business@tribunemedia.net
FRIDAY, APRIL 26, 2024
$5.80
$5.85
$5.92
Atlantis challenged: ‘What’s wrong with Wendy’s on PI?’ By FAY SIMMONS Tribune Business Reporter jsimmons@tribunemedia.net
t .FHB SFTPSU XJMM BMXBZT GFFM CSBOE AOPU VQ UP TOVGG WENDY’S attorneys yesterday asserted that Atlantis cannot dictate all that hap- t "UUPSOFZ BSHVFT JU DBOOPU pens on Paradise Island even though it may view the fastEJDUBUF 1* EFWFMPQNFOUT food restaurant as “not up to snuff”. Gail Lockhart Charles t 4BZT TUBODF AHBMMJOH BT KC, representing Psomi DBVTFE PWFSEFWFMPQNFOU Holdings, the entity spearheading development of the combined Wendy’s/Marco’s Pizza restaurant at Paradise Island’s former Scotiabank branch, effectively told the Subdivision and Development Appeals Board hearing that the Paradise Island mega resort, other properties and high-end homeowners have adopted a snobbish attitude towards its planned presence. Speaking as Atlantis and other resorts, including the likes of Paradise Landing, Comfort Suites and the Four Seasons Ocean Club launched their bid to overturn the site plan approval granted by the
Town Planning Committee, she argued that detractors will continue to “heckle” Wendy’s and its local franchise, Aetos Holdings, regardless of what they do. Mrs Lockhart-Charles said: “Atlantis doesn’t feel that Wendy’s is up to snuff. Atlantis feels that Wendy’s is going to somehow detract from their brand. Atlantis does not own Paradise Island, formerly called Hog Island. Paradise Island has private property up for sale. Any Bahamian, any non-Bahamian with
permission can purchase land on Paradise Island. “It’s not up to one developer, even though they may be a large one, but they cannot say this our land and you can’t come here. You can buy a business here, but you can’t operate here unless we feel that your brand is up to snuff with what we think we’re doing. That’s not democracy. That’s not even constitutional, and certainly nowhere in the law.” Mrs Lockhart-Charles argued that Atlantis and
“whoever else” had ample opportunity to themselves purchase the former Scotiabank branch location and control what type of business can operate there, but they failed to act. As a result, she said they cannot now turn around and seek to “curtail” a Bahamian landowner and developer from operating a business on its property. She said: “Atlantis and whoever else had every opportunity to buy this property if they wanted to tie it up. If they wanted to feel like what’s going to happen, there is what they want, they should have bought it. They didn’t buy it. And now they cannot curtail a land owner, a Bahamian developer, a Bahamian business, from operating on their land that they pay good money, and a lot of it, to purchase “That land commanded the price that it did because it was land that was in an area that is permitted for commercial
SEE PAGE B8
Mitchell demands halt to cemetery’s appeal By FAY SIMMONS Tribune Business Reporter jsimmons@tribunemedia.net A CABINET minister was yesterday revealed to have intervened on behalf of his constituents over a planning appeal involving a proposed 13-acre Bernard Road cemetery that is heavily opposed. Fred Mitchell, minister of foreign affairs, PLP chairman
and Fox Hill MP, wrote to the Subdivision and Appeals Board on February 19, 2024, urging that the appeal be dismissed “and the status quo maintained” on the basis that permitting the project would devalue nearby properties and disturb his constituents’ way of life. Asserting that roads in the area would be unable to handle the increase in vehicle traffic
generated by the cemetery, he added that the Government is also “in the early stages” of using its compulsory powers under the Acquisition of Land Act to purchase either the entire property or “pieces and parcels” of it. Mr Mitchell’s intervention, which was sent to the Appeals Board’s now-former secretary,
SEE PAGE B3
FRED MITCHELL
PM: Bill’s ‘flexibility’ to end GBPA’s energy regulation By NEIL HARTNELL Tribune Business Editor nhartnell@tribunemedia.net THE Prime Minister yesterday confirmed that the Electricity Bill 2024 provides “the flexibility” to remove the Grand Bahama Port Authority’s (GBPA) ability to regulate the energy sector in Freeport. Speaking to journalists, Mr Davis was asked if the legislation set to be debated by the House of Assembly next Wednesday “intends to take away the authority for Freeport energy from the Grand Bahama Port Authority and give it to URCA” (the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority) based on provisions in the Bill.
Replying, the Prime Minister affirmed: “That flexibility exists in the Bill.” His words affirm that Tribune Business’s initial analysis of the Bill and its contents were correct, as it had been informed that the Government appeared to have found “a sneaky way to circumvent the Grand Bahama Port Authority (GBPA)” and its regulation of utilities in Freeport via powers bestowed by the Hawksbill Creek Agreement. The Bill, which treats Grand Bahama as a Family Island, appears to make the Grand Bahama Power Company the “approving authority” for anyone
SEE PAGE B4
Opposition leader fears Bill ‘guts URCA’s BPL oversight’ By NEIL HARTNELL Tribune Business Editor nhartnell@tribunemedia.net THE Opposition’s leader yesterday accused the Government of “gutting URCA’s oversight” with planned energy regulation reforms that the Prime Minister said could lead to BPL’s break-up. Michael Pintard told Tribune Business it was “very worrisome” that the Electricity Bill 2024, which is set to be debated in the House of Assembly next week Wednesday, “sidelines” the Utilities Regulation and Competition Authority (URCA) by preventing it from having any influence over the rates
MICHAEL PINTARD charged by Bahamas Power & Light (BPL) and other utility-scale energy providers for a three-year period. Recalling the fall-out from last year’s “glide path” strategy, which saw BPL hike its fuel charge by
SEE PAGE B4
$5.96
Sarkis defeats CCA’s bid to dismiss $2.25bn claim t 'SBVE CSFBDI PG DPOUSBDU DBTF DMFBS UP HP UP USJBM t #BIB .BS EFWFMPQFS T AJTTVFT PG GBDU OFFE IFBSJOH t #VU $IJOFTF DPOUSBDUPS TFFT PXO DMBJNT SFJOTUBUFE By NEIL HARTNELL Tribune Business Editor nhartnell@tribunemedia.net SARKIS Izmirlian’s $2.25bn fraud and breach of contract claim against Baha Mar’s Chinese contractor was yesterday cleared to proceed to full trial before a New York court this August. The Cable Beach SARKIS IZMIRLIAN mega resort’s original developer saw the main elements of his case survive China Construction America’s (CCA) appeal with the New York State Supreme Court’s appellate division finding there are “issues of fact” that must be determined via a full hearing. In particular, the New York appeals court said a trial is needed to determine whether CCA and its parent, China State Construction and Engineering Corporation (CSCEC), both of which are owned by the Beijing government, “diverted resources” to the now-British Colonial’s acquisition and sent 700 construction workers home despite fears - concealed from Mr Izmirlian - that they would miss Baha Mar’s completion target. And the appeals court also agreed that Baha Mar’s original developer had supplied sufficient evidence that CCA’s “misrepresentations” resulted in him spending millions of extra dollars to ramp up operations to prepare for the planned opening, including taking guest bookings, even though he had “some sense” his Chinese partners were “not telling the truth” about the construction progress. However, while the New York appeals court found for Mr Izmirlian and his BML Properties vehicle on the main issues, yesterday’s
SEE PAGE B3