Jay Bookman is a newspaper guy. That must be why he can use such few words to say what it takes me a paragraphs to express.
Sometimes, important government decisions do more than determine the outcome of a particular controversy. They take on a larger symbolic value and make a statement about public priorities and values.
An amendment to Bill 367 by state Rep. Debbie Buckner was approved last week that would protect the main public beach on Jekyll Island State Park from certain types of development. A vote on that amendment by the House Rules Committee was supposed to take place Thursday. But whisperings abound that pro-development Representatives are willing to let the bill die rather than protect the publicly owned beach. Despite the fact that politicians in the Georgia State capital are actually taking notice of what the public has been, to put it politely, screaming.
Supporters of S.B. 367 — and the Jekyll development plan currently in the works — say environmentalists and island enthusiasts are jeopardizing the $2.3 million in annual federal funding, all for the sake of a parking lot (by adding the protection amendment).
Of course, it's not one parking lot, it's four. Four lots that stand between you and the dunes. No condos. No giant hotels. What the supporters of the development want the public to trade is complete beach access for "6 public access points," contained, of course, in a massive development.
Also written today was an important opinion from the pages of the Savannah Morning News. It's a pretty big deal; middle market newspapers have been fairly silent on the issue, leaving most of the controversy to be covered by the AJC; and Savannah, an hour and a half up the coast, has watched its own barrier island, Tybee, overtaken with development.
THE GEORGIA House Rules Committee should give state representatives more choices in Jekyll Island revitalization plans.
To date, GOP leaders in the General Assembly have favored the $352 million development proposed by Linger Longer, which would install 1,100 hotel rooms and condos on 63 acres - taking up the last stretch of open beach easily accessible to Georgia residents on the state-owned island.
When the House Rules Committee meets Thursday morning, it has the power to send amended Senate Bill 367 to the floor for a full House vote. Failure to do so would be to ignore those who want the state park to maintain its unique, tranquil atmosphere.
What they also do is point the choice of a "middle ground" which proponents of the proposed development do not want discussed, as they have tried to disingenuously frame the argument as "the LLC plan or no revitalization:"
Rep. Buckner's plan instead steers revitalization back to the development company's original plan: Tearing down the outdated convention center and building a new development from that point south and west toward the interior of the island.
This alternative could have a much smaller impact on the island. While it does not limit the size of a new development, the original footprint was only 24 acres.
Mr. Bookman, in his opinion, goes on to ponder a larger issue that gets lost in the current scuffle:
What would it say about Georgia and its priorities if we took the last open stretch of public beach in the state —- a half-mile stretch of property that is supposedly protected as a state park —- and convert it to condo units and hotels, as is now being proposed? What would that say about the things that Georgia holds dear, and about its commitment to preserve assets for future generations?
... the intent of a redevelopment plan for Jekyll Island should not be to maximize revenue or even visitation. The No. 1 priority should be to preserve and enhance the natural resource. If we give any other goal a higher priority, it says something less than flattering about us as a state.
His point underscores one of the questions the JIA hasn't sufficiently answered for the people whose land they steward- how much money do they need to run the island to remain self-sufficient, not how much money do they want. There's a big difference, especially when it comes to one of the last unobstructed stretches of beach on the coast.
Phone calls and letters to the editor have made a huge difference. That we're even still talking about it is proof. At some point, legislators have to do more than just listen.