Residents in Sandy Ground, the neighbouring villages and across Anguilla, as a whole, have voiced a resounding and emphatic no to the proposed megayacht marina in the Road Pond. The company involved is said to be Sandy Ground Development Ltd., with head office in Switzerland and registered in Nevis.
Such was the vociferous outburst of public disagreement, over the MOU, that the Government officials at the consultation, and/or other persons who might have had a more open-minded approach to the project, remained virtually silent.
The consultative meeting was held on Friday evening, October 9, at Roy’s Restaurant where a mammoth crowd had assembled. It was a joint event by the Sandy Ground Community and the Government of Anguilla. The chairperson was Ms. Pat Hodge, a Sandy Ground resident and President of the Sandy Ground Committee. Those who joined her, as the main speakers against the yacht marina, were: Mr. Richard West, the well-known owner and captain of the yacht, Charm 3 – former Marine Surveyor for British ships registry in Anguilla for 20 years, and former Lloyd’s Global Marine Insurance Surveyor for Heavy Lift and Extreme Risk Cargos for 25 years; Mr. Rommel Hughes, a Civil Engineer; Mr. Edison Baird, a former politician and community activist; Mr. Ed Carty a deep-sea fisherman; and Mr. David Carty, an environmental advocate, historian and professional boat-builder in North Hill, overlooking Sandy Ground.
The Government of Anguilla was represented by Premier Dr. Ellis Webster and his Cabinet members. In his introductory remarks, Minister of Home Affairs, Mr. Kenneth Hodge, asked “that the discussions be in order and above all, there would be an opportunity to get the views of persons as to what they see as the future in this [Sandy Ground village].”
Ms. Pat Hodge told the crowd: “We are gathered here to discuss a very important and heated topic: the marina in the Road Salt Pond. Why is it important? It is because we are residents of Sandy Ground. We call upon all persons present, to help us to conduct this meeting in a friendly and courteous manner.”
Speaking first at the invitation of Premier Webster, the Elected Representative of District 5 (which includes Sandy Ground), Mr. Merrick Richardson, set the matter in perspective. He said in part: “Those of you who were following the election campaign would have known that I campaigned on a promise of no marina in Sandy Ground. Two weeks after being elected and entering office, the APP held a town hall meeting here in Sandy Ground, and again we said no marina in Sandy Ground. One week after that meeting, we received some emails saying that we are needed at a meeting with the folks who are planning a meeting in Sandy Ground…
“Upon entering that meeting, we realised that there was a signed definitive agreement to put a marina in the Sandy Ground Salt Pond. We subsequently met with the developers via a Zoom meeting. We expressed to them that we were not interested in a marina in the Sandy Ground Salt Pond. Just before that, after learning about the project, I convened a meeting with Pat Hodge, Rommel Hughes and the former representative for this area, Mr. Baird, and I told them about the proposed marina for Sandy Ground – and this was a shock to everyone to find out that not only was there a proposed development for the salt pond, but it was already signed and about to be executed.
“We are now stuck in a hard place. There are persons who believe that this MOU definitive agreement is not a contract – but a signed MOU is a contract between Government and the developers…We met with the developers. We stated our case and how we strongly feel about this. There has been a lot of propaganda on the airwaves, but I have withheld from making any public announcements about the marina because we know we cannot say much until the environmental assessment is done on the pond and that is what we are awaiting.”
Premier Webster briefly stated: “There is a marina development company that met with the former administration – and there is a definitive agreement that has been signed. Our position is that we want to see the environmental impact assessment which will be done by a company that has been taken off the list of the Land Development Control Committee, and it will be paid for by the developers.
“If that environmental impact assessment is favourable, then the position is that we are willing to go ahead with the marina in the Sandy Ground Pond, unless the people of Anguilla decide that is not what they want. You see, I didn’t say the people only of Sandy Ground. I said the people of Anguilla and that’s the position…We believe that the community of Sandy Ground have the say. We also need to listen to the people of Anguilla -and that’s where we are.”
The first presentation, using a detailed map of Sandy Ground, was made by Captain Richard West. He made the following statement in part: “We put together this short presentation because we want to express our serious concerns about this project. It is not just about Sandy Ground residents. We are here to address everybody in Anguilla. There is nobody on Anguilla who does not understand the terrible economic situation; the debt left by the previous administration; and the ruinous effects of the Covid-19…Everyone in Anguilla wants meaningful investment that will create jobs and revenue long term for Anguilla. This project, however, does not meet the needs of any criteria. The destruction of the most iconic area of Anguilla, with hundreds of years of history, should not be seen by any Anguillian as an acceptable price to pay for an unknown promised return.”
He charged that, in June 2018, the previous administration of Anguilla was misled by an original yacht development study. According to him, it showed the image of a typical yacht in Road Pond that was not even built yet – and could not enter or float in the proposed dredged marina. He stated, among other matters, that the dredging of the pond would result in some 50,000 cubic yards of mud (extremely toxic stuff) and that its disposal at sea, like that of the estimated 180,000 cubic yards of sand, dredged from the sea, in the approach to the pond, was not an option. He pointed out that there was also the issue of hydrogen sulphide gas and its health risks. He spoke about unacceptable controls which the developers would have in the Road Bay area, limiting public use.
