Sammy takes on Alden for Red Bay seat

| 12/02/2021 | 83 Comments
Cayman News Service
Sammy Jackson

(Press release): Samuel “Sammy” Jackson has announced that he will be a candidate in the (now expedited) upcoming General Election on 14 April 2021. Jackson is a candidate in the constituency of Red Bay and will presumably be running against the current premier, Alden McLaughlin.

“I have come to realise that unless this country is able to obtain credible and competent representation, our future will not be owned or even enjoyed by our children and grandchildren. This is what has provoked me to humbly offer my services to this country, because my conscience dictates that I do so, otherwise I would feel that I have let down the younger generations of Caymanians who will come behind me, who will not be able to obtain a proper education, or even when they obtain an education, they will not be able to find a job, let alone a career, in their own country, if we do not try our best to fix all that ails this country now.“

Jackson is family orientated man, but also an experienced attorney-at-law, with twenty-seven years of law practice in the Cayman Islands, and has experience in working in the civil service, the Judicial Department and over two decades of private practice.

He has spent many years offering his assistance to legislative initiatives and has been appointed to and served on the board of a number of statutory authorities, including the Immigration Appeals Tribunal, the Health Services Authority, the Planning Appeals Tribunal, the Electricity Regulation Authority and the ICT Authority, which he chaired for some two years. These appointments have allowed Jackson to gain valuable experience and insight into government’s operations and challenges, which he intends to harness to bring about positive changes for the people of the Cayman Islands.

Why Red Bay?

Jackson decided to run in the district of Red Bay after a number of the area’s constituents made representations to him that they would appreciate his representation since they were dissatisfied with their representative, mainly because the needs of the Red Bay community have largely been neglected.

Issues and challenges which Jackson has identified as needing to be addressed post-haste relevant to the Red Bay Community include:

  • Traffic issues
  • Crime
  • Lack of parks/green spaces and public amenities
  • Improvements to quality of life and social and economic welfare
  • Improvement of living and working environments
  • Indifference to public views in respect of development and social projects

Transparent and Accountable Representation

Jackson states, “I have noticed with concern lately that there are far more complaints regarding the lack transparency, accountability and, generally, the rule of law, many of which seem to be punctuated by an attitude of indifference on the part of government to the ordinary rights of members of the public and there now seems to be an almost complete disregard for even the views and wishes of the very people who appointed them.

“I will, if granted the opportunity, take my sworn constitutional duty as my immutable instructions from the people who elect me, to always act in their best interests, as well as the interest of these islands and its many varied people. I am NOT for sale. I do not have any hidden agendas or corporate sponsorship and I will not act for special interest groups against the interest of this country. I believe that decisions regarding important matters should be made rationally, based on merit, not political expediency.”

Education and Quality of Life

Jackson believes that the previous administrations have left the people of the country behind and that there is significant need to address the failings of government in the field of education and professional opportunities for Caymanians. “I believe that no Caymanian who is capable and willing to work should ever be reduced to beggarly status, relying on handouts to feed themselves and their children, while there are thousands of people here on work permits earning much more and enjoying a higher standard of living than the average Caymanian. That is not charity, that is victimization.”

“I believe that the people of this country deserve access to all of the opportunities that this country offers. I do not believe that there is a single job existing in this country that a Caymanian cannot be trained to perform. I refuse to believe otherwise, even though I recognise that if we do not take serious remedial action to address the failings of government on education, that will only serve to further prejudice opportunities for Caymanians in the future.

“In order to achieve this we need to focus on identifying why the funds we are spending on education are not resulting in better returns for our youth, and do whatever we need to do in order to change this. We need to focus on providing tradesman opportunities, and importantly, we need to stop legislating away the rights of Caymanians to find job opportunities in the financial services industries of this country. There must be a future for our youth, otherwise what are we doing any of this for? GDP means near to nothing if our own future is left behind.”

Sustainable Development

Jackson has become well known over the years in his role as attorney-at-law, specializing in development and planning law, but he firmly believes that rather than simply allowing more development, what the country needs to focus on is “sustainable development”.

Jackson states, “I believe in sustainable development and protecting the environment, and by ‘sustainable development’ I mean development which is not only proportionate in terms of scale and massing, such that it can be sustained by the country’s infrastructure, but also development which actually benefits the economic welfare of the people of this country, without causing irreversible damage to the environment. Development deals between the government and private sector should be done transparently and with the best interest of the people of the Cayman Islands at heart, not secretly behind Cabinet doors.”

Jackson believes the country can make headway with advancing further sustainable enterprises including undertaking legislative initiatives to encourage sustainable farming practices and focus on green transportation and development opportunities.

Respect for Women’s Rights

Another issue important to Jackson is ensuring that women are respected and represented by their representatives. “Recent events have illuminated the absolute need for public education and social campaigning of women’s rights. In 2021 women need to feel secure in their personal and professional capacities. I want to unequivocally state that violence or bias against women is absolutely unacceptable and our country cannot and should not ever tolerate any such behaviour.”

