The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

Environmental activists fear a proposed marina facility at the heart of the Bahamas’ “only carbon-free community” is being treated as “a fait accompli”, forcing them to initiate another legal action.

The Abaco Club’s planned 44-slip private dock at Little Harbour is the latest development to be subjected to Judicial Review proceedings, on the grounds that both the Government and developer have failed to undertake “adequate consultation” with residents and affected parties.

The action, brought on behalf of Little Harbour property owners by Responsible Development for Abaco (RDA), the group that won a memorable - though some would argue ‘too late’ - legal victory over BEC’s Wilson City power plant several years ago.

David Pictairn, RDA’s vice-president, and owner of a Little Harbour property immediately adjacent to the Abaco Club’s proposed development, expressed particular alarm that no Government agency had responded to the Association’s letters seeking information/consultation on the project.

“It is obviously unfair that a development of this size could be permitted to go ahead by numerous public authorities without even taking into account the views of the community that will be directly affected by it,” Mr Pitcairn alleged in an April 26, 2016, affidavit.

He said that while the South Abaco District Council “originally appeared to be receptive to the idea of consulting properly”, details on the project - particularly its Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) - were only released after a Town Meeting in September 2015.

“At the meeting itself, the concerned members of the public who attended were not in a position to comment properly or in any detail on the proposals, and had no time to come to a considered view,” Mr Pitcairn alleged.

“The fact that the [Government] respondents have now taken a decision not even to respond to [RDA’s] attorneys’ letters on the subject means that there is a very real concern that these permits will all be granted in secret, so that work can begin and the development will become a fait accompli.

“That cannot be the right way to go about major developments in any properly functioning democracy.”

Tribune Business, meanwhile, has obtained independent confirmation that the Abaco Club is pressing ahead with its Little Harbour project, and is working with the Government to obtain the necessary permits and approvals.

Khaalis Rolle, minister of state for investments, told this newspaper in a recent interview: “We’re working through the logistics for the members’ docking facility at Little Harbour.”

The Minister held out the Abaco Club, located at Winding Bay, as a model for his strategy of focusing on ‘stalled’ foreign direct investment (FDI) projects and reviving them, either through new financing or ownership.

The Winding Bay-located development was acquired in late 2014 by a combination of Southworth Development and a group of existing homeowners, who purchased it from Ritz-Carlton and Marriott.

The new owners moved with great haste on their plans for Little Harbour, with Bahamas-based Islands by Design completing the EIA for the project in December 2014.

Apart from the 44-slip private dock, the project’s supporting facilities include a supplies shop, private restaurant and 6,000 square foot covered parking lot.

RDA fears that if the project goes ahead it will completely change the environment and character of Little Harbour, a 50-home community that runs entirely off solar power.

Its legal action, which is being supported by Save the Bays, the environmental activist group that has come under heavy fire from the Christie administration recently, again raises fundamental issues and concerns about the development approval process in the Bahamas.

These include self-determination, and the right of Bahamians to have a say over development that impacts their communities; the ability of the Government to impose its vision on Family Island communities; and the transparency of the investment approvals process, and whether the Government is following its own laws.

The RDA action is seeking Supreme Court permission to bring Judicial Review proceedings against nine government respondents, including Prime Minister Perry Christie; Deputy Prime Minister Philip Davis; Glenys Hanna Martin, minister of transport and aviation; Kenred Dorsett, minister of the environment; the Town Planning Committee; South Abaco District Council; Richard Hardy, acting director of Lands and Surveys; and Marques Williams, Abaco’s port administrator.

Mr Pitcairn alleged that RDA’s letters, sent to all the respondents on December 21, 2015, received “not a single reply..., not even the courtesy of an acknowledgment”.

Further letters were issued in February 2016, he claimed, resulting in a further deafening silence.

“In each of those letters, it was made explicit that if the recipient of the letter failed to provide even a basic reassurance that the applicant [RDA] would be properly consulted, then it would be an irresistible inference that the recipient had no intention of carrying out a proper consultation process at all,” Mr Pitcairn alleged.

“Because of the respondents’ failure to respond to these letters at all, it is clear to me that the respondents have no intention of carrying out any, or any proper, consultation process prior to taking any decision on any application by the Abaco Club in relation to the various permissions and permits required for the development.”

Documents filed to support the Judicial Review action claim “at least 98 per cent of the Little Harbour residents” are opposed to the Abaco Club’s plans, with several petitions sent to the Government containing between 60-70 signatures.

While the Abaco Club initially appeared receptive to public consultation, its principal meeting with Little Harbour residents in early 2015, it then abruptly withdrew from such contacts on the grounds that its plans would be opposed whatever the content.

It since appears to have made good on its position to work solely with the Government to obtain the necessary approvals and permits, and avoid further public consultation.

Mr Pitcairn, meanwhile, alleged that the project outlined by Abaco Club executives at the September 2015 Town Meeting was “substantially different from that originally set out in the EIA”.

“In particular there is no mention in the EIA of a permanent generator, a reverse osmosis desalination plant, or waste-treatment facility,” Mr Pitcairn alleged.

“This means that the scope of the development, its intrusiveness, and its adverse effect on the environment, have all increased since the EIA was drafted.

“The lack of consultation to-date has already soured relations and is only likely to lead to further disputes if matters are not properly consulted upon now, so that the development (if it goes ahead at all) goes ahead in the right direction.”

RDA is seeking a Supreme Court declaration that it has a legal right and “legitimate expectation” to be included in a meaningful way in the consultation process on Little Harbour.

It also wants the court to prevent the Government issuing permits to the Abaco Club without “proper public consultation”, and to quash any that may have been granted already.