By Tad Stoner
tad@caymannetnews.com

Responding to Complaints Commission criticism, the Cayman Turtle Farm announced it will invest up to $120,000 to gain electrical and occupancy permits by September, and hopes to apply in three weeks for a permit to discharge effluent into the sea.

“The budget has been set at about $110,000, $120,000, to get all these licences, and we have set $50,000 to get a discharge licence, but that is not just to become legal, but to treat the discharge, manage it better and become more efficient,” said Joey Ebanks, Managing Director and Chief Operating Officer of Boatswain’s Beach.

“We’ve already achieved a lot of that, and have covered six of the 11 permits we need; some we just need to invest more money to get right. There is no danger of buildings collapsing or anything like that; a lot of it is just a matter of the final-approval process. We have asked two local contractors to come in to make sure we get it right,” he said.

Mr Ebanks’ remarks came in the aftermath of the Wednesday (25 June) release to the Legislative Assembly of the April report on Boatswain’s Beach/Cayman Turtle Farm by the Office of the Complaints Commissioner.

The report, self-initiated in January by Complaints Commissioner John Epp in response to persistent press reports, was completed in late April, but only tabled in the LA this week. The 28-page, eight-chapter document found a series of problems at the multi-million-dollar West Bay facility including an administrative conflict of interest, unlicensed discharges of animal effluent into the sea, persistent illegal electrical connections and nine buildings without occupancy permits.

“A discharge permit is required for the Turtle Farm commercial operation and [it] has failed to take all the steps necessary to obtain such a permit and thus remains in violation of the law,” the commission’s report said.

“The water park was built without mandatory inspections being completed, and thus without assurance for the safety of those who visit and work on the premises. It is maladministration to continue to operate a water park that has not been fully inspected … this situation must be rectified as a matter of urgency.”

Finally, the report said, “we examined the potential conflict of interest, or real or apprehended bias, on the part of Mr Joey Ebanks,” who until late May sat on the board of directors of the Water Authority, responsible for issuing effluent-discharge permits. Mr Ebanks quit the authority last month citing “other commitments”.

Mr Ebanks challenged report claims that he had never recused himself from board discussions of the Turtle Farm.

“I never had any discussions at the authority about Turtle Farm discharges,“ Mr Ebanks said. “The record did not always reflect that. But if I were conflicted, wasn’t the entire board conflicted?

Everyone in the room knew.

“I have resigned from all the other boards and activities that I did. I was a member of so many things that it interfered with what I felt was my commitment to the Turtle Farm,” he said.

He quickly dismissed suggestions he might resign his Boatswain’s Beach positions in the wake of the report.

“No, no, absolutely not. If the [Boatswain’s Beach] board is willing to keep me on and think that I can keep performing, I’d very much like to stay.”

He said he thought the report had been “a little harsh”, launched just after he joined the Boatswain’s Beach executive: “When I took over in September, the [Water Authority] and I outlined what needed to be done. The Complaints Commissioner announced his investigation and we responded that we had plans and that we needed a chance to prove that.

“I have only been doing this job for nine months now, and when I joined in September was when I discovered all this. I did the things that could be fixed quickly and cost-effectively, while others needed more cash; we waited for the new financial year and the new budget. Now we have the funding.”

He rejected suggestions that licensing and repairs might require temporary closure of the facility.

“No, no, even if I wanted to, I don’t have the authority to close the Government’s $66 million facility. That would take an act of the Governor-in-Cabinet.

“I have always believed this is a very viable project, and one gets very few opportunities to work with endangered species and really make a difference in the world.”