Jackson also believes that there is room for growth with respect to protecting women’s rights and putting in place practical measures to ease the burden on working mothers to balance their careers and family life, such as reviewing whether maternity leave provisions should be extended and to encourage businesses to stagger working hours.

Respect of the Voice of the People

“One of the most disappointing aspects of the past administrations has been their lack of respect for the voice of the people of this country. I understand that if I am elected, it is my duty to represent the people and I strongly believe that in matters of national importance, such as the development of cruise berthing facilities, the voice of the people needs to be of paramount importance. A government should not be fighting its own people and acting against the wishes of the majority of the population.

“If a situation arises, such as the cruise port petition, I will see it as my duty to allow the people of this country to have their say instead of fighting with all my might to prevent a petition vote from taking place. It is absurd that a government spends the peoples’ money to fight against them and to fund media campaigns against their interests, this has to end.”

Leadership with Integrity

Jackson’s campaign will focus on providing the people of Red Bay and the Cayman Islands with truly transparent and accountable leadership. He will be going door-to-door to meet his constituents and hear their views, suggestions and concerns.

“I believe that there is no excuse, save for genuine cases of national security, for government to hide the truth from the public. My approach will be to do everything I can to build a legacy of truth and integrity. That is my pledge to you. I do not believe in telling people what they want to hear, but instead telling them what they need to hear: the truth. No excuses, no hidden agendas, no price tags.”

Jackson believes that the Cayman Islands need “a lot more meritocracy and a lot less cronyism. If elected, I will do my utmost to always act in the best interests of the people of this country: Firstly, my constituents, and, just as importantly, all my fellow Caymanians. I look forward to meeting my constituents and more of my fellow Caymanians and hearing your views and opinions.It is time for the people to take their power back.”

CNS will publish verbatim press releases for candidates and parties or political groups announcing that they are running in the May 2021 General Election. Please submit to info@caymannewsservice.com

Subsequent press releases may be used to inform CNS articles in the usual way.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Tags:

Category: Candidates

Comments (83)

Trackback URL | Comments RSS Feed

  1. Anonymous says:

    As a candidate, how do you respond to the lack of water quality monitoring for locals, children, and visitors alike:

    https://cnslocallife.com/2019/05/caymans-waters-safe/

  2. Naya Boy says:

    People need to see both Alden and Mckeeva for what they really are defunct political leaders run and supported by some pretty unsavory characters and anti Cayman agenda’s because they no longer see any political or financial advantage or reward in doing so. Sad times ahead if we keep them running our government. Make a Change NOW! for Cayman’s future its time!

    15
    3
  3. Anonymous says:

    VOTE SAMMY JACKSON

    23
    2
  4. KPolitico says:

    Hey Sammy.

    You claim that you have an arms length relationship with Dart. My question to you is have you used your company, Jackson Equipment Services to do any work for Dart or any of your other high net worth clientele? Are you providing one stop shopping services?

    These questions are asked because as the expert Planning attorney, you will have first hand knowledge of any development projects coming into the pipeline. And so you have the opportunity to sweeten the deal with your equipment services company. Nothing wrong with gaining maximum financial advantage to generate wealth but it’s a bit troubling that you plan to represent the small man on the street. The same man who may not get a fair shot at bidding for those lucrative development projects where equipment services are concerned.

    It’s important you address those concerns. Articulating the right tone for voters is not enough.

    2
    10
    • Anonymous says:

      Im pretty sure doesn’t have a heavy equipment business that provides services to anyone for construction work. Pretty sure you’ve got that totally wrong because of the name of the company. You’re thinking of what Scott’s etc do that’s totally different.

      8
      3
      • Anonymous says:

        Maybe he should declare nature of business himself to avoid ambiguity because the name of the company could result in voter misunderstanding? 🤷‍♂️

        • Anonymous says:

          Yes that’s a good idea. I’ll try to message him. He probably doesn’t realize it’s confusing people.

      • Cleanasawhistle says:

        Correction – Company name is Jackson Heavy Equipment Services. The name spells it out and is not arguable.

        Those of you using phrases “Im pretty sure” and “I think” are simply trying to cover up this. Mr. Jackson needs to declare to the public, the nature of business and contracts that has been fulfilled. What is the obvious reason that a “Planning Expert Attorney” have a business that can benefit from first hand knowledge of development projects in the pipeline? I say if Mr. Jackson cares about his reputation as he does and operates “arm length” and wants to start a campaign based on transparency for the people, then he will find the time to declare this.

        Offcourse, I am sure back then, he had no ambitions for running for public office an it didn’t matter back then.

        The excuse of his too busy, to even read those comments is hogwash.

    • Anonymous says:

      Alden’s clean up crew putting with the spin. Vote Sammy Jackson. Landslide victory.

      16
      5
    • Anonymous says:

      Sammy’s a busy dude so he’s probably not going back to this article to check the comment section. But I’m sure he has meetings where you can ask him these questions. Here’s his Facebook page where you can also find his phone number and email. https://m.facebook.com/sammyjacksonky/

    • Anonymous says:

      His company doesn’t do heavy equipment services… I don’t even understand what you’re asking?

