Maybe some are missing the point of the revised SRA
A post on Facebook yesterday regarding the new proposed SRA (Special Rates Area) seems to miss the point in that as with many of Donald Trump’s tweets it ignores reality. Whilst Trump denies global warming and sees no reason to take action on carbon emissions, this post seems to dismiss the urgency of Spit and Beach erosion. The recent petition calling for action from DEDEAT and Council was to accelerate action for both these bodies as with SFPO, realise the potential disaster should urgent action not be taken.
Certainly nobody can determine a 100% solution to saving the beach or spit but experts on beach erosion are being consulted and different solutions being considered by all concerned. To sit and do nothing simply because there is no guaranteed plan seems somewhat like Caesar watching Rome burn.
As for creating dissension in the St Francis Bay community one would suggest many of those who voted against the SRA last year that don’t reside on the canals or in the village most probably sighed with great relief on hearing they would not have to find extra money each month. One would suggest that SFPO’s intention is certainly not to split a community but to rather ensure those more directly affected by certain criteria can be masters of their own fate without asking others who feel the spit and beach has nothing to do with them and as such are reluctant to contribute.
But reading between the lines it may be the author of the post is more concerned that the areas outside the demarcated canal and village area won’t form part of the CCTV plans proposed by SFPO. It goes without saying that if these areas are not contributing to the fund to cover the CCTV those who are would be us unhappy sponsoring those not paying. To state that it is “punishment for previously not voting the right way” really seems the author is ignoring the real problems of the “empty plot” problem that almost makes a fair vote impossible.
Rather than sulking about being left out of the CCTV loop possibly the way forward would be to engage with SFPO rather than constantly undermining their efforts. There must be a way to extend the CCTV to the entire St Francis Bay it surely is just a matter of those not participating in the SRA finding a way to participate. Engagement rather than mud slinging would seem the best way forward.
The more people paying toward a CCTV solution would no doubt bring costs down but the drawback would possibly be getting 50% +1 property owners in the excluded areas unless all the plot owners can be found and then convinced that their empty plot needs to be watched by a CCTV camera.
Don’t miss the Public Meeting at the Links at 4:00pm this afternoon (3rd January)
Very well said and you are spot on with your assessment. Some people habitually seek to publish negative comments and outline all sorts of reasons “why not” as opposed to a single reason “why”. If only they could become part of the solution as opposed to part of the problem, we could all make progress.
Great article and well said. I am in full support to save and improve any part of St Francis Bay. No matter where one lives in St Francis Bay, we are a community that need each other, the spit, the beach, the village etc
It would be useful to know about the experts giving advice on the spit problem. What is their expertise and what are their predictions for the erosion of the spit. Presumably the first impact would be the sanding up of the “Ski Canal”? In the event that the efforts to save the spit are ineffective, are the experts considering any mitigation measures, such as the possibility of making a new connection between the canal system and the river?
Such information would be very valuable to the potential voters.