Everyone’s back yard
There has been a considerable amount of comment on CNS recently suggesting that those who are against the East End Seaport are only opposing it because they don’t want it in their backyard. However, this project will essentially affect everyone’s yard in Grand Cayman — front and back.
The opposition to this proposed development is about a lot more that not wanting an unpleasant looking industrial construction project in their district.
The opposition to this piece of environmental terrorism is about the preservation of a way life, about choosing environment over development at any cost, and about thinking of new ways to approach our economic woes. It is about people saying that pouring concrete on everything is not going to solve the country’s fiscal shortcomings and that we need to re-think the endless march to development as a way to get rich.
As has been articulated by both Ezzard Miller and Arden McLean, this project is not as a result of carefullythought out assessment and the future needs of the country’s people but about a wealthy man’s desire for more money and a political leader’s desire for something that looks like action.
With the premier desperate for a tangible project to break ground so he can take credit for any short term economic gains to the public purse and the developer desperate to get hishands on the fill, the red-herring of the need for a cargo facility in East End suits them both well.
Aside from being an environmental catastrophe in itself by putting at risk the local water lens, destroying reefs, threatening the critical habitat in the area and undermining the aesthetics of one of the islands’ most dramatic stretches of open, undeveloped coastline, the project also offers some real dangers and knock-on environmental hazards.
Many local mariners have warned about the potential dangers during rough weather, not just major hurricanes, and the revelations that the developer is considering laying an oil pipeline through the middle of the island to carry the fuel stored in the new containers he proposes to put there is horrifying, not just to those who have a serious commitment to environmental conservation but to anybody with common sense.
Moving oil around, be it in pipes, on ships or in road tankers, is an inherently dangerous thing to do and if we insist on continuing to burn this fossil fuel, not just in our cars but to generate our power as well, than we will need to move it around. Given those dangers, it is best to limit the movement as much as possible in order to reduce the risk of hazardous accidents and leaks.
At present the fuel is carried a relatively short distance from South Sound to the industrial area and to local gas stations, but if Joseph Imparato builds his commercial seaport, the oil he wants to store there will have to come back to the capital somehow. It will either be via pipeline and all the dangers and environmental repercussions associated with it, or it will be pumped into tankers to be moved across the island day after day on the roads.
If this port proposal ever comes to fruition there will be major changes to the island that will affect everyone in Grand Cayman. In the first instance there will be the need for major road upgrades, which will not only cost the public purse millions of dollars but will cost the environment unquantifiable expense.
The need to move cargo back to the country’s capital, cruise passengers to and from the airport and mega yacht owners to their private hangers will increase the traffic in the islands’ once peaceful areas, challenging any efforts by the Department of Environment to preserve what remains of the country’s dwindling natural resources.
Development cannot be allowed to continue at any cost and the people who oppose this project are much more than ‘NIMBYs’, a loathsome term used to describe those who oppose development for purely selfish reasons. If the people of East End and North Side were being truly selfish they would probably support the project as they are suffering significantly from the country’s economic decline and the associated unemployment. After all, Imparato is promising them all jobs working in his quarry, blasting the rock to send overseas.
The opposition to this project comes from different people for different reasons but the desire not to destroy and take risks with nature is the common thread – not to mention the rather unattractive thought of physical chunks of a people’s country being simply dug up and sold overseas.
The anti-seaport movement needs everyone who has ever taken a stand against a development project because of the risks to the environment to join them in opposing this proposed ravaging of the last remaining areas of natural landscape.
Those who asked for support for their opposition to the Emerald Sound development, those who fought for the Ironwood forest and those whohave pushed against the North Sound channel also need to get behind the people of East End and join forces to say no to this development and to send a clear message to government that the people care for more than a rich man’s empty promise of trickle down.
Category: Viewpoint
Ms. Wendy,
While I have the greatest respect for your OPINION I now find it hard to believe anything that appears on CNS due to the obvious bias and inaccuracy you show in this article even though it is is in ViewPoint and in your personal name.