      5
      2
    • Anonymous says:

      2:25 Can someone explain when has working for DART became ILLEGAL!

      11
    • Anonymous says:

      What’s wrong with you? Sammy’s business exists since a decade, it wasn’t just created to profit from some insider knowledge as you seem to make it out, He will also earn less if elected than he earns now as an attorney. What exactly are you willing to sacrifice for this Country?

  5. Big Times Ahead Cayman says:

    Alden got this the Bag bro him and senor Eric Bush got big plans when he gets the international affairs minister’s post The globe trotting will never done Next Stop Savile Row to tailors Boyz and to Boltons crip at SW10!

    8
    8
  6. Red Hot says:

    Hey Sammy.

    Read your article.

    As you would know more than most, you had better prepare for entering the political arena and expect the type of commentary accordingly.

    But it’s an opportunity to have an open dialogue. I know you have a following on here many of which perhaps don’t live in Red Bay, yourself included, but that’s quite fine. I am preparing for the significant thumbs down.

    Based on the introduction of your message, you mentioned that you decided to run, mainly because constituents asked you to and not on your own merit?

    Why not run for West Bay which you know like the back of your hand versus Red Bay?

    You highlighted a few problems with Red Bay, crime being one of them. If I asked you where is crime worst, Red Bay and West Bay, which would you choose? And what would be your solution?

    You mentioned traffic issues. Red Bay do not have any traffic issues per se. There is a bottleneck issue coming down to the Hurley’s roundabout, mainly from east bound traffic. So you need to specifically address where that problem is and what are your plans to fix it.

    Based on the attached articles, no doubt you have been representing some high net worth clients on some controversial projects with environmental impacts. Now I get you are an expert at the Planning Law and so most of these high net worth clients come to you to get their development through the gates. This ofcourse carries a certain perception and so you will have to demonstrate how you connect/have connected the common man on the street.

    I will ask you this question, would you buck against the biggest land owner in the Cayman Islands, who is depriving the next generation of Caymanians, an affordable opportunity to own a piece of land? What mechanisms do you think can be put in place to ensure the next generation get a fair shot at owning a piece of the Cayman Islands? What kind of legislation would you propose?

    You have contributed to the Planning Law. That’s why you have been seen as an expert. Are you going to continue your legal work or act in a consultancy capacity if you get elected?

    Again open dialogue. You will get punches thrown at you from your political opponents. So how you handle it will demonstrate your fitness for representing any constituency.

    15
    2
    • alaw says:

      1:49 I am tired of the STUPID COMMENTS, of Dart DEPRIVING GENERATIONS of LAND, Dart OWNS the LAND that he BOUGHT.
      As a CAMANIAN, that is the SAME WAY my Family
      and I OWN LAND!

      9
      6
      • Anonymous says:

        8:23 pm, right, Dart bought the Land, Caymanians Sold The Land. So why blame Mr Dart, if you all want to blame someone, blame the Caymanians that sold the Land, in all 3 Islands, all over one can see Land for sale.

        16
        2
      • Anonymous says:

        Exactly! People commenting all the time about Caymanians not owning land…..pure rubbish! Lots of young Caymanians, even in my immediate family, have bought and own land. Older members of my family have held onto land that’s been in the family for generations. It’s simply not for sale.

        Also, Dart didn’t steal land. Caymanians saw dollar signs and SOLD it to him. That is their right! However, some of the greedy fools want the money for their land and yet expect to retain the land.

        If you want land, don’t waste money and get that savings account built up and then buy some land!

        5
        2
      • Anonymous says:

        So true! Why don’t people look behind the ‘Dart Curtain’ and see who’s at the top and THEIR associations, companies and spouses. Dart Group is made up of many advisors and many are ‘new’ Caymanians only worried about the money.

      • Anonymous says:

        If you read the NRA Agreements, it’s clear that Cabinet Ministers sold and swapped prime acreage of OUR crown lands for a little bit of money, in exchange for supervising some domestic works using the least transparent public departments and resources, while dangling expiry-date promises, long ago withdrawn. Not really a great bargain one the whole for us. Certainly not an RFPed developer mechanism open to competitive bidders. This was a deal struck by private appointment.

  7. Red Bay voter says:

    For Anonymous at 10:31 am
    Sorry, the threads are getting totally confusing but I wanted to thank you for responding to me. I promise I have taken note. I haven’t fully decided yet, though.

    • Anonymous says:

      You are welcome. I’m sorry if I came across as harsh or condescending earlier. I’m just an ordinary Caymanian who only wants the best for this country. I hope this election can bring some much-needed change. Wish you and Cayman’s people all the best.

  8. Sunrise Political Brokers says:

    The removal of Alden has now become essential to save these islands and its environment but what we must ensure is that some of these backers who wish him gone are not merely trying to simply become the new political Tyrants Mr Jackson be careful with those business chameleons who eat and dine with the same political demons who are merely looking after their very own interest.

    25
    3
  9. Saltcreek Rocky Lizard says:

    Alden and the Turtle Dumpling Gang are wuking hard Bobo those building consultant fees are now under serious threat and the even realm is partaking in this endeavor now too to keep the money flow open to their dependents across the pond. I don’t envy you Mr Jackson tougher men have failed.

