Tell us about yourself and your organization.

"Prior to relocating to Jekyll Island in 1997, I enjoyed a long and enjoyable career teaching and writing about Russian history. After four decades of immersing myself in the study of the Evil Empire, of authority gone wild, I welcomed the chance to begin a new life on Jekyll Island, a place far removed from the world I came from. My wife, Mindy—a former school psychologist—and I have enjoyed our years on Jekyll, finding here a simpler place in time and a chance to do many of the things that we lacked the time for when hip deep in work seven days a week.

Our attachment to Jekyll’s unique character is what led us to form the Initiative to Protect Jekyll Island State Park (IPJI), an all-volunteer, non-profit organization devoted to preserving Jekyll’s special qualities and protecting its natural systems. The immediate impetus for the creation of IPJI was the Jekyll Island Authority’s 2004 announcement of its intention to redevelop the island. We felt that the JIA should know what Jekyll’s visitors liked and disliked about the island in order for the redevelopment plan to be consistent with the vision of a renovated Jekyll held by its clientele. We also felt that the JIA was not offering adequate opportunities for Jekyll’s visitors, the general public, interested professionals, and various interest groups to participate in defining future island options and desired visitor experiences. Jekyll is a highly valued state public park after all; its future should not be decided in a vacuum by a group of political appointees.

To my way of thinking, public involvement from the very beginning of the redevelopment process would have helped the JIA to better understand the values people hold in relation to Park resources and visitor experiences, and to make more informed planning decisions. Unfortunately, our efforts to share the input we gathered by surveying more than 10,000 of the island’s visitors was not welcomed by the JIA board, perhaps because the message Jekyll’s visitors conveyed about the Park’s redevelopment was not the one the Authority wanted to hear.

What was that message? Rebuild what needs rebuilding, particularly Jekyll’s aging oceanfront hotels and convention and retail centers, but do not damage the island’s down home, laid back character with additional and unnecessary development. Over and over we were told this by the visitors we surveyed and spoke with, and over and over the JIA misrepresented and dismissed this input as the view of a handful of “people opposed to all change.”"

Save Jekyll Island? Why does it need saving?

"Jekyll needs to be saved from those who view the island as a piece of prime real estate that is underdeveloped. It needs to be saved from a JIA board that would, in its town center project, toss out 45 acres of oceanfront land to the development community without placing any limits on the scale or level of density of the development desired and without considering if the site was environmentally appropriate. It needs to be saved from a board that would move forward with a comprehensive redevelopment program without first adopting a conservation plan to ensure that whatever development takes place does not damage Jekyll’s natural systems or interfere with wildlife habitats. It needs to be saved from a long-term development plan that favors a 150 percent increase in Jekyll’s built environment and a peak season population of 15,000+ people. It needs to be saved from those who feel that the state park’s key amenities should, in effect, be privatized. Most of all, Jekyll needs to be saved as a relatively unspoiled piece of Georgia’s coastal environment to be enjoyed by people from all walks of life, now and for generations to come."

What do you have against development? Aren't the folks with the Jekyll Authority just trying to make Jekyll better?

"The allegation that IPJI is “against development” is one that the JIA has tried to tag us with for the past two years. The truth is that we are for responsible renovation of Jekyll Island which, to our mind, allows for the reconstruction of the island’s oceanfront hotels, convention center and retail shops, while protecting the island’s unique character and sensitive wildlife habitats from the adverse effects of development.

Having polled thousands of Jekyll visitors, we know that the vast majority of the island’s clientele is dissatisfied with the overall quality of Jekyll’s lodgings and would welcome new hotels on the sites of the ones that have fallen into disrepair. We also know that most folks would like to see amenity upgrades, particularly more opportunities for family dining. We know that Jekyll’s visitors believe that the best way to draw people to the island is to capitalize on its natural appeal and recreational opportunities. And, we know that there is widespread opposition to development that would convert Jekyll into another crowded beachside resort, replete with multiple story, high-end condos and time-shares. 

So, as  you can see, we are not “opposed to all change,” as some would have you believe, but rather want to see Jekyll improved in a way that celebrates the island’s own distinct sense of place and showcases its natural rhythms and environment as a means of generating more visitation and of enhancing the JIA’s revenue.

