From: Chris Willemse
Subject: Re: Item 58/10/15 on the Council Agenda for WEDNESDAY
Date: 29 October 2015 at 8:31:07 AM SAST
To: Jacques Weber
Hi Jacques
You continue to be patronising whilst ducking the actual questions asked: Who supported this scheme and on which of the myriad versions thereof?
Please note that this question will not go away and will remain an albatross around your neck until you answer it satisfactorily.
Of course, the item was "approved" by all the very compliant DA councillors looking after their jobs. The reality, of course, is that it was approved by your boss, the mayor, a long time ago.
If, as you state, the communities' (note plural) feedback and comments were conveyed to the City, and here I presume it was for consideration (you're most obtuse with this statement), then can it be taken that not a single point that we raised was worthy of consideration? The implication is that the vast and deep institutional knowledge of such communities (and individuals highly placed in the development industry) is really not worth anything.
It is quite mind-blowing that you now urge the communities to "make use of the multiple ongoing public participation opportunities which remain as part of this project", when not a single input to date has been considered by the so-called City property specialists. You make a most fatuous comment in this regard and it shows the lack of respect you have for your voters.
I think that you will find that the voters will remember this next year: The people whose trust you have abused in this matter will not forget your betrayal.
However, there is a good chance that this matter will be decided by the WC High Court prior to elections. If the Court finds fault with this process, which you have so eagerly supported, to the detriment of your electorate, will you resign as a councillor?
Cheers
Chris
From: Jacques Weber
Subject: Re: Item 58/10/15 on the Council Agenda for WEDNESDAY
Date: 28 October 2015 at 4:13:29 AM SAST
To: Chris Willemse
Dear Chris
You email is acknowledged.
I must restate that I do not ignore your feedback and comments which have been conveyed, together with those of other residents and organisations, to the City on this development.
The item was approved today by DA led council by 125 votes to 62.
May I conclude by urging you and likeminded organisations to make use of the multiple ongoing public participation opportunities which remain as part of this project.
Regards
Cllr. Jacques Weber
Ward 54 – Atlantic Seaboard
Porfolio Member: Transport For Cape Town (TCT)
Cell: 076 520 7550
Fax: 086 202 8742
From: Chris Willemse
Subject: Re: Item 58/10/15 on the Council Agenda for WEDNESDAY
Date: 27 October 2015 at 10:04:42 PM SAST
To: Jacques Weber
Hi Jacques
I'm afraid your response raises more questions than answers and appears more of a spin exercise than a meaningful response to genuine civic concern on the part of the electorate that voted for you.
Firstly, please name any of the Civic Based Organisations (CBO's) in your ward which have supported this proposal. In fact, please name any organisation that categorically supported the proposal - and which particular machination of the proposal it was in the first instance.
You will find that your dismissive and rather petulant remark that "(you) have to consider the comments and views, formal and informal, of all those in my ward and not just those of one organisation or individual" is neither helpful nor truthful. You (and various City officials) were requested to supply minutes of meetings you purportedly held with "stakeholders", and which apparently formed your positive attitude toward this unacceptable development, but nothing was forthcoming.
Insofar as the city-wide perspective is concerned, the CBRRA and other organisations attended every meeting held to discuss this proposal and observed that there was no support from the community, either by groupings or by individuals. In fact, quite the opposite. Or is the political spin going to be that, because many people didn't actively respond to the "public participation" process, it follows that they support it?
You have avoided actually stating your position on the matter, which leaves your entire response with the so-called "elephant in the room" problem. I can assure you that every CBO in your ward (and across the city) is following this e-mail trail, so it would be of assistance to all if you could simply state your position. If, of course, it is your position that it is in the "city-wide" interests to sell off scarce and precious public land for private development and profit, then you have nailed your colours to the mast, so to speak - and you will be judged accordingly.
Please don't try to fob off active and concerned communities with pacifying comments like the "first of many steps which also require public participation". It is clear to all how "public participation" processes are dealt with by the City. You conceded as much at the last CBRRA meeting you attended.