As well read(researcher for BBC, House of Commons), educated (UK and Wales, BA Hons, MA, Msc Econ) and travelled/lived person (Nairobi, London, Caribbean and elsewhere) as you are, you definitely have to KNOW that some of your arguments are pure sensationalism. While I do not have a problem with the average person saying these things I have a extreme concern that as an extremely competent journalist you would use your skill to create such an unbalanced and incorrect piece of literature(sic). The question is “why”?
When you talk about pipelines and the ‘short distance’ you should also say “through the most heavily populated and commercial areas”. A pipeline problem in the middle of George Town will shut down the country. You well know that pipelines are used to send billions of gallons of oil, gas and other fluids hundreds of miles everyday uneventfully. When you talk about the “jobs in his quarry” you well know that it has been said that is one of the main reasons some are objecting is that he HAS NOT offered jobs there.
When you talk about ‘millions’ to build a road there you know that Government has already committed to building a road there for the Shetty Hospital. No new expenditure here–what Arden and Ezzard should be doing is ensuring Imparato builds it as PART of the port freeing government from the expense. They should be ensuring jobs for their constituents. They should ensure land value appreciation for their voters to free them from needing a political handout. They should be ensuring a BOND to guarantee completion. Therefore, there is no reason that this should be seen as anything more than NIMBY or political posturing on their part.
When, Ms Wendy, you use your political blog and your intellectual capacity to try, in my opinion, to mislead Caymanians with these types of false argument and scare tactics I get concerned on your ultimate agenda. Your environmentalist passion is clear and that truly is fine with me but do not mislead unsuspecting persons for something personal.
While I have not given support to this project awaiting the details, the idea that East End, North Side or Bodden town residents and land owners will continue to sit by with useless maiden plum, thatch palms and cliff rock while the rest of the country benefits is something that will not continue. When our representatives try to activate folks by telling them Government is “going to take away their land” and give it to Imparato, I have concern…Government has no such power and they know it. When they say create “civil disobedience” I have a problem. What next? stone the Queen’s photographs?? We may never know what is behind the real objection of our MLAs. We do know one is campaigning for PPM leadership( may be this is a test run) and also has a past with the developer….not sure if that was a good or bad experience.
If the environmentalists want to preserve the land I have no problem about that either. Just go and purchase it and give it to the National Trust. Until then, being an obstructionist for obstructionist reasons is not good enough and certainly not good enough for our MLAs and press. We should be able to trust our journalist as being fair, unbiased and accurate. If they are not, then all we have is political satire. sigh…maybe sometimes “life’s more than a beach”
If we build it they will come.
Can we charge Imparato with misappropriating the theme from Boatswain’s Beach?
This is what the developers own website has to say about the project:
"In Phase 1 of the Construction Period the infrastructure – the port basin – will be created. Key points during this first phase are that the land is privately owned and is unencumbered; there is private equity (no borrowing involved) and the aggregate will be processed and sold. During Phase 2 the Seaport’s Key Elements, which are the levers of Economic Diversification, will involve Joint Ventures, e.g. with Cruise Lines and Transhipment Companies, Bond Issues and the raising of Private Equity though a public offering."
Note how no borrowing is required for the first stage, quarrying and selling the aggregate. No need to split this part of the project with external investors, because of course this is where the guaranteed profit lies.
The actual building phase, for which the developer has less confidence in his project ( as evidenced by the fact the he is not prepared to commit the significant profit he stands to make in the excavation phase to build the facility ) is open to and in fact dependent upon outside partners and funding. No interested partners means no building and I am unaware that any names have been put forward as credible third party backers for the project. The developer has refused to commit to putting up a financial bond to confirm the port will be built after he has stripped out the easy money. Ezzard Miller has rightly challenged him on this point and much to my amazement, I find myself in full agreement with Mr. Miller for once.
I am interested to know if you feel that a very large hole dug in EE and then left to fester will enhance land values and have a positive impact on residents? I seriously doubt it.
I have seen the developer’s PR people characterise the position as being " if we build it, they will come", but their own words indicated that in fact this should be " if they come, we might build it." There is a huge difference and one that could present a big problem for EE in a few years time.