    14
  10. Soft Touch says:

    Alden not worried his mentor Kurt going around mumbling threats XXXX if you don’t vote 4 him the UK is goin to cut us off when its Infact the other way wrong,but believe you me XXXX. A lot riding on this one Cayman Status Quo must be maintained at all cost. Even the replacement politburo is filled like minded clones.

    18
  11. Anonymous says:

    Sammy, as much as I want you in GTN,I believe if anyone can move Alden, it will be you. We need change and honest caring people. Alden and McKeeva have been around for so long that when they couldn’t find enough fools to join them they joined up..UDP or PPM, same difference. Hope people see them for what they are this year.

    32
    5
  12. Anonymous says:

    I hope he does to Alden what Kenneth Bryan did to Marco in the last election..

    We need new blood this time around..Let’s put the remnants of PPM and UDP to rest.

    32
    8
  13. Anonymous says:

    Go Sammy go..I wish I could vote in Red Bay.

    It’s unfortunate that we can’t find more Caymanians like him to run..

    27
    3
  14. Anonymous says:

    Best candidate I’ve seen in all my days! You go Sammy!

    26
    4
  15. Anonymous says:

    Oh, Anomymous knew and admitted that Sammy’s quarry was not an illegal operation, then why mention it in the first place? I believe you are one of these propagandists for hire to throw dirt on people and since you couldn’t find any you made it sound as if you did! Hypocrite!

    30
    3
  16. Anonymous says:

    A good administrative law attorney holds government entities to the law. That is all a lawyer in this field does. If the laws need to be changed that needs to be done by parliament. All a lawyer can do is point out what the law is so don’t kill the messenger. Cayman has serious issues with government authorities making up powers they don’t actually have which is something you don’t necessarily care about until it impacts you personally and at the rate gov is going now it will impact us all in one way or another in no time.

    23
  17. Anonymous says:

    Questions for Mr Jackson:
    1. If elected, would you advocate to change the membership of the CPA?
    2. If it fell to you, how would you choose the new membership?
    3. What would you change in the planning law and why?
    4. What would you change in the NCL and why?
    5. Do you believe the NCC has too much power, not enough, the right amount?
    6. Do you believe the DOE has too much power, not enough, the right amount?

    19
  18. Anonymous says:

    He’s a great attorney! We would be lucky to have him fighting for the people.

    34
    4
  19. Anonymous says:

    Good luck Sammy

    30
    4
  20. Anonymous says:

    What a pleasant surprise. Sammy is a man of his word.

    37
    3
  21. Anonymous says:

    Yes Sammy!!!fantastic news!

    37
    1
  22. Anonymous says:

    Sammy Jackson has an unlicensed quarry: https://www.caymancompass.com/2012/05/14/conflict-over-west-bay-quarrying/

    “For years, attorney J. Samuel Jackson – whose company Jackson Heavy Equipment Services Ltd. has a contract with Dart to excavate at Uncle Luke’s Pond – has claimed the Water Authority and government have no jurisdiction over the West Bay excavation activity because it is unlikely to harm faraway groundwater sources, and because the quarrying has been continually occurring 
since the 1950s.”

    Sammy Jackson represents FIN development: https://fingrandcayman.com/person/j-samuel-jackson/

    Sammy Jackson represents Kel Thompson: https://caymannewsservice.com/2020/10/balboa-case-reveals-planning-process-problems/

    Sammy Jackson thinks the CPA is too environmentally minded:
    https://www.caymancompass.com/2020/11/17/cpas-balboa-beach-decisions-to-be-appealed/

    “Thompson’s attorney Samuel Jackson said of the refusal, “We have expressed our interest to appeal the CPA’s decision on the grounds that it was irrational, and was unduly influenced by the National Conservation Council, which really had no real role in such a decision to begin with.”

    Sammy Jackson doesn’t believe in sidewalks, or that developers should lose even the smallest piece of their profits of their lands.

    The NRA asked for a 6 ft sidewalk (https://www.planning.ky/wp-content/uploads/Mcpa0920.pdf)

    “The NRA has further recommended, or rather, demanded, that “a six (6) foot
    sidewalk shall be constructed on Paddington Lane, Godfrey Nixon Way and the
    Esterly Tibbetts Highway within the property boundary”. Such a demand is unlawful
    and, if the same were to be adopted or followed by the CPA, this would lead the CPA
    into appealable error on at least two of the statutory grounds of appeal, in that,
    such a decision would be erroneous in law and would be unreasonable.
    We have noted in recent times in a number of applications where the NRA has
    persistently insisted on the CPA implementing through the planning approval
    process that any development which borders a public road must include the
    provision of public sidewalks within the boundaries of the development parcel, on
    privately owned land, and thereby effectively dedicate the same to the public’s use,
    without payment of any compensation to the landowner.
    However, as we have protested in other such matters, this approach is in fact
    unlawful, and clearly offends the spirit and intent of even the Roads Law itself as
    well as the very concept of proprietorship of land as enshrined in the Registered
    Land Law. This is so because, firstly, any such condition imposed on planning
    permission would be tantamount to the deprivation of valuable privately owned
    land and would, in the current application, significantly reduce the size of the
    development site itself, thereby causing a further net loss in terms of loss of
    developable area. It should be noted that “net loss” is the very principle upon which
    compensation is calculated for acquisitions of land under the Roads Law.”

