Your research on liquor licence and association’s un-willingness to partake in any referendum would suggest the association has entered into some pact with spar. Would they have the same approach should I decide to apply for a “shebeen” type licence in Park Island?

I am disgusted that the Association will leave such an important thing as a liquor licence application to the residents without them actually giving us proper information. Do they care about our area at all? They embarrassed us by supporting the very controversial Loitering Act. They object to buildings at Sunrise Circle. (What on earth these things have to do with us at all is beyond me.) They put in their 2c worth about Cape Town’s boom-gate policy (please note, we were not even consulted about these things at all).

Now that something is actually happening on our very own doorstep, they are shtum!!

What gives? Who greased the palm of whom here? Or does the Chairman just like the idea of having his daily fix on his doorstep?

On 20 February, the MDGA issued an e-mail notice to those members on its e-mail list (half the membership if you’re lucky) advising of Spar’s plan to open a bottle store and how the MDGA will not act on behalf of its members in either supporting or opposing the liquor license application. Although this same notice states that:

“The owner of the Spar, and a regional representative of the chain, held discussions with Excom, prior to making the application, in order that our members should be aware of their plans”
“(Spar) wish to achieve the acceptance of the community for the venture”
“The Spar representatives have prepared a brochure, setting out their plans. A copy is held in the Marina office, for any member who wishes to read it”

the MDGA for some reason see no obligation on their part to fully inform all their members and instead (for the first time in its history I believe) opted to notify members not by notice at their respective registered domicilia but rather by way of “an information notice…distributed to members by E-mail, informing them of the facts”

In this same e-mail notice, there is stated this fact:
“A security guard will be stationed at the entrance”
further supported by “Spar, as a responsible organisation, with a reputation to protect….”

Now, barely two weeks after the above e-mail notice was issued, the residents of Eastlake Drive and Fisherman Quay (which for those who don’t know are situated in the immediate vicinity of the Eastlake/Spar shopping centre) received a written appeal from Richard Gie – donning his ‘Independent Security Committee’ hat – to join the fight against crime. A page of scare tactics focusing on the crime wave heading towards the Cape alludes to the possibility that Spar will subsidise the security guarding costs for Eastlake Drive. But lo and behold, if you read further it is not Spar who will subsidise the residents, but the members who will be subsidizing Spar! Spar it transpires no longer wish to pay for the services of a full-time security guard and Mr Gie et al have very kindly offered to enlist the support of Eastlake Drive residents to help finance this cost. Who is going to provide the security guard for the bottle store? Or is it the same security guard that the residents will be co-financing? Does this mean that the residents are going to be subsidizing the security for the entire shopping centre????

Now although Mr Gie (donning his MDGA Security Committee cap) is very much aware of the pending llquor license application cum bottle store (donning his Independent Security Committee hat) he doesn’t so much as mention this teeny weeny little matter of a neighbourhood bottle store in his appeal to the Eastlake Drive residents. But hey let’s be fair, he has offered his and Elaine’s assistance (that would be Elaine Meyer of MDGA Excom fame) to these poor helpless residents to set up a committee to facilitate this wonderful security initiative – and dare I say to ensure that it isn’t ignored. Mr Gie (wearing his Cannon Island Security Association regalia) recently appealed to members of that association to ‘reason’ with their neighbours to come on board so that they can achieve the 90% debit orders required for the Marina-wide security scheme. Presumably there will soon be a whole lot of ‘reasoning’ with neighbours going on in Eastlake Drive, too….

I sincerely hope that the residents who received these notices in their letter boxes treat this ‘security initiative’ with the contempt it deserves. In any event, any security guard watching all of Eastlake Drive and Fisherman Quay as well as a Spar and bottle store must have x-ray vision and eyes in the back of his head.

Regarding the shopping centre itself, I fully support the centre and its tenants. But I do believe that the shopping centre management should look after its own affairs. The residents all around Cavendish Square aren’t expected to subsidise the mall’s security costs. We are now told that the Marina shopping centre is a member of the Independent Security Schemes - and we know where the ISS is headed as the ‘bottom up’ approach to the Marina Wide Security Scheme all neatly managed by Excom through Richard Gie & co. I only hope that anyone joining an ISS thinks very carefully before signing a debit order.