Before we get to arguing about the merits or otherwise of the location, you should be concerned about receiving more than just lip service about actual construction going ahead come what may.
Wendy you hit the nail on the head, time for the people of this island to stand united and be heard. We are the ones that will be living here when all is said and done. Many thanks for stating what you believe. A lot of people have the same sentiments.
Well said and thank you Wendy.
I signed saturday morning….and will oppose this selfish and shortsighted project completely!
Our fore fathers situated the port at GT (the leeward, not windward) side of the island for good reason.
No!….to port proposal at Easternside of the island.
This will only benefit a very few already rich people and permanently destroy the remaining prestine part of Grand Cayman…the only part that even feels like a Caribbean island.
Wendy, judging by the many aggressive responsesto your well written opinion piece, you did a great job. Nothing upsets more those who wish to deceive, than the plain, undeniable truth. And their common tactic is to smear you with the very criticisms that they themselves invite. Thus is the tiger revealed by its claw! Most of your observations are common sense.
None of the writers with objections to the arguments of those who are against theport, will firmly address the commonly held perception that this is all about a quarry, and the port is just a diversion, with a solid legal reasons, to enable the quarry to happen. This is a very serious matter that will not go away. Until Mr.Imperato commits to a bond to ensure that the port is built, I have no belief that there is any intention that it will be.
Not even the simplest questions raised recently in the media have been answered, such as the seeming impossibility of making a profit by shipping excavated rock to the Eastern Caribbean, or indeed anywhere overseas. The figures, as recently presented in the media by a qualified individual, support this view. Nor has even the slightest effort been made to describe how the losses to tourism caused by the destruction of this special part of Cayman’s coastline at Breakers, would be compensated for in terms of alternative cash flow. I’m talking real dollars here, not just aesthetic damage. Just a reasonable explanation of even these two simple questions might help some of us believe that a few of the pro-port supporters are not just Joe Imperato’s disingenuous, on-line, spin-doctor lackeys.
For Pete’s sake, just build the dang thing in South Sound!!! Either way we need one and IF they really intend to hire Caymanians it would make it a worthy project, if not, then lets just burn it down afterwards 🙂
…or just uneducated? would you really destroy great swaths of nature forever just for a few years of jobs for a handful of caymanians? i sure hope your post was satirical
Well,well, some one has the guts to speak up about this port in the eastern districts other than the two MLA’s. Wendy thank you, I have not signed the petition yet BUT I most certainly will as the more I see and hear about this project the more I feel uncomfortable about it.
Why if this is such a good thing for the island and will bring jobs for us, why havent the government come to the people and explain it to us if its such a great thing, why give the developer the go ahead to do so with out the researching that needs to be done to show what type of danger that it poses to us.
I trust that the government isnt throwing us all under the bus for a few dollars as a quick fix for the mess that we are in. That port in East End will do more harm than the current mess we have now.
The two MLA’S need to stand tall and proud of their districts, bring the facts out, leave out the rhetoric, thats not imporant, facts are. Show you are genuninely dedicated to this idea for the people and you will get the support that you need, all Caymanians with a good clear mind should vote on this.
Not that I disagree with Wendy entirely, but some of the arguments don’t ring true. The idea that a pipeline is worse than the never ending stream of tanker trucks moving avgas and petrol around like we have now seems contrived? How many pipelines has that same petrochemical moved through elsewhere before the tanker brought it here and then another truck moved it to the gas station or to the airport? At least it’s not in Cayman.
The truth of it is, that we do have to balance development, jobs, long term economic vitality with long term ecological integrity and sustainable communities.
To me the idea of a port at East End seems rediculous. However we might want to hear the pro and con before we announce that all development is destruction or that we will cease to be able to feed our kids without building for the future.
Now both sides won’t like me. 🙂
"How many pipelines has that same petrochemical moved through elsewhere before the tanker brought it here and then another truck moved it to the gas station or to the airport?"
For what it is worth, there is currently a pipeline connecting the current Jackson Point terminal to the airport. CUC and HomeGas get their petrochemicals from pipelines too.
The proposed East End seaport would require new longer pipelines and/or a substantial increase in the number of trucks to supply these major consumers.
