The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Hostilities erupted between Goodman’s Bay neighbours over allegations voiced at a public hearing regarding the motives for opposing the Wynn Group’s 14-storey penthouse project.

Keenan Johnson, the Town Planning Committee’s chairman, brought Wednesday night’s consultation to a swift halt after the development’s main opponent was forced to vehemently deny claims that he informed fellow residents he was “in full support” of the project if he received a multi-million dollar payment for his home.

Edward Hoffer accused Tony Skandaliaris, a Goodman’s Bay neighbour, of stooping “very low” with such an allegation that he asserted was “not true”. The exchange saw the two men trade words towards the end of a sometimes-heated hearing on Wynn Group’s bid for site plan approval, especially when Mr Hoffer was challenging the developer.

Intervening towards the end of the meeting, and identifying himself by name, Mr Skandaliaris admitted he had an interest in the outcome - and whether Wynn gets the necessary approvals to proceed - as he owns the land upon which the 14-storey complex is to be constructed.

“I respect everyone’s opinions and their concerns,” Mr Skandaliaris said, “but for Ed Hoffer, when we first approached to discuss this property, he was in full support of the property, in full support of the development, providing he got a [multi-million dollar] pay-off for his home or he would [ruin] the project. I think there’s a small detail you forgot to share.”

This sparked unease among other attendees, and Mr Hoffer could be heard threatening to sue Mr Skandaliaris for defaming his reputation. Mr Johnson, the Town Planning chair, quickly said he was “not going to get into a back and forth with respect to that”, but several of those attending demanded that Mr Hoffer be given a right to reply.

Mr Hoffer duly responded to his neighbour’s accusations, saying: “That’s not true. OK? I was not in full [favour] with anything from block one. Even in 2010, I wrote a letter to the zoning department saying I was against changing the zoning to commercial, so take that.

“As far as the other thing, too, my house is also listed under the Antiquities, Monuments and Museums Corporation (AMMC). It’s an antique house. I just think that’s terrible, Tony. I respect you, Tony, because I’ve known you since you were a little boy, but you shouldn’t throw accusations. That’s very low.”

Mr Skandaliaris, though, stuck to his claim, responding: “We had a conversation, Ed.” To which Mr Hoffer replied: “We did not have a conversation.” It was then that Mr Johnson intervened to bring the public hearing to a close following the last-minute effort to seemingly discredit Mr Hoffer and his objections.

No decision was taken at the meeting on whether to grant Wynn’s sought-after site plan approval. The Department of Physical Planning, in a message posted on its Facebook page, stated the Town Planning Committee “is gearing up for a comprehensive review that will shape the future of this project” although no details were given.

Earlier at Wednesday night’s public consultation, Mr Hoffer said he would “rather talk from the heart” than read a prepared text detailing his arguments as to why Wynn’s 14-storey penthouse - branded a “monstrosity” by one other attendee - should not receive the necessary approvals to proceed.

The 65 year-old, who would be the project’s immediate neighbour to the east, asserted that Wynn’s first Goodman’s Bay development - the Residences at GoldWynn - had “really shook me to pieces” with “cracks” appearing everywhere in his foundation and property due to previous construction work.

Now bracing to be “rattled to pieces again” by Wynn’s latest proposal, he also accused the developer of being against Bahamians by denying them access to Goodman’s Bay and its beach - an allegation the developer vehemently rejected.

“I’ve had dust and dirt and cement in my house, and I’ve had to change all the duct work,” Mr Hoffer told the Town Planning meeting. “There’s also an easement that runs along the side of my house, between lots eight and nine, which they did not take into consideration.

“They’re [Wynn] sucking up the easement, and that’s supposed to be a public easement for a pedestrian walkway” for Bahamians to access Goodman’s Bay and the beach. Meanwhile, revealing that his grandchildren now live in a home he has occupied for five decades, having inherited the property from his father, Mr Hoffer added: “This is a big problem for me...

“The first development really shook me to pieces, shook all of my infrastructure, shook all of my foundations. I’ve got cracks everywhere. I have so much damage, and no attempt.... I actually went and spoke to Mr Hart [Randy Hart, the Wynn Group’s vice-president] over here in reference to that, and he told me it was above his pay grade.

“So, having said that, I’m going for phase two that is going to rattle me to pieces again. You know what? I’m 65 years-old, and I don’t want to move. I like my house. You know what? You don’t allow access to the beach for Bahamians because I know for a fact you guys tell people to move on when they come on the beach. You’re supposed to be for the Bahamian people, and I don’t think you are.”

This provoked an immediate riposte from Mr Hart, who was interrupted several times by Mr Hoffer as he spoke. “Let me just respond to the various points,” Mr Hart replied. “I strenuously object to the insinuation.....” Mr Hoffer then interjected to confirm his statement was made “without prejudice”.

Mr Hart, though, continued: “I never obstructed, inhibited or deterred anyone from using the public beach. We know the beach is sacrosanct. It’s sacrosanct to us just as it is to you. It’s really a very misguided statement.” This prompted Mr Hoffer to say: “It’s in the newspapers, Randy”, sparking a further denial from Mr Hart.

“Every day I’m in my office I look out the window and people are walking by, they jog by, they play by, they swim. They enjoy the beach. We encourage that. I’d like to take this opportunity to kind of debunk this myth that there’s some kind of evil developer that’s trying to appropriate the beach from Bahamians,” he added.

“Actually, I think it’s the opposite. From what I’ve observed, it’s actually a testament to how well and harmonious it can actually be. When we were building the project, we knew people would be coming in, jumping in the pool. It’s been perfect. It’s worked like a charm. Bahamians are respectful of the guests, the guests are respectful of Bahamians’ right to use the beach.

“It’s actually in my opinion a perfect example of how things ought to be, and so in no way will we do anything we do with this project - phase two - to interfere with anybody’s right to use the public beach.”

As for the easement issue, Mr Hart said Wynn had been advised by its attorneys that the access route had been “terminated” some time ago and was therefore no longer a potential obstacle for what he indicated is a $125m investment.

“You raise a legal issue,” he added of Mr Hoffer. “We have a legal opinion that the easement was terminated many, many years ago. Obviously we would not put forward a project of this magnitude if we have a legal impediment such as that.

“We’re not trying to hide anything, we’re not trying to cover up anything. We have obviously done our homework, and there is no legal impediment or easement. People have access to that beach from either side of that property.”