Property Matters – Sandals MoU? Part two

Sandals MOU_ (3)

The previous article updated readers on my attempts to obtain the Sandals Memorandum of Understanding for the proposed high-end, large-scale resort development in Tobago. That proposed development is said to be a significant part of our country’s diversification efforts so it requires our sober attention if we are to understand what is at stake.

The model for this project is one in which the State either pays for or guarantees the financing of the new resort. The State would pay for the cost of design, financing, construction, fitting and furnishing of the new resort, all to the standards set by Sandals. The completed resort will then be operated by Sandals under a management agreement. T&T is unique in the Caribbean in that our largest hotels were funded by Public Money with the operators working via Management Agreements.

That is the model which has been used thus far in our State-owned hotels. That fact has been cited several times by the PM, quite likely to offer a degree of comfort to those who are unsure about this project. After all, we have done this model before, so what could be the harm if we go along the same road once more?

That approach to a major investment of this type does not offer me any comfort at all. Since September 2016 I have been pursuing a detailed research program into the State-owned hotels, with my colleagues from Disclosure Today and we have been solidly resisted. In my view, we do not have enough information about the existing State-owned hotels – Trinidad Hilton (1962); Magdalena Grand (originally Tobago Hilton, opened in 2000) and Hyatt Regency (2008) – to be confident about this approach. Continue reading “Property Matters – Sandals MoU? Part two”

Property Matters – Sandals MoU?

Adam Stewart, CEO Sandals

This is a continuation of my 8 March 2018 article on the Sandals MoU. That MoU was declared as no secret by our PM to the Parliament on 12 October 2017 and that was confirmed by the then CEO of the Sandals group, Adam Stewart, as reported on 27 February 2018 in the T&T press.

My 27 February 2018 request for that MoU under the Freedom of Information Act (embedded below) was therefore made against that background of both parties’ declaration that there was no secret. The Office of the Prime Minister responded on 22 March 2018 to refuse my request, citing that the MoU contained a confidentiality clause which prevented its disclosure at this time. I have since written to the OPM to request a reply in conformity with the provisions of the Freedom of Information Act – I am still awaiting a reply to that letter.

I have now written to Mr Adam Stewart of Sandals Resorts International to request from him a copy of the MoU. (See below)

This is a proposal of high public importance as it is being advanced as an important part of our country’s diversification strategy, so the correspondence is set out in this article.

From: Afra Raymond
Date: Fri, Jun 15, 2018 at 3:41 PM
Subject: Request for Memorandum of Understanding with Sandals Resorts
To: Adam Stewart

Dear Mr Stewart,

I am writing to request a copy of the signed Memorandum of Understanding between Sandals Resorts International and the Government of the Republic of Trinidad & Tobago – it was recently reported that this MoU was signed on 10th October 2017.

There is no doubt that the proposed 750-room Sandals/Beaches Resort for Tobago will be a large-scale, high-impact development, so there an understandable public interest in those proposals. I was therefore greatly encouraged by your emphatic statements that there is no secrecy in relation to the business arrangement or the MoU and that you refuted any secret deals – as reported in the Trinidad & Tobago press on 27th February 2018.

I was therefore astonished that the Office of the Prime Minister replied on 22nd March 2018 to my request for that MoU by citing a confidentiality clause to refuse its disclosure at this time. I wrote to the OPM on 11th April 2018 requesting a clarification and their reply is still awaited. In the interim, I am requesting from you a copy of the MoU in the public interest of transparency in this large-scale development proposal.

For your information, my earlier article on the Sandals MoU was published in the Express Business on 8th March 2018 and can be accessed here. The related correspondence is attached for ease of reference.

Please let me have your reply in due course.

Afra Raymond

afraraymond.net

 

Property Matters – more Property Tax FAQs part three

property-tax-logoApart from the strong objections to the re-introduction of property tax, there are tantalising points emerging on the need for those taxes to be used to pay for local government services. Local government is one of the sectors which is in most frequent contact with the needs of communities, such as maintenance of drains and playing-fields; garbage collection; road repairs and many other such services.

One of the common positions on this tax is one in which there is no real objection to property tax as such, but there are local government and property valuation concerns expressed. Most of those persons seem to have a strong preference for the property tax to be used to fund their local government services, which then leads to an objection to the valuation approach. Those persons seem to hold the view that the extent to which one property is more valuable than another ought not to be the basis for setting the property taxes, if those properties are using broadly similar levels of local services. One can understand that this approach would appeal to those who own the more valuable properties, but one can equally say that those who own more modest properties would be displeased if their property tax bills were the same as their neighbours with larger and more valuable properties. It is complicated. Continue reading “Property Matters – more Property Tax FAQs part three”

Property Matters – more Property Tax FAQs part two

property-tax-logoThis week I will provide further necessary correctives on the impending re-introduction of the Property Tax, which is not a new tax. It previously existed as House Rates in the five cities and Land & Building Taxes in the other parts of the country.

