Lately I have read and observed with much interest, the series of articles, photo opts and invited comments that bring into focus the progressive deterioration in the quality of life in St.Peters and talks of resuscitating the community council (see DH March 12th p3). As a resident of St.Peters this, as you can imagine, struck a deep and responsive chord within me. Consistently exposing the deplorable conditions in the community (running sewage water, crime and poverty) and reviving the community council is indeed commendable and absolutely necessary to create a safe and resilient neighborhood. However, after a moment of sober reflection delaying the referendum might be in the best interest of the community until the electorate obtains verifiable facts pertaining to areas such as: the election process and election committee, the legal status, financial position and comprehensive overview of the St.Peters Community Council (SPCC) and the factors that contributed towards its demise. Such an elucidation is essential in order to address and resolve a number rumors of "illegalities" and the "misappropriation of funds" that allegedly occurred under the watch of the former council. Allow me to direct your thoughts and attention to the heated exchanges between the co-founder of the SPCC and a "proud resident" of St.Peters concerning a number of "suspicious" activities by former board members definitely warrants serious consideration. It therefore stands to reason that the next board may in fact inherit a terrible mess as it relates to monetary and or legal consequences and incur reputational risks. Should these serious allegations persist, it is highly unlikely that the new council will inspire the confidence or kindle the enthusiasm of the people. Come Election Day, we might witness people line up to denounce the referendum instead of a vote. Additionally, if in fact it can be proven without the shadow of a doubt that conflicts of interest, corruption or fraud occurred we, the concerned residents of St.Peters will be calling for an independent public investigation. Therefore, good conscience and ethical considerations prevents one from lending support to elect new board members at the SPCC in the absence of complete information. In my view, to do otherwise seems contrary to the interests and aspirations of the community. Ever mindful of "the search for truth is the responsibility of the community". (Dr Franz Fanon) we the conscientious residents of St.Peters insist that a town hall meeting is quickly organized in an effort to obtain clarity, insight and competent answers to the genuine concerns that have dominated our minds and conscience for quite some time. Therefore the attendance and active participation of all concerned residents and invited guests is highly encouraged I urge and implore the good residents of St.Peters and social partners to wake up to this responsibility and take an active interest in this affair because our survival, progress and future prosperity is at stake!
Riegnald "Bakari" Arrindell
Garveyite and resident of St.Peters