Which brings me to the final point. You claim that you remain committed to working with the CBRRA, however you have steadfastly avoided attending it's monthly Manco meetings. The minutes reveal that the last meeting attended by you was 08 June 2015. The CBRRA will be addressing a complaint to Ald Qually regarding your less than acceptable record in this regard. Or, perhaps you only want to work with CBO's on your own terms?
It is your choice how you go forward - but you can't have it both ways. And beware of #DA/deLille/greedydevelopersmustfall…… It might be surprisingly effective, as recent SA history has shown.
The CBRRA awaits your direct response on how you intend to deal with, and vote on, this matter tomorrow.
Cheers
Chris
0836536363
From: Jacques Weber [mailto:Jacques.Weber@capetown.gov.za]
Sent: 27 October 2015 06:09 PM
To: Chris Willemse <cnwillemse@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Item 58/10/15 on the Council Agenda for WEDNESDAY
Sent: 27 October 2015 06:09 PM
To: Chris Willemse <cnwillemse@gmail.com>
Subject: RE: Item 58/10/15 on the Council Agenda for WEDNESDAY
Dear Chris
Please note that I do not access my emails until late afternoon as I am generally on dealing with service delivery issues or in meetings during the day.
Your concern is hereby acknowledged.
It’s my responsibility to take into account views expressed during the extensive formal public participation process, and I can assure you that your organisation’s comments have been properly considered. At the same time, as councillor I have to consider the comments and views, formal and informal, of all those in my ward and not just those of one organisation or individual. Further to that, I (and the City) must evaluate the city-wide perspective in coming to a decision.
Please be reminded that this decision, if approved by council, is the first of many steps which also require public participation.
I reassure you that I remain committed to working with your organisation in the best interests of all the residents of our beautiful city.
It’s my responsibility to take into account views expressed during the extensive formal public participation process, and I can assure you that your organisation’s comments have been properly considered. At the same time, as councillor I have to consider the comments and views, formal and informal, of all those in my ward and not just those of one organisation or individual. Further to that, I (and the City) must evaluate the city-wide perspective in coming to a decision.
Please be reminded that this decision, if approved by council, is the first of many steps which also require public participation.
I reassure you that I remain committed to working with your organisation in the best interests of all the residents of our beautiful city.
Kind Regards
Cllr Jacques Weber
WARD 54 - Atlantic Seaboard
Cell: 076 520 7550
From: Chris Willemse <cnwillemse@gmail.com>
Sent: 27 October 2015 05:38 PM
To: Jacques Weber
Subject: Re: Item 58/10/15 on the Council Agenda for WEDNESDAY
Sent: 27 October 2015 05:38 PM
To: Jacques Weber
Subject: Re: Item 58/10/15 on the Council Agenda for WEDNESDAY
Hi Jacques
It is now 17h35 and there has been no response from you regarding this critical matter.
Please respond by return.
Cheers
Chris
cnwillemse@gmail.com
0836536363
On 27 Oct 2015, at 9:48 AM, Chris Willemse <cnwillemse@gmail.com> wrote:
Hi Jacques
It has been brought to the CBRRA's attention that this item is on the Council agenda for tomorrow.
It is, again, beyond belief that yet another machination of this unacceptable development has been tabled without any reference to the I&AP's - although purportedly based on inputs received. This is simply not how public participation works and speaks to a process that is merely working to a previously decided outcome.
Any right-thinking person will immediately realise that this is so lacking in transparency - and such a pathetic attempt to circumvent due process - that it must be rejected with the contempt that it deserves.
You are the public representative for the area and the CBRRA, as the registered civic based organisation for this precinct, hereby demands that you ensure that this item is withdrawn from the agenda until such time as this new "vision" is properly workshopped through the relevant channels with all I&AP's. Your failure to do so will reflect poorly upon you in the community that elected you in the first place.
It is safely assumed that other CBO's in your Ward (and beyond) agree with the CBRRA's position in this matter - although time constraints have prevented proper consultation.
In the alternative, please respond by return that you do not feel bound by the reasonable expectations of your electorate but rather by the DA party leadership and it's Development Industry backers.
The CBRRA awaits your urgent response.
Cheers
Chris
No comments:
Post a Comment