    Sammy Jackson stood out against the National Conservation Law, which is literally the only piece of sustainable development legislation and only just just just barely: http://archive.caymannewsservice.com/2013/12/04/ncl-not-being-rushed/

    Sammy Jackson does not believe in the community should have any say in development, if they don’t own land next door: http://archive.caymannewsservice.com/category/science-and-nature/page/122/

    “We want to know who is in the room and if they fall outside of the 1500 feet objection they have no business being here,” said Jackson.

    “Ebanks said she was very concerned about how Berry’s lawyer had simply dismissed the objections submitted by the Department of the Environment. She said Jackson had told the CPA it should not even look at the objection as the DoE had absolutely no legal standing, as there was no environmental law in Cayman.” “We believe, however, regardless of his belittling the environmental objections, members of the Planning Authority are more intelligent than that and they will consider the comprehensive objections submitted by the DoE and ourselves,” she said. Indeed, Kenneth Ebanks, the Director of Planning, recently attended a climate change conference and said that Cayman needed to improve its environmental protection legislation.

    16
    32
    • Anonymous says:

      You realize A lawyers job is to represent his clients position? You realize that when a lawyer defends a murderer it doesn’t mean they think murder is ok? You realize all of that, right? Because it seems like you’re desperate to find something. He is a damn good lawyer and he will make a damn good politician and his talent will then be used for the people. Goodness if lawyers are responsible for their clients positions then every lawyer in history would be a bad person or guilty of crimes…

      31
      12
      • Anonymous says:

        Lawyers can choose who they represent.

        20
        15
        • Anonymous says:

          Actually that’s not true. Our code requires us to represent ALL unless there is a conflict. You think anyone wants to represent real bad guys- like rapists?

          23
          5
          • Anonymous says:

            Could you quote the part of the code of practice which says that private attorneys are forced to represent developers?

            11
            11
          • Anonymous says:

            @6:19 Lawyers have ethical duties to the court, their client and society greater than their personal values. Their duty to the court is paramount. It’s a bit like doctors and their Hippocratic oath: a doctor wouldn’t neglect a dying patient just because they didn’t like what the patient did – the doctor’s oath is more important; it’s exactly the same with lawyers. However, if a lawyer was personally conflicted and it would affect their duties then they could recuse themselves

            13
          • Anonymous says:

            What code?

            2
            2
          • Anonymous says:

            That is total hogwash.

            3
            3
    • Anonymous says:

      Look- law is law. His job to to represent a client on the law. If you don’t like the law you have to change the law. He’s not the one writing them, he’s just good at his job and maybe what we need then is someone who actually knows the laws to sit in the la and fix them. You’re trying to blame the messenger. Alden was the one who had the power to change them… so….

      31
      3
    • Anonymous says:

      Reading through this gives me the impression that someone is putting a lot of effort into discrediting this candidate. He must be viewed as a serious opponent and Alternate to Alden:; please Mr. Jackson respond,

      34
      3
    • Samuel Jackson says:

      Clearly the political propaganda machinery has now kicked into overdrive, and there is a massive concerted effort to try to discredit me, since I have dared to challenge our great leader.
      Given the extent of information that they have dredged up and the obvious spin that is being put on the same, it appears that they have deployed a significant amount of resources, at least some of which are being paid for by the taxpayers of this country. That is what Alden and his crew are all about, twisting the truth and producing spin, yet they keep their dirty deals – also done at the taxpayer’s expense – under wraps, by telling us that those deals are “privileged” and “commercially sensitive”.
      Let me just say this once, so that it is clearly understood, I will sue all those responsible for defamation of my character, if necessary, so you should tread very carefully when you take liberty with my reputation. Perhaps a read of the seminal case of Bodden vs. Bush (as in Jim vs McKeeva) would be very instructive.
      Let me answer this salacious commentary by the coward who posted this, line by line:
      Everyone knows I own the company that has been excavating, since 2011, at the now Dart-owned marlpit which was started by my grandfather many decades ago.
      I can say, without fear of contradiction, that the contract that my company has with Dart is an arms-length agreement for such services, along the lines of what scores of other local contractors have had and still have with Dart.
      Indeed, my every dealing with any and all of the Dart entities in the past has always been arms-length and legitimate, and I have nothing to hide there.
      For the record, since I’ve seen suggestive comment by others elsewhere that I’m “sponsored by Dart’: I have NOT received one single dollar from Dart or any other corporate entity for this campaign and I certainly would not accept even a donation from anyone which comes with strings or conditions attached or with some hidden agenda.
      Anyone who has dealt with me will tell you that. My reputation means more to me than money, and I am not going to be anybody’s stooge. It really is that simple.
      When that Compass article was written, I had already appeared before the CPA, made my case, based on law, and the CPA, who had the opportunity to take legal advice on its own, agreed with me that the continued excavation of Uncle Luke’s Pond was exempt from planning control, which they documented in writing. Without that, I would and could not have even started that project.
      Indeed, it was open to the DoE and/or the Water Authority to challenge that position, yet the decision was taken to instead propagandize the issue by way of that article (which in hindsight I wish I had sued them for) and to misrepresent the true legal position, whilst breaching legal privilege enjoyed by the CPA regarding advice given on another matter. That is how too many government authorities have been functioning for many years now, rather than following the law.
      Simply put, if either myself or my company had breached some law, why wasn’t either me or my company prosecuted? As a matter of personal conduct, especially given my obligations as an attorney, I make sure to not offend laws, period. But I recognize that there will always be others who are envious of what others can achieve, and will do anything they can to smear others and tear them down.
      This has already caused me to sue two family members for defamation, and I have a signed letter of apology that I obtained along with a large settlement over this very same project, so perhaps the propagandist that wrote this commentary should bear that in mind, because you cannot hide behind an “anonymous” title from a Grand Court order for discovery.
      As regards my acting for the FIN project, Kel Thompson (my client is actually the Waterfront Center Ltd.), etc. anyone who has even a basic understanding of the nature of the attorney/client relationship should know that lawyers are duty bound by professional obligation to represent their client’s position as best as is possible, within the confines of the relevant law. That is what I have always done, whether my personal views are different or not. Anything less would be a dereliction of the professional duty that I owe to my client.
      In any event, I have also represented hundreds of clients who have opposed many large projects, including most recently a 10 storey hotel, then again on the second iteration of the same hotel, which was 7 storeys, as well as the Beach Bay Mandarin, the 10 storey Lacovia redevelopment project and before those the Grove project, just to name a few. And, just as when I represent a developer, I have done my best to represent those folks to the best of my ability.
      It should always be borne in mind that it doesn’t matter what any special interest group may want or opine on what the law should be, it is what the law dictates that matters. Anything otherwise would be anarchy.
      That is why I have decided to make this step, because I have seen the constant legislative tinkering by the past two administrations to satisfy this or that special interest initiative or project, and we all know that this administration has done this in secret and refused to share the details with the public that they are supposed to be serving.
      As regards the comments about my purported position on sidewalks, let me be clear on my personal position: I think it is lamentable, in fact, shameful, that the NRA, which is statutorily charged with the responsibility for providing for safe and sensible vehicular, bicycle, AND pedestrian traffic, has not only failed in most instances to provide for sidewalks and bike lanes, but they instead use the planning process to inveigle the CPA into taking away private land to donate for such public purposes, thereby avoiding having to use the lawful route of acquisition of land in accordance with the Roads Law. I have said this many times now to the CPA and I stand by it. That isn’t a matter of personal preference, but it is my duty to prevent the government from effective breaching their own laws and stealing land from private landowners in flagrant breach of Section 15 of our Bills of Rights. Simply put, I think the NRA should be providing public sidewalks, and bike lanes, along the side of every public road, wherever viable, and they should use the procedure prescribed by law to acquire the land for that.
      As regards the National Conservation Law, everyone knows that I publicly opposed that law, not in concept, but rather the way it was drafted, simply because it was written in the form of National Park styled legislation, writ wide across the entire country, with complete disregard for existing lawful due process and landowners rights. And it was particularly troubling because it also offended the provisions of Section 15 of the Bill of Rights and it gave very draconian powers to the DoE, who have since effectively usurped the authority of the Council created by that law, by way of delegation of functions which include the power to shut down the entire planning process whenever the DoE dictates it, whether that decision is rational, proportionate or procedurally fair, which is in direct contravention of Section 19 of our Bill of Rights.
      BUT, what a lot of people don’t know is that the person who asked me to review that legislation, which resulted in me engaging in public debate with then Minister Panton and DoE Director Ebanks-Petrie, was none other than Kurt Tibbetts, the then Minister of Planning, who was very concerned about the draft legislation himself, and quietly asked me to research and advise him on the Bill that was being presented by his own government!
      In the end, I produced a report which I shared will all members of the legislative assembly, which resulted in some 36 or so critical amendments being made. For that exercise, I did not earn one dollar, and I politely declined three different entities’ generous offers to represent them in opposing the Bill in its entirety. Ironically, I only earned the scorn of the DoE (who I have even represented on occasion in the past, btw) and some of the folks that supported this, who labeled me as “the developers’ representative”, when I was in fact acting at the behest of the Minister of Planning. Such is the reward for free public service, it seems.
      On this point, it is my personal view, based on extensive experience, that what is needed is a planning process which has environmental considerations imbedded into it. That is the only way we will achieve balanced, sustainable development, which I believe in and will always support.
      There are many more details of similar things that I wish I had the time to share, but there is not enough space or time for that now.
      But, if provoked, I may very well have to make the time for that.
      One thing is for sure, I have always acted in accordance with my conscience, and, consequently, I will vigorously defend my reputation against this kind of propaganda, as necessary.
      And I am happy to explain and elaborate on any positions I have taken on these things, as required.

