It takes a very special issue to bring Jack Warner and Afra Raymond to the same side of the table, but a controversial land deal at Freeport, purchased by the Housing Development Corporation (HDC) in June 2012, is just that.
Mr Warner claims that he first raised the issue of the land deal three years ago, but was ignored. Chartered surveyor Afra Raymond called for a critical examination into the transaction in 2013.
The Integrity Commission investigated the matter in 2014 and found “no conclusive evidence” that demanded further action and closed the matter.
The land, now called Eden Gardens, returned to the news in October 2016 as an axe on the grindstone of Attorney General Faris Al-Rawi when he called for an investigation into the circumstances of this deal and threatened legal action against officials of the HDC.
On the weekend, attorney Gerald Ramdeen revealed eight of the nine names of people and businesses being brought before the court by the government.
They are Jearlean John, former Managing Director of the HDC, Henckle Lall, former chairman of the HDC, Greg Davis, Peter Ford, Anthony Sampath, Patrick Soo Ting, Project Specialists Ltd and Point Lisas Park Ltd.
Mr Ramdeen, who is Ms John’s lawyer, noted that while the legal action had been filed on November 2, Ms John had not received any pre-action protocol correspondence nor has she been advised of the allegations and charges she may be facing.
How did this happen?
In 2010, Point Lisas Parks Ltd (PLP), a company founded by Anthony Sampath, Patrick Soo Ting and Azad Niamat in 2007, purchased 50 acres of land in Freeport from Sookdeo Deousaran for $5 million.
In November 2011, the company began offering the property for sale and commissioned an independent valuation, which placed its worth at $52 million. The HDC was offered the property by PLP in January 2012 for $200 million.
Another valuation was done by Commissioner of Valuations, Ronald Heeralal, at the request of the HDC board. Mr Heeralal described the valuation by Linden Scott and Associates as “grossly understate” and placed the open market value of the land at $180 million.
Between 2010 and 2012, the developer had laid roads, drainage, water and electricity and installed a sewage treatment plant on the property, which certainly was a factor in the appreciation of the value of the bare land purchase. If this had been a land deal in the private sector, there would be no need for public interest in the sale.
But it was not an exclusively private sector business deal.
It was a transaction with the government, made with taxpayer money and some level of accountability for the rapid escalation in cost and the decision to ignore the input of a respected valuator with no vested interest in either the purchaser or seller seems appropriate.
What was so compelling about this acreage of land in Freeport that made it such an attractive deal for the government, particularly in an area which might hardly be described as over built?
The development of 50 acres of land with appropriate infrastructure is not an easy or particularly cheap consideration. Was PLP planning its own development or was the entire project designed to attract one big buyer right from the start?
As a land deal, it may stand up to the scrutiny of the free market offering and sale of a block of unencumbered land.
But does it meet the test of a true free market product? There aren’t many buyers available for 50 acres of land prepared for development and the HDC tops that list by a considerable distance. If so, why wasn’t the board moved to negotiate harder on the price?
There remain questions regarding Eden Gardens that have not been satisfactorily answered and the Attorney General is right to press for appropriate responses.