As for the JIA “just trying to make the island better,” we feel that the Authority has erred by defining “better” in economic terms only. More precisely, the JIA’s long-term analysis of the impacts of development on Jekyll Island measures impacts solely with respect to how much revenue will be created if the island’s built environment is expanded from its current 1,600 units to 4,100 units by the year 2023 rather in terms of the effect that this growth might have on the island’s natural systems and the visitor experience. It is widely accepted that the prime goal of public land planning should be the enhancement of the quality of the visitor experience, and that this requires identifying general public preferences, systematically monitoring visitor satisfactions, and using the findings to guide management decision making. In sum, understanding what Georgians want for Jekyll Island is the key to publicly responsive park planning and “to making the island better.”"

Those folks at Linger Longer have some powerful connections. What can you really expect to accomplish?

"True, Linger Longer has some political clout, but so does people power, which is what IPJI is all about. That power has manifested itself in various ways and has led to some impressive accomplishments on Jekyll’s behalf.

For example, Jekyll’s environmentally fragile south end is now protected from further development, thanks to Senator Jeff Chapman’s April 2007 amendment of House Bill 214. Letters, emails and phone calls to Georgia’s lawmakers from thousands of IPJI’s supporters, by all accounts, helped tilt the balance in HB 214’s favor.

The mega-town center plan proposed by Linger Longer Communities and backed by the JIA has been drastically reduced, allowing Jekyll’s open beachfront north of the Convention Center to be preserved, and preventing the island’s central maritime forest being criss-crossed by an intrusive road network. IPJI’s input at JIA board meetings, at Linger Longer’s town hall forums, and at the State Legislature played a significant role in the scale back of the initial town center plan. 

The proportion of Jekyll Island’s undeveloped/developed land has been recalculated, showing that, contrary to what the JIA had been claiming, 55 rather than 108 acres remain eligible for development before reaching the 35 percent development cap imposed by law. IPJI first drew attention to the need to recalculate the island’s land area early in 2008 and then consulted professionals in the field of remote sensing and mapping to determine if the JIA’s land area figures were accurate. After IPJI announced its investigation of this issue, the JIA commissioned its own study, which concluded that the Authority has 53 fewer acres available for development than previously claimed. 

Loggerhead turtle nesting zones on Jekyll’s beach are now protected by a modern beach-lighting ordinance. As of 2008, the JIA was still relying on a beach-lighting ordinance that had been written in 1981 which allowed lights from oceanfront business operations to flood the beach in several spots at and north of the Jekyll’s convention center. Environmental authorities had repeatedly notified the JIA of lighting violations but nothing was being done to correct this damage to loggerhead nesting success. IPJI members brought this problem to the public’s attention; urged the JIA to remove the offending lights at the beachfront; and proposed a new Beach Lighting Ordinance, based upon the highly successful models used in Florida. Subsequently, the offending lights were either extinguished or completely removed, and the proposed new Beach Lighting Ordinance was officially adopted by the JIA, after review and revision by experts in loggerhead ecology.

So, Linger Longer and some members of the JIA board may have powerful connections, but clearly this does not rule out the possibility of success for grassroots civic action, particularly when large numbers of highly motivated citizens are involved."

Why should those of us in the Golden Isles care about this issue?

"To my mind, anyone—Golden Isles area resident or not—who appreciates what Jekyll has to offer should care about the over the top, transformational kind of development that is forecasted for the island over the next decade or so. Jekyll is, after all, one of the last barrier islands in America that is easily accessible to the public and relatively undeveloped, and as such it is an “endangered species” worthy of protection. We need to ensure that Jekyll’s openness, its charm, serenity and grace, do not become just a memory. If we don’t act and let others have their way with Jekyll, a “Business Plan” will dictate the island’s future, and Jekyll may well end up having another, anyplace, resort atmosphere. If we don’t speak up, then we can look forward to five-story condo and time-share complexes on Jekyll; an urban-like population/lodging density within the developed part of the island; traffic volume that may make island access a nightmare; the privatization of Jekyll’s key amenities; and nearly a 50 percent increase in hotel room rates over the next 5 years, according to the figures in the JIA’s Business Plan."