      44
      13
      • Anonymous says:

        You represented Fin Sammy, clearly your conscience operates differently than some who place principles before a pay check. Look at what that development has done to a once peaceful Caymanian neighborhood. If you made a clear statement advocating the protection of what little is left of Cayman’s natural environment perhaps you’d prevent yourself from being lumped in with the rest.

        19
        23
      • Red Bay voter says:

        Mr. Sammy, this is a Red Bay voter who voted for Mr. Alden last time and is sincerely considering voting for you in this election. I understand that the comment in question may well have been written by an opponent’s supporter and how you might want to squash down everything they said. But honestly, there are things there that I, as a voter, want to know about. You must expect your past to be dredged up and examined if you want to represent us and now is the time to do that.

        Personally, I found it chilling that your response was to threaten a law suit. Is that how you mean to conduct this campaign? Can we all expect civil suits from you if we ask questions about your past actions, even if they were while you were representing other people? Because if that is the case, I may as well vote for Mr. Alden again.

        I don’t want to vote for a bully. I don’t want to vote for someone who threatens people who ask questions he doesn’t like. You must understand that as a politician, you can expect this sort of thing. You are asking for us to make you a public figure rather than a private citizen.

        So the questions I have about you regarding planning and the environment remain and I look forward to hearing more about that over the next two months. But now I also want to know how you will react to criticism and difficult questions because this campaign is also to find out about that.

        30
        14
        • Anonymous says:

          There’s a difference between asking questions and impugning someone with criminal accusations. People need to understand they are liable for their words too. People too loose with their words behind anonymous posts.

          22
          7
          • Red Bay voter says:

            … so says Anonymous. I am not reassured. The reasons I am looking to vote for a candidate other than Mr. Alden is 1. I don’t think he cares enough about the environment and is all for development over conservation. 2. I think he has been in politics too long and his ego is too big.

            So If I am going to vote for someone else they have to prove to me that they are a better choice on those two points. I don’t want to swap one fragile ego who paves paradise for another, especially as over-development in this area is getting to be a real issue. In that case I’ll stick with the devil I know.

            BUT I’m really hoping that Mr. Sammy can convince me to vote for him.

            18
            8
          • Anonymous says:

            I completely agree, if Sammy doesn’t defend himself all kinds of untrue stories will be made up in the hope some of it will stick. There is big money invested in this campaign to ensure the promises made to some will bear fruit.

            31
            2
          • Anonymous says:

            I wish to make it abundantly clear that I said unlicensed and not illegal. Unlicensed means without a license.

            3
            7
        • Anonymous says:

          Heaven forbid someone defend their reputation against such obvious propaganda.
          Also, if you really care about the environment, then voting for Alden wouldn’t make much sense, because between the two, Sammy cares a lot more about sustainable development and protecting the environment – it’s there in the article. FIN is an eyesore imo, but it doesn’t pose as much of a threat to the environment as people think – far less than Alden’s port would have done, which like most people, Sammy opposed. And like Sammy mentioned in his response, he’s also represented clients who actually opposed large-scale developments as well. That is kind of his job as a lawyer.
          I don’t know what your opinion is on Mr Bush, but if you want a woman beater to remain in control of this government then please do vote for Alden. Sammy explicitly stated on CMR that he would support the no-confidence motion.
          So feel free to vote for whoever you believe is best, but if you care even slightly about the environment or women’s rights, a vote for Alden would be contradictory to what you claim to stand for.

          17
          2
          • Red Bay voter says:

            I think this is in response to me. It’s hard to tell on long threads. Anyway, I hope that you are not part of Mr. Sammy’s campaign. The tone you have chosen is talking down to me for asking stupid questions and making stupid points. I am a voter and I am trying to make up my mind. I am looking for straight talk to help me do that.

            It’s easy to say that you are for the environment in a press release but given his past work he has some way to go to convince me, and I suspect other RB voters. The whataboutism is annoying. This is about Mr. Sammy, not the premier. And dismissing concerns about Fin makes me a little uncomfortable. I am trying to get a proper idea about the decisions that he would make if he got into office. So when did he oppose the port? I don’t remember him being publicly opposed to it at the beginning. Was it after the petition got enough votes or before? These things matter. It would show if he was going along with popular opinion or really cares about the environment.

            The Bush issue is important but to introduce it here feels like deflection.