Tax Evasion

Self-employed and professionals and sole traders have always under-reported their earnings and never paid the correct taxes. Those people often use property as a useful place to store their untaxed wealth. We have never really dealt with this tradition of tax evasion amongst our successful citizens and I cannot remember anyone being imprisoned or having property auctioned due to taxes owed. Whatever my doubts about the motivation of the American Imperium in pushing its ‘anti-tax haven’ agenda, some things do give cause for a pause. For instance, the Financial Times article of 28 June 2017 – ‘Trinidad & Tobago left as the last blacklisted tax haven‘. Continue reading “Property Matters – more Property Tax FAQs part two”

Property Matters – more Property Tax FAQs

The recent series of comments on this Property Tax have prompted my return to this controversial issue. Some of those comments were;

The proposed Property Tax has three main differences from the old system which ended in 2009 –

  1. Revised Valuations – It will be based on updated valuations. In 2009 $143M was raised, the 2017 estimates were for $503M to be raised – the 2018 estimate is $250M, likely due to the delay in passing the required law and the ongoing litigation which is now at the Appeal Court level;
  2. Database – It will require an open database for proper operation. This open database is the decisive element, which I welcome;
  3. Funds – The old system allocated those monies to local government, but the new system directs the Property Tax revenue to the consolidated fund. In my view that is detrimental to proper local government.

Property owners have had an unprecedented tax holiday, with no property tax paid since 2009. At a minimum, using the lower 2009 revenues, $1.287 Billion more remained with our property-owners.

I will touch on three of the most common objections – Continue reading “Property Matters – more Property Tax FAQs”

Property Matters – St Augustine Nurseries, part three

northgrove-planIn writing these articles on St Augustine Nurseries — Part 1 and Part 2 — I found my thoughts returning to those poorest of HDC’s applicants who simply cannot afford to buy. I reflected on the fact that many of our leading citizens emerged from very humble backgrounds which ought to have entitled their families to the benefits of subsidised housing. This is the final article in that mini-series, so I will be locating St Augustine Nurseries within the wider context.

rowley-bookFrom my reading of Dr Rowley’s autobiography ‘From Mason Hall to White Hall‘ it is clear that similar situations prevailed in his own early life. Between pages 32 and 33, Dr Rowley recalls his first visit to Trinidad to stay with his late mother, ‘Vassie’, at her rented home in John John – he was an eight-year-old, so this would have been 1957 or so. The crowded and unhygenic conditions he describes make it clear to me that Ms Rowley’s case was one which would have surely been worthy of public housing subsidy to obtain a better quality of affordable rented housing. Here was a decent, hardworking woman unable to do better, but having to make do, until she was able to move to an NHA home at Coconut Drive in Morvant as described later in the book. At page 35, we are told that Dr Rowley lived there in 1970, so those homes were conceived and built before the 1974 oil boom.  Continue reading “Property Matters – St Augustine Nurseries, part three”

Property Matters – St Augustine Nurseries part two

Property Matters – St Augustine Nurseries part two

The previous column detailed the ways in which this HDC project was being pursued in breach of existing land and housing policy. In this article I will go further, to specify the HDC’s statutory responsibilities, which it is legally bound to discharge. I will also examine the potential for a judicial review of the prospective decision to approve this project.

In addition to the land-use policy points made last week, the HDC is a statutory agency of the State, created by the HDC Act 2005. The HDC’s functions and duties are specified at S.13 (1) –

“…13. (1) Subject to this Act, it shall be the function and duty of the Corporation to—
(a) do all things necessary and convenient for or in connection with the provision of affordable shelter and associated community facilities for low- and middle-income persons…”

The law lists the low-income persons ahead of the middle income persons, which would conventionally denote a priority. The first item in a list taking precedence over the second and so on, but that is straight-line thinking and that is not where we are. Not at all.

HDC’s official responses to my queries stated that less than 22% of the 13,484 new homes allocated between 2003 and 2015 were given for rent. That is a scandalous misallocation of Public Money, given that 95% of the waiting-list comprises persons who cannot afford to buy a home, even on the most generous terms.

Last week, the PM announced plans for a $9 Billion investment in 10,000 new homes to be built in the coming months. That is a virtually unattainable target. Just remember that the original target in the 2002 housing policy was for 100,000 new homes in a decade, but in the 13-year period 2003-2015 only 11,788 new homes were completed. Yes, that’s right, the numbers do not match. HDC allocated 1,696 more homes than were completed in that period, but that is for another article. Continue reading “Property Matters – St Augustine Nurseries part two”