Wendy, while I respect your opinion here, and it is simply that, your opinion, I must say, there are many of us who disagree with you and the position of the two elected members seeking to rally support to prevent this development. I personally am of the opinion, and it’s just that, my opinion, that the relocation of the port to the Eastern Districts will allow us the opportunity to open up our entire allowing Caymanian land owners to realize the value of their asset. I believe the social impact of this project will be to the benefit of the residents of the Eastern Districts. I believe this project will also positively impact the residents of East End and North Side.
Now, I must say, that all of the statements made to scare the people into action is very irresponsible. Much of your fears are not even a part of the potential development, the fuel line for example, the largest consumer is CUC, Why not relocate their future generation to the vicinity of this port? I can assure you, that in the USA, far greater quantities of fuel are being trucked every hour on the hour each day than we will need to service CUC and all our service stations. I can assure you that if we are hit by a hurricane that produces wave action of the magnitude to breach the twenty foot walls around this port that with or without the port, all will be lost. But answer me this, Mr. McLean wanted us to support his Savannah Gully wall to the tune of several million dollars, why can’t he accept that a “wall” can be used for the same effect here?
So please, do us a favor, wait for the proposal to be submitted for approval before you write your opinion and mislead the populous.
"Much of your fears are not even a part of the potential development, the fuel line for example, the largest consumer is CUC, Why not relocate their future generation to the vicinity of this port?".
Wendy is quite right to consider all of this in moving the cargo port to EE. Relocating CUC’s future generation won’t do anything about its existing generating facilities the most recent of which is only a couple of years old. You do understand that it is the consumer who would pay for the relocation of CUC’s generating stations, don’t you? Do you also understand that this project would involve tens of millions of $$ in government expenditure as it too would be required to relocate its infrastructure? Do you think Mr. Imparato will be building the new roads for you? The new Govt. buildings? And all of this so Mr. Imparato can have his quarry.
It is not at all "irresponsible" to soberly consider the very serious implications of this project rather than be giddy with greed. Oh, and by the way, the appropriate word is "populace" not "populous" which it seems you would like to mislead.
The Premier was right; we need to govern the media.
That would be Castro – control contol control. Take criticism just like you give it!
So Wendy you’re okay with the short pipe line through our school district? To hell with the children, lets save the rocks in East End?!
Wendy, have you spoken to the developer? Have you reviewed the proposal to Planning? Where have you gotten your information from? Are you attempting to create another political party in an effort to secure future media material?
Firstly, I trust the employees of the Planning department to review and ensure the proposal meets all the requirements. You have written an opinion piece in support of two elected members who oppose the project in attempts to ensure that we remain in a recession and they have a platform for reelection.
Personally, this opinion piece is reminds me of the rhetoric and attack Fox News took against Obama during the midterm elections in the USA. The only difference is, they had the courage and honesty to publicly state they want Obama removed from office. Now, I am not a supporter of Mac, but I am a resident in the Eastern Districts and until the plans are before our Planning Department for approval, until the Environmental Impact Study is done, I for one am sick and tired of hear the opinions of the two elected liars and now you.
"…until the plans are before our Planning Department for approval, until the Environmental Impact Study is done, I for one am sick and tired of hear the opinions of the two elected liars and now you".
Well if you need to wait for the Environmental Impact Study to be done would not it be premature to condemn them as "liars"? Suppose they are proven correct, would it not mean that they are people of great insight, foresight and understanding? It seems that you are committed to this project regardless of the results of any Environmental Impact Study.
i have lots of respect for wendy..
however as opinion piece/article this is seriously flawed……any high school teacher would hand this back to the student straight away….
where is the research, basis, references…etc….
this is the equivalent of the developer writing a peice and saying everything will be fine and dandy…. neither makes sense at this stage…..
Here is a direct and clickable link to the online petition. Join us.
http://www.ipetitions.com/petition/noeastendport/#sign_petition
One thing that I find interesting in this whole situation is that from what I have read the developer has no intentions of building anything besides a harbour. All of the talk about cargo, berths, docking, fuel storage, etc. seems to be simply stated as "potential". In other words, it would be for someone else or the country to build.
