fundamentally, the problem is that the current regime wasn’t formed by voters. It was coddled together by monied developers that have corrupted every level of the civil service apparatus that is supposed to defend truthful accounting/notice, due process, transparency, and significant overriding public interest. Cayman’s voters need to petition the FCO and Governor for changes to the Cayman Islands Elections Law – prohibiting those with criminal records, disqualifying ritual violators of Nolan Principles, repealing indemnities put in place recently by this regime, and restoring a semblance of accountability and legal/custodial sentence recourse – to the those they purport to serve: the public. The ACC, SIPLC, DOE, OAG, need to be given adequate resources to enforce laws and process already on the books. We probably also need a new Dep Governor and Attorney General. Until then, the appearance of fairly elected governance in the Cayman Islands is just smoke. Any referendum on which bad policy to adopt, is not going to be a productive undertaking.
So, 10:56, it was “monied developers” who went into the polling stations and into the voting booths and voted for the slate of candidates we (alas) ended up with? Utter bullcrap. It was US…we the “woters” who are so sensible and proud of our heritage blah blah blah that came up with this bunch of “I born ya” losers and tossers.
Voters did not come up with this career pool of duds, but it’s who they are stuck to pick from every time, because of the embedded flaws in the Elections Law that engrain these candidates and artificially restricts participation of other Caymanians willing to serve. That local developers also enjoy the freedom to put their fingers on the scales, is a separate judicial and governance problem.
There is no way Caymanians will agree on any thing. Ever. Never have and never will. Just another lame excuse to end up doing what they do best. Nothing. Except bleed money away on nothing of value instead of spending it on what is needed. Like more vehicles for crash King John John. Like agreeing on doing nothing about the Dump. Again. Its OK. It pretty much guarantees that Cayman Islands will never be developed into anything more than it already is. Perfect.
Undoubtedly B3 offers the greatest profit potential to political interests. That is the only metric that counts for this government.
At the moment we have but one, one lane road for traffic from three Eastern Districts to get to the Capital, GT. We got cut off in Hurricane Ivan. There has been times when people missed their flights because an accident blocked the roadway and brought vehicular movement to a standstill. Have you ever experienced that sort of anxiety? Please ignore the “who owns what” phobia and do what’s in Cayman’s best interest and build the EWA. We accept that there will be a small impact to the environment, as definitely trees have to be cleared and land filled to do the road, but it’s not like the whole forest is being destroyed. Mitigate the impacts as best as we can, but build the road! A Referendum will be a waste of money, a waste of time, a delay tactic causing more frustration and in the end, the same road will still have to be done. So let’s cut the nonsense out and get it built. It’s a critical piece of infrastructure that is crucial to our future.
Got to respect you for putting your name to your articulated viewpoint, Mr Wood.
Perhaps he will care to explain his particular interest.
Notice he is careful to say “ignore the who owns what”.
Joey always stood beside you but not on this one. Build the road to go where? We get faster and stuck in traffic at the usual spots every morning and evening? A waste of money and a pricey cost to our environment. A chance I don’t think I would like to take for my children’s kids.
Schools have been out and no issues getting to work on time. So we are aware of the issues and know of the fixes. We saw working from home worked during Covid why not give companies incentives to allow their employees to work from home? Have some government offices move to the Easter districts, etc…
I agree
Mr Woods you are 100 per cent correct, couldn’t have said it better myself. The only thing I can add is that this road should have been built 20 years ago and it should be as straight as possible as the shortest route between two points is a straight line. It grieves my soul to see how so many newcomers that have nothing to risk or at stake can invade a country and create so much havoc. Every day on this island there is a new organization born here for the sole purpose to suppress and delay progress.
I say we do a referendum come election time and it include all pressing topics: environment, cruise dock, gambling, etc. Holding it this year for only one question is silly & a waste of funds.
abortion & weed
Duty free alcohol and tobacco
Abortion yes. Weed no.
5:50, you think the kind of voters who vote for the likes of Seymour, Bryan, Bernie Bush and Mac (just to name a few) could actually handle a voting document that asked them to read something carefully and think?
Just asking: you want the same electorate that gave us these crappy politicians who can’t make a right decision to go to the polls and make the right decision on their own in a referendum?
The choice of B3 has nothing to do with anything but Mr Dart’s quarry land where he wants his new cargo port to go. We had to re-route the road away from the sea by Breakers so his properties can be accessed by a canal from the sea We will soon announce the Breakers site as the next “choice” made by Cabinet for a new port. Forget complaining about environmental damage, Dart eventually gets what Dart wants.
Dont worry this issue will be solved long before the population reaches 250000.All those hotels and apartments will be vacant because nobody will want to work or vacation in hell and the government will be on the hook for billions. I just feel sorry for the caymanians that depend on rental property for retirement income.
We do owe DART an invoiced receivable for the duty waivers exceeded, backdated with interest. Eventually, the registered votership wisens-up, DART gets no new applications heard via any UBO obscuring nominee, because of their own history of failing to honour and deliver on their promises, and/or exploitation. Their continued ambition to corrupt successive government policy on dredging is very telling. DART can throw a tantrum, and leave. All responsible and honest developer(s) should be welcomed in the Cayman Islands, knowing this is the Cayman Islands, not Bahamas, or little Jamaica. There are several (bigger) billionaire families already resident in Cayman that might easily step in to the very large truth vacuum, and actually do something to add CIG revenue, local jobs, training, capacity, or something proportionately redeeming and useful to bring any developer priority treatment back into equilibrium.
If you have evidence or proof you should publish it for the public’s benefit.
Resigned disinterest is what got us here. Maybe it’s time for a new consequence-based adult approach?