Spencer McNally, Chairperson Camps Bay CID SC
Chris von Ulmenstein’s letter "Proposed Camps Bay CID divisive effect on community!” (Atlantic Sun letters, November 2) refers.
Difference of opinion is not evidence of a divided community. Instead it is clear that the CID establishment process has galvanised and substantially united the community of Camps Bay.
Starting with the most comprehensive survey of Camps Bay residents ever undertaken, and continuing with the most proactive and exhaustive engagement process of any CID in Cape Town ever, everyone in Camps Bay has had ample opportunity to express their views as to their needs.
The results show extraordinary levels of consensus around the major problems facing our community. A small percentage who disagree is to be expected and is a sign of a healthy process.
The issues that Ms Von Ulmenstein raises in her letter have all been comprehensively addressed on these pages and elsewhere. Nonetheless, we note the following:
Anyone in Camps Bay was free to establish a Steering Committee (SC). The purpose of a SC is establish a CID, and hence a SC must necessarily be comprised of people who are in favour of a CID. Inter alia, members of the Camps Bay CID SC were therefore selected on that basis and for their ability to work effectively with others.
Relevant CID legislation does not require local volunteer organisations to be included or represented in the composition of the SC. Nonetheless, the SC is constituted of volunteers who between them have many decades of experience serving all of the major volunteer organisations in Camps Bay of relevance to the mandate of a CID. The only allegedly “important” volunteer group allegedly “ignored” is Ms Von Ulmenstein's own, not least because it is not formally constituted and is active in an area in which members of the SC already have substantial expertise and many years of experience.
The SC has proactively engaged through multiple channels, and has responded to every comment received in writing from the community. It held a focus group that Ms Von Ulmenstein and others attended, one in which all of the other attendees participated constructively. The SC has held two public meetings attended by hundreds of residents and has proactively and repeatedly solicited comments from every single property owner in the neighbourhood through a combination of email, physical mail, courier, phone calls and personal visits.
As of writing, the SC has therefore spoken to or corresponded with 85% of property owners in Camps Bay. Of these, 84% have indicated that they are in favour of the CID and 6% are undecided. The proportion against the CID is 10%, including approximately 0.5% who have stated that they cannot afford the additional CID levy. The SC has proposed a solution to assist elderly people in such circumstances.
Before being presented in August, the draft Business Plan was formulated with substantial community input from all of the significant volunteer organisations, other CIDs, potential service providers, the City of Cape Town, and a number of Camps Bay residents not involved with the SC.
Voting for/against the CID is a well-defined process that is subject to specific laws and by-laws, and which will be tightly supervised by the City of Cape Town. More than 50 other CIDs in Cape Town have successfully navigated this process and ours will be no different.
Transparency in the CID process has been exemplary. All written comments, not least the 187 from 88 individuals received during the Consultation Phase, have been responded to quickly and comprehensively, including several received after the deadline had expired. Questions were invited prior to and at both public meetings, and all were answered. Public engagement during Camps Bay’s CID process has exceeded that of any other CID by a substantial margin.
The allegation of “volunteer bashing” is a woolly canard with no basis in fact. Volunteers are not only generously praised in the CID Business Plan, they have been incorporated in the CID’s proposals from the outset, and will be supported to the maximum extent possible by a dedicated member of the CID’s permanent staff.
The time and resources required to achieve all of the aforegoing is substantial, particularly for a small group of unpaid volunteers working nights and weekends. Ms Von Ulmentstein's criticism of the SC is therefore a particularly ironic example of "volunteer bashing".
CBCSI’s unsustainability self-evidently follows from its voluntary funding model, with only 25% of the neighbourhood contributing, and from an over-reliance on over-worked and under-resourced volunteers. Again the irony of more “volunteer bashing” from Ms Von Ulmenstein.
Ms Von Ulmenstein’s unsubstantiated claim that “the community feels that ... the CID should only focus on the Beachfront stretch of Victoria Road” is patently untrue. In reality, the SC’s comprehensive engagement with the community has highlighted numerous areas beyond the beachfront that the vast majority of residents wish to see addressed, including crime levels throughout the neighbourhood, illegal structures and campfires in the greenbelts and elsewhere, and cleansing / repair / maintenance / upgrading of public spaces everywhere. Moreover, the experience of the Sea Point CID (which covers only Main and Regent Roads) demonstrates clearly that her proposed approach will serve only to displace problems to adjacent parts of the suburb.
The City of Cape Town is certainly able to address the issues of vagrancy and regularly does so, albeit not as often as necessary. The problem is lack of resources, in particular a lack of resources dedicated to Camps Bay, a problem that a CID is explicitly designed to address. With sufficient funding and using a proven, integrated approach that incorporates compassion and a firm hand, the Camps Bay CID will be able to address this issue comprehensively and effectively.
Ultimately, Ms Von Ulmenstein’s unsubstantiated claims and allegations are an unfortunate distraction from the reality of Camps Bay’s significant problems, which encompass the entire neighbourhood. Only a CID, with resources and funds ring-fenced to Camps Bay and accountability to the property owners of Camps Bay, can effectively and sustainably address these issues.
In this regard, the 84% of residents who have indicated their support for the CID are very much united.