This is a bit like the reclaimed land developers that always refer to the many homes that will exist on the land they create, but in reality that is for someone else to do. They just leave the barren land to sit and wait in an undeveloped ugly state once they have sold the lots.
If my understanding is wrong then feel free to point me in the direction where I can read the full intention/plan of the developer. Then maybe I can form a better opinion.
Great article Wendy!
Thank you so much for adding your voice to this cause.
* Come on Cayman, let us be strong, steadfast and wise this time around.*
The opposition must remain inspired, centralized and up-to-date – otherwise we run the risk of being railroaded.
(Clicking over to the online petition right now … join us!!)
It’s high tide people realise that this is not about a port at all! This is about a quarry… a port in Cayman makes NO SENSE at all! There are not enough flights to and from the islands to make a cruise home port viable in any way! This is about the money which these people will make off of the quarrying and the export of the same… think about it people. Are we willing to sell a piece of Cayman and export it overseas??… we already have limited land mass and now we will let someone steal a huge piece of land from our islands and make billions off of it? NO
Right on. As I posted a comment previously, this "district" thinking and mentality is part of the reason Cayman is now where it is. Everyone is just for themselves and time after time people fail to keep the bigger picture (ie entire country) in mind.
It is "district thinking" that is supporting this project – the fact that you believe you won’t be adversely affected by it because you don’t live there, and the fact that the UDP believes it will not cost them politically. "It’s just a bunch of EEnders who cares. We don’t have any UDP MLA in EE and NS who will suffer defeat as a result". Think I’m wrong? Remember when there was a proposal to put the cruise port in WB? Why was that cancelled? It is that mentality that is ruining this Island. The rest of us understand how this will affect this Island as a whole.
For real… It is high time “developer’s” realise they are now unfashionable & incorrect as the entire world has been hit with the eye opening green hammer.
Well said Wendy! This project will only concentrate more wealth in the hand of an already very wealthy man. The cost to Cayman is more thatn that ofenvironmental damage. Not only is it quite likely that we will be left with yet another eyesore of an unfinished project, once he has sucked out all the valuable fill, we will also suffer the social cost that excessive disparity off wealth gives rise to. Personally, I don’t even think he has any intention of building a port but is using this as a rouse to get planning approval for what is effectively a quarry.
Excellent article. Hope it doesn’t "fall on deaf ears". Time to say "Stop the Insanity!" Cayman shipping rocks overseas? There are quarries overseas the size of Cayman itself.
Well said, Wendy!
This is a very biased article. Expected better!
CNS: It is a commentary, i.e. an opinion piece, not an article.
This is an opinion, but a very sound opinion based on common sense facts.
????? Please reply outlining the portions you find that are biased.
Waiting to see your outline……
but they are not facts…. re-read the article!….. statements are made as if they are facts but again I ask what is the basis for these statements?
Basis? Common sense. Tradewinds – rough seas.
Definition of port/harbour? This wouldn’t be the spot
Irreversible damage to environment. Joe plz go. nuff is enough.
cns: wrong!….
”Aside from being an environmental catastrophe in itself by putting at risk the local water lens, destroying reefs, threatening the critical habitat in the area and undermining the aesthetics of one of the islands’ most dramatic stretches of open, undeveloped coastline, the project also offers some real dangers and knock-on environmental hazards”
this is written as fact…what is basis of this statement?
of COURSE it’s written as fact! every single opinion piece is written as fact- it’s the writer’s opinion….. read much?!
so its okay for me to write an opinion piece and make up whatever I want, say what i want and state it as a fact?…. zzzzzz……..bad day for cns…..
and for the record…. i could very well end up opposing this development 100%, but i will wait till i see all the facts before me
Hate to break it to you, but you shouldn’t expect better.
whoever you are, please, you are welcome to submit alternate thoughts- however, i’m afraid you are greatly in the minority. But instead of throwing stones, please, let’s hear the facts in rebuttal to those posited in this exceptional, clearly presented editorial… {i didn’t think so…}. Cayman is being ruined- Caymanians desperately need to stand up, or there will be NOTHING but deserted concrete left for their children instead of indigenous flora and assorted wildlife.
