Around the time we were putting together this publication an armed robbery was taking place in St Francis Bay further demonstrating how out of control crime in St Francis has become. Living in the city one expects to hear reports of armed hold ups on petrol stations and 24-hr convenience stores and the like but in St Francis Bay? One of the reasons many choose to settle in St Francis is to get away from the crime in the big cities but that seems to changing.
Early yesterday morning three armed robbers held up the owner of the convenience store / second hand shop next door to the Caltex petrol station at gun point and escaped with an undisclosed amount of cash.
Considering there is only one way in and one way out of St Francis monitoring the comings and goings of traffic would certainly be far more effectively monitored than in a town with multiple entry / exit points. For this reason and considering the rapid increase in crime it has become imperative and indeed urgent that at least vehicle tracking CCTV cameras be considered, if only at the main entry / exit point at the circle. Cape St Francis Civics installed such a camera shortly before Christmas as far as SFT is aware there have been no major robberies since.
Certainly such a camera would not be the total solution but with a network of cameras as proposed in the St Francis Property Owners 2018 SRA presentation, there would certainly be some control and deterrent factor. Whether this ever becomes a reality of course is now in the hands of the property owners who need to cast their vote either in favour of or against the proposed SRA.
Sadly some owners have been extremely critical of the SFPO proposal and seemed almost obsessed with the fact that their money is to be spent on the beach and spit rejuvenation. As a town that relies primarily on tourist this priority makes sense but it is not the only matter being addressed? Possibly a way those against having their money spent on the beach / spit should look at it as their hard earned money being spent on improving their personal security (CCTV) and motoring costs with better roads whilst those on the canals and beachfront pay for the spit and beach.
Of course everything could be left as is and as the sea encroaches on St Francis Drive and more and more home owners would abandon their properties, fewer tourist would visit, businesses would close down and ……
Crime would spiral even more than it is now.
But back to security and policing. Of course it is SAPS job to keep the community safe but they are not doing it. All we as a community can therefore do is appeal to SAPS’ higher authority which SFT understands some very concerned business people are in the process of doing and all play our part whether it be by supporting the Neighbour Watch in person or kind and by being alert to any suspicious behaviour be it in a car parking area or out on a street.
Although SAPS recently turned a victim of crime away when they went to report a burglary, alerting them to potential crime may receive a more positive response
A petition will be launched tomorrow.
Totally in favour of cameras. We have installed cameras in our home there which we can access remotely on our phones and this is great comfort when you live far away
As a owner of two properties in St Francis bay. I agree wholeheartedly that, a little SRA levy is of paramount importance if it can make a difference to our community and safety.
Just pay the levy!!!! that levy is far less then what the consequences can be!!
I have a property at Otters landing and would gladly contribute towards cameras. Loitering around the business create opportunities.
If there are no consequents to robberies it will increase.
It’s amazing how the SRA Propaganda Machine kicks into action to justify their proposed levy.
Why didn’t the SFPO use the donations wisely, as in the case of CSF, to install the CCTV cameras in our village. Instead donations were used to fund Consultants to produce a document on the beach and spit rehabilitation that’s been known to us for the past two decades.
According to SFPO over 90% of the donation money received was from residents concerned with saving the Spit & Beach not for a CCTV solution which has only quite recently been suggested as a way to reduce crime.
Jannie, you are so blinkered about the SRA
The “Propaganda Machine” refered to by you does not belong to the SRA. It is a group of concerned citizens gathering votes in favour of a levy to improve the lot of all citizens who live in the area where the special levy is to apply—–even naysayers like you that are against it!!!
The reports are necessary to obtain an EIA required by the Dept of Environmental Affairs before any work can be done to the spit or the beach. The problem might have become visible 20 years ago but nothing was done about it
Look at the disaster of Santareme which was simply developed without an EIA being done. The consequences now are the cause of the beach and spit disappearing!!
Read Morne Marais again—-pay the levy or suffer the consequences when the spit goes, beach houses collapse into the sea, and those in St Francis Drive become “Beachfront houses” !!!!!
And Collo, why should riparian and beachfront owners be responsible for the beach problem? is not the beach used by virtually EVERYONE in SFB for their enjoyment? Therefore ALL residents should contribute to the repair and maintenance of the beach, not just riparian and beachfront owners or even those who live in the SRA area.If a beach-goer is not a ratepayer, they should be required to make a donation towards the maintenance of the beach.Pay a rand or two to use the beach!!!
Totally agree beach is for everybody – intention was if those who are so against fixing the beach maybe they should live in their own world and pretend their contribution is just for their little bit of the planet.
Mick, when making a statement that “All residents should contribute to the repair and maintenance of the beach and spit”, then please allow “All the residents” to vote!
Why exclude Santareme from the SRA vote if that part of the village was the main cause of the beach and spit disappearing??
If “quite recently” can be defined as ten years ago, then I suppose “saving the beach and spit” must fall in the same category.