            10
            6
          • Anonymous says:

            In response to Red Bay voter’s 1:15 pm comment, since I don’t have the option to reply directly.
            Firstly, I am not a part of Sammy’s campaign. He has never asked me to defend him, nor does he need me to. He doesn’t even know I’m writing this comment.
            I happen to know Sammy personally, so that’s how I know his views on the port. Not to mention that he signed the petition early on. If you attend one of his meetings and ask him, that is what he will tell you. Sammy isn’t one to follow the crowd and go along with popular opinion, and to my knowledge, he didn’t speak out against the port publicly in the hope of achieving validation.
            As for “whataboutism”, Sammy and Alden aren’t even comparable in terms of integrity and backbone, two qualities that most of our current MPs are severely lacking. And even if they were comparable, only one candidate can win this election. The whole point of an election is to compare the candidates and select the one you feel would serve the country best, regardless of how similar you may feel they are. But I reiterate, they aren’t similar. You now have a highly-intelligent, principled candidate running in Red Bay, and I hope that you get the chance to see that. Even though you now have a shorter time, thanks to the Premier (which honestly would be enough reason for me to not vote for him), I know Sammy will come through.
            As I said, I think FIN is an eyesore, and I’m not too fond of overdevelopment in general. You have every right to be concerned about Sammy’s past in regards to this. I don’t think you should blindly vote for anyone, whether it’s Sammy or Alden.
            You genuinely seem like an intelligent voter, but please don’t make the mistake of voting for these same politicians that will continue to screw us over.
            I know for a fact that Sammy cares about the environment, comparisons to the incumbent aside. But if by April 14 you still aren’t convinced, then you must consider the Bush issue. You also have the option not to vote, and I certainly wouldn’t vote for someone who defends a woman beater.

            8
            3
          • Anonymous says:

            Y’all Grand Cayman is in an era of Heavy Development, and any Candidate that PROMISE to Stand AGAINST the FLOW of BIG MONEY will be telling a BIG LIE.
            and will be on the FENCE!

      • Anonymous says:

        You really need a thicker skin if you are already threatening to sue…you have no clue how much worse will be said if you are elected. Toughen up and prove with actions.

        15
        12
        • Anonymous says:

          He wasn’t threatening to sue the commenter. Rather, he’s making it clear from the beginning of his campaign that people who defame his character can face legal repercussions. He has already sued two of his family members for defamation. People on this website seriously need to develop their reading comprehension skills.

          13
          3
          • Red Bay voter says:

            What you just said right there does not help. You’re saying he threatened someone/everyone in advance of what they might say. We don’t need an MP prone to dish out law suits. Free speech is stifled enough here already. That’s why we comment anonymously. I’m not interested in candidates’ hurt feelings. This is an election and muck will get thrown.

            I was leaning towards Mr. Sammy before his comment and really happy that he was running and now I feel I am stuck between two candidates that are beginning to feel very similar. I’m getting depressed now.

            9
            12
      • Anonymous says:

        On the defensive? What are plans as a politician, not a lawyer?

        4
        6
      • Anonymous says:

        You lost me when you mentioned sue for the second time.
        I’m back on the fence.
        Also no one forced you take on FIN.
        Conscience and morals need to have some say unless its money you crave.
        You also think the subdivision on Spinnaker should not have put a footpath in?
        Its only time before a jogger or pram pusher is crushed into the fence.
        Red Bayer

        4
        3
    • Anonymous says:

      Yikes!! Thank you for sharing! I can’t vote for anyone who represents Fin.

      13
      20
      • Anonymous says:

        Yeah 8.29 your alternative to him is consequently to give your vote to the candidate that is instrumental in giving concessions to Fin! Smart 🤔, I can tell you that that’s not something Mr Jackson stands for, and I previously was represented by Mr. Jackson. I can assure you that he will always represent his clients to the best helping them to be treated lawful! When various government institutions often in violation of the law, making things difficult for you since you can’t afford the back door approach, he will have no fear to challenge them and he helps his client to be treated lawfully! Trust me that’s hard to find, many lawyers here evaluate if representing you could earn them dislike of the mighty! He is different and as a client your lucky if he takes your matter!

        25
        1
    • Anonymous says:

      So in a nut shell, he’s good at his job and we should have him on the peoples’ side.

      24
      1
    • Anonymous says:

      Look at anonymous being cute. Something can’t be “unlicensed” if it doesn’t require a license in the first place. Cute try though

      13
  23. Anonymous says:

    ” I am NOT for sale.”

    Times have changed, nobody is interested in purchasing politicians anymore; especially with so many of them available for rent by the hour.

  24. Anonymous says:

    Any second now Alden the chicken will be swapping districts with someone… I guarantee he will not run against Sammy.

    34
    3
  25. Anonymous says:

    Just what Cayman needs! Good luck Sammy!

    37
    1
  26. Anonymous says:

    RIP Alden.

    34
    3
  27. Anonymous says:

    Go Sammy, go! I hope you are able to rightfully claim this despot’s seat.

    39
    2
  28. Anonymous says:

    Good luck Sammy, you got this!!!!

    48
    1
  29. Anonymous says:

    Finally, a great candidate running in Red Bay. Say your prayers, Alden.

    54
    3
  30. Anonymous says:

    Good Luck Sammy. I wish he was running in GTS.

    49
    1
    • Anonymous says:

      I can see you would say that, but someone had to challenge the Premier and there couldn’t be a better candidate to do so. But Alric is a viable candidate too, and you should definitely consider voting for him over Barbara. I know I would. Getting that woman beater out of power is one of the most important things right now and if you live in Red Bay, GTS, WBC or WBS and want to see that happen, then you should vote for Sammy, Alric, Katherine and Raul, respectively.

      9
      6

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.