Mr. Edison Baird stressed that he was very disappointed about the manner in which “The Definitive Agreement Sandy Ground Grand Marina and Resort Project came into existence.” He went on: “Not a single person knew that the Government had signed this document and, in fairness to Dr. Webster and his Ministers, and his political colleagues, I believe I am on safe ground in saying no one knew that this document existed during the election campaign. In fact, I understand that the present Government stumbled onto this agreement after being in power for some two weeks…They did not know that the previous Government had signed this document despite the fact that the Governor had said to them, in clear and unequivocal terms, no major projects can be approved. The House of Assembly was dissolved on the 9th of May. Therefore, from the 9th of May up to the general elections, the Government was not in a position to sign this document or any document.”
Mr. Baird declared that the implementation of the MOU “can wipe out every man, woman or child in Sandy Ground, and that the document can be used to dispossess us of our properties.”
Mr. Rommel Hughes said in part: “I am particularly concerned with the survivability of this sand bar on which we now sit with a marina in the pond and all that it entails. Therefore, I would like to pose a number of questions for this administration for their consideration. Given my intimate knowledge of this area where I swam this beach for over thirty years, I know what is out there… When I was an engineer working for Government, we drilled a number of wells on the eastern side of the pond, along the road that leads to the cemetery. In those holes that went down about thirty feet, there was nothing but mud. On the [western side], with the construction of the jetty, the piles are going down in mud up to forty, fifty feet. So, obviously, under Sandy Ground has an extensive layer of mud if which, I am convinced were to be removed, will definitely destabilise the sand bar to the point where it would subsequently disappear beneath the waves. Therefore, I am totally and 110 percent against a marina going into the pond.”
He added: “I listened to the Premier at the onset of this gathering and he indicated that once the impact environmental assessment comes back and says that it is okay to put a marina in the pond, it is a go for them.” His statement was met with shouts of ‘no’ by the crowd.
Mr. Hughes proceeded to put a number of questions to the Government concerning several matters relating to the MOU. One of the questions was whether the environmental impact assessment would be reviewed by a competent and independent person or body. No immediate answers were given by the Government.
Mr. Ed Carty spoke about high sea surges in Sandy Ground during hurricanes, and the disastrous effects caused by the canal from the sea to the pond when opened. “What will happen to our little sand bar we have here when you dredge on one side and talking about dredging on the other side?” he asked.
Mr. Carty, known for his calm and quiet disposition, began to lose his cool, demanding: “Are you thinking about people or the dollar? Are you looking at it from a standpoint just for money? Just for development? My dear, Anguilla is a flat island. A lot of development can go on, but do not destroy our history and heritage. Just remember that.”
Mr. David Carty said in part: “Mr. Premier, I am not here to defend the people of Sandy Ground. They can do that for themselves. I am actually here to help you and to advise you that what you are involved in is a true exercise of democracy – not only in this session, but in your decisions. I also want to say to you, that most Governments have faced this kind of issue where you are stuck between the necessity of economic development, jobs, revenues, paying the bills and what you have to give up to a developer to get that. But, with the hindsight of history, you need to be very careful.”
Mr. Carty pointed to a case where, some years ago, there was a proposal for the US navy to use Dog Island as a bombing range in exchange for two naval vessels to provide electricity for Anguilla. He pointed out that it was objected to and resolved by opponents at a political meeting on the Ronald Webster Park. He also recalled when an Italian/St. Maarten investor wanted all the residents of West End and Long Bay to move out of that area and to make it a touristic zone. The Government of Sir Emile Gumbs, at that time, in 1978, strongly objected to the proposal.
Mr. Carty observed: “Every Government deals with an investor who comes with an idea that he thinks is great, and does not measure the consequences of social and political fallout. You now have that same challenge before you. You are the custodians of the pond for the next four plus years. Your decision counts.”
Reading from the MOU, Mr. Carty advised the Premier that it stated that the terms of the environmental impact study were the responsibility of the Department of Physical Planning. “You should run screaming away from that. The terms of reference for this project have to be done in consultation with the entire Government and, in the exercise of democracy, by the people of Sandy Ground…It is within the Government’s power to list the terms of reference – and the terms of reference are not just there to protect you from hydrogen sulphide. The terms of reference are there to protect the issues of heritage that Ed, Rommel and Mr. Baird spoke about…You cannot have a cultural village like Anguilla co-existing in peace and harmony with the development that they [the developers have produced]. You are bound to create conflict.” He pointed out that the Department of Physical Planning, and the environmental impact assessment company on its list, were not qualified to do the study. He suggested that there was a need for Government to contact international consultants from such organisations like the Environmental Defence Fund of the United States.
Mr. Carty also spoke about an environmental issue whereby the Government of Anguilla could find itself in legal trouble with the developers in terms of their planned oceanfront homes. He referred to disturbing noises from the operations of the port now being developed at Sandy Ground; the loud music in the area from a growing population; and the possibility of the Government being sued by the developers. He stressed that there was a need for the Government to seek advice from international advisers in deciding on the terms of reference about which he spoke earlier.
The consultative meeting continued with various other persons delivering statements or asking questions. The mood of the people was generally respectful, though extremely strong and loud, and left Premier Webster and his Cabinet with much to think about.
