Lotsa Unanswered Questions

"Indian" wrote:

Jekyll Boy You just don't get it! The real issue is not about cost. The main and mainly ignored issue is the proposed overdevelopment on a fragile barrier that decidedly cannot support a tripling of population.

JB: I do get it, and I agree with you. The environmental issues are not being addressed to the same degree as other topics. And that's just ONE issue. I think there are a number of really basic issues/questions that need to be addressed. Among them,

-- Jekyll Island is defined as a "state park." What does that mean?

-- As a state park, what kind of amenities / facilities should be provided for visitors?

-- Is Jekyll Island just for Georgians? Coastal Georgians? People from Atlanta? Rich people? Poor people? White people? Black people?

-- It has been stated that Jekyll Island exists for the benefit and use of 'common' Georgians. What does that mean?

-- If we are indeed concerned about preserving Jekyll Island's environment, how far are we willing to go in that endeavor?

Yes, I am aware of the Master Plan which attempts to answer some of these questions. But most people are NOT aware of that plan, and are focusing on a small portion of the issues.

INDIAN: Yes the common developers stance that the island's amenities need replacement is true. But replacement does not mean development to such levels as proposed. That style of builders overreaching will seriously diminish or possibly destroy the native natural habitat and reduce this place to the level of so many of the coastal "Developed" beach fronts and barrier islands.

JB: Do you really believe that these people are that insensitive? Is it possible that they may realize that Jekyll Island's unspoiled beaches, etc are what make it truly special, and that by destroying that they are diminishing the value of their efforts? (Before someone jumps in and accuses me of being on "their side," I am not. But slow down. Think seriously and objectively.)

INDIAN: Jekyll Island has one of the most biomes on the Atlantic coast and should be maintained. The only real benefit to the proposed extensive constructions will be to the corporate developers. Georgia citizens will pay the tax burden necessary to finance the necessary increase in infrastructure and services. It is time to put an end to the rampant mind set that believes in "ANYTHING DOE A BUCK and TOO MUCH IS NEVER ENOUGH. It is unfortunate that many of our elected government representatives have been captured by these ideals.

JB: I agree that Jekyll Island's environment MUST be maintained. I do not agree, however, that 'corporate developers' will be the only beneficiaries. It boils down to what we want Jekyll Island to be. It potentially impacts the jobs and livelihoods of those who work on Jekyll Island. It potentially impacts Jekyll Island visitors, some of whom might actually WANT modern facilities, etc. Are those impacts positive or negative? Guess it depends on your point of view. AGAIN, what do we want Jekyll Island to be?

INDIAN: The local merchants would be wise to remember how little income was actually derived by the recent presence of the G-8 conference. It is reasonable to assume that many of the present retail establishments will be supplanted by strong national retail franchises. "The Wal-Mart effect"

JB: I'm not sure what the G8 has to do with this discussion. I do know it was not the financial windfall for the state that was suggested. Did it raise Georgia's stature on the radar of people looking for places to visit? Probably not; effective marketing requires much more than a single event. Regarding the 'Wal-Mart Effect,' I've seen comments that suggest Wal-Mart, Target, Old Navy and other national chains are going to take over on Jekyll Island and kick the mom-and-pop business out. I seriously doubt that. We just got a Target in Brunswick, and it struggles.

INDIAN: From the developers, planners, JIA and government offices there is also a decided failure to answer the question of how the available aquifer allocation can support the population increase. The present and past usage has been in the upper 90% of allowed daily water drawdown.

JB: I would guess the reason is because they do not know. Seems to me that is a CRUCIAL PART of the puzzle. The availability of fresh water is a serious issue, even here on the coast where we are surrounded by it. Look at metro Atlanta's water troubles. Failure to deal with this is more than folly, it should be considered criminal.

INDIAN: The above items need rational attention devoid of the profit motive. We will likely never be able to reclaim the natural heritage for which we are about to abandon our stewardship duty.

JB: Never say never. You can always get rid of stuff, and Mother Nature will reclaim the land. It's a lot harder to undo damage to the aquafier, etc. but even it will heal over time. Unfortunately, you and I might not be around to see that day. Thank you for helping to carry on the dialogue in an objective way. Stay tuned.

-- Jekyll Boy