Folks, you have a choice – let this go ahead and see the East End of island go the same way as Seven-Mile-Beach or start to put the brakes on all development and preserve what is left.
I no longer live on Cayman so am probably poking my nose in where it’s not wanted but I can at least now look at it from the perspective of a visitor, and you need that viewpoint if you want to hang on to what little remains of the stay-over tourist industry.
It’s nearly 20 years since I first visited Cayman and anyone who says that in the intervening period the island hasn’t been ruined by development is fooling themselves. Next time you fly out of Owen Roberts Airport look out of the window at all the part-finished projects to see what I mean. People do not enjoy visiting, whether on business, as tourists or as property owners, a construction site pretending to be a Caribbean island and that is what Cayman has become.
Whatever the quality of the finished product, this project is going remove yet another relatively unspoilt area of landscape and replace it with a bit more ‘Little Miami’ in Cayman. That’s fine if visitors want it but my best bet is that they don’t and whatever gains you may, or may not, get from this development will be more than offset by losses in other areas.
I also find it ironic that a massive development of this nature is being considered when during my time living on Grand Cayman numerous smaller projects, many of which would have directly benefited the community, were being arbitrarily rejected.
It just shows you John, how large our government is growing in size and pushing the private around with hefty fees,permits, and licenses. More and more rediculous laws with hefty fines are being legislated to prevent the low-wage local from starting his own business or sustaining one. How do you expect the economy to get better if the private sector is not given a chance to grow and compete in a free market? Some months ago, government enforced measures to prevent people from selling mangoes and other produce alongside the road, all because of the "probability" of desease or insantary conditions. Now I believe they have to pay a fee just to sell! You see we are creating more laws than people here! The government is not helping one bit with the economy, crime has increased, and those on the low end of the ladder, are the ones being held back from making better of themselves because of too many restrictive laws that are hindering free enterprise.
But all like Joe, Dart, and others are not feeling the pinch, because they it seems to me they know very well how to infatuate some (if not many) of our politicians.
Here is the problem Mr Evans,everyone in Cayman want to maintain their high salaries and nice lifestyle. All of that cost something and sacrifices need to be made. It is obvious that the combined dock services can no longer continue at that site and wherever we put it someone is going to have a problem.
This does not mean I totally agree with the project. Why would I put cruise ship facilities so far from town and the seven mile beach. We already cost an arm and leg for the tourist to come here, or are we just building this site for the wealthy who spend less money but give the potential for investment?
Why don’t we just pour concrete over the whole island and have done?
We have no ecological or environmental commitment here, and nor will there ever be until we remove the tiny brained politicians and their equally tiny brained develop-at-any-cost supporters and try to catch up with the rest of the planet.
Well said Wendy. You are really gonna get a beatin’ from somewhere now though::))
I agree 100% with everything you have written, Wendy.
Here is the petition link
Please everyone….Sign up!!
sorry wendy , judging by your comments…you have obviously got access to a detailed environmental impact assesment…can you share this with us please?… or is it just more typical nimby hot air and rethoric?……
CNS: How can it by nimby when she doesn’t live or own land in the district? Explain ….
I believe the back bone and most important point in this opinion is that The Premier believes the answer to everything is development. Development will trickle down into everyones pockets and solve the countries economic woes. Our economic problems are part USA and world recessionary but mostly the fault of the principals and mind set of the countries leader. Over the past 2 decades teh voters have been brain washed into believing that development is the only way.
Less development, less Government, less entitlement, cost of living, duties, more new income streams and probably most importantly long term planning. Of course all that means less money for the people who run the country.
What a wanker.
Are we allowed to say that on CNS?
Either way, I mean really: what a wanker….
what a comeback…. zzzzzzz
what a mature comment,
i mean really, what a mature comment…….
Well according to Wendy it’s everyone’s back and front yard…do you need further explanation?
well, yeah we need further explanation! LOL! can’t you explain yourself using words?
Start studying geography/social studies – you missed those subjects, quite obviously