What can we do to help?

"Join the Initiative to Protect Jekyll Island State Park, which has become one of Georgia’s most popular and successful grassroots organizations. Membership is free and opportunities to help through “action alerts” are numerous. Stay on top of the Jekyll development issue by visiting our website – www.savejekyllisland.org. Informed and vocal citizens who persist in their opposition to private exploitation of Jekyll Island State Park and in their support for responsible Park improvements are Jekyll’s best hope."

Thanks for talking with us David. Is there anything else you would like to mention or that we should have asked you about?

"I would like to point out one more thing, which is that the basic rationale behind the JIA’s forecast for a 150 percent increase in Jekyll’s built environment is not that Georgians are clamoring for more development on the island but rather that the Authority has a backlog of capital improvement projects and infrastructure needs allegedly totaling nearly $100 million which cannot be taken care of without a massive boost in JIA revenues from increased development. The JIA’s Business Plan—a product of the Bleakly Advisory Group— spells out, step by step, how much and what kind of development is needed to produce enough income to cover the items on the Authority’s $100 million wish list.

The problem is that the items on the wish list have been neither rationalized nor proven to be cost effective by the JIA nor has it been shown that the JIA would have to bear the full cost of each of the projects listed. For example, the list includes $30 million for Historic District improvements, yet the record shows that of the $38,799,871 spent on Historic District projects between 1984 and 2005, the JIA covered $5,657,650, or only one-seventh of the cost. The list also includes $13,100,000 for beach renourishment but ignores the fact that federal funds, through the Army Corps of Engineers, typically cover the majority of the cost of beach renourishment projects.

If all of the items on the list had to be covered in full by the JIA, which is not the case, then one would think that the Authority would have tried to maximize its revenue by striking the best deal possible in its long-term contract with private partner Linger Longer Communities, but, for reasons that remain unclear, this did not happen. For example, the Authority has agreed to accept just 1 percent of the gross sales of Linger Longer’s $163 million time-share project even though the 6 acres of prime oceanfront land that the Authority contributed to the project accounts for at least half of the time-shares’ value, according to a study recently completed by Dr. Ken Cordell, a nationally known expert on public land planning and management. In addition, the JIA has agreed to pay Linger Longer $1.3 million simply for “participating in Jekyll’s revitalization.”  And, the JIA has agreed to a 10-year, multi-million dollar reduction in the revenue sharing arrangement for Linger Longer’s two town center hotels. Add to this the fact that the JIA has taken on $50 million in bond debt to cover the cost of the infrastructure for the Linger Longer town center—a debt that will cost $85 million to repay—and we can see why many people are left wondering why the JIA seems content with earning $20 million in direct revenue from the town center project over the next 15 years, or just one-fourth of the JIA’s dollar investment in the project. 

There is much speculation as to why the JIA entered into such a lop-sided financial agreement with it private partner. Some say Linger Longer, angry over the JIA’s mistake in selecting a town center site that was under the zonal jurisdiction of the Shore Protection Act and over having to abandon the two-thirds of its original town center project that fell within that zone, threatened to walk away from the Jekyll project if it didn’t get its way, and that the JIA, rather than suffering further embarrassment over its site selection error and having to seek a new private partner, caved in and gave Linger Longer a sweetheart deal. Others say that high-level political pressure came into play. Linger Longer’s president, Mercer Reynolds, has been the nation’s top Republican fund-raiser for over a decade and has bankrolled Georgia Republicans to the tune of over $100,000 in recent years. Still others claim that the JIA’s negotiators were out of their league in dealing with the likes of a big-time developer like Linger Longer, meaning they were just out-classed at the negotiating table.

For me, the “why” of the JIA-Linger Longer deal is not as important as its impact on Jekyll’s future. That impact boils down to one key fact, which is that the JIA’s minimal financial gain from Linger Longer’s town center project makes additional development appear necessary in order to generate the revenue needed to tackle the items on the Authority’s wish list. Had the JIA negotiated a mutually beneficial deal with its private partner, had it earned the $50 million that experts say it should have through the Linger Longer time-share project, then the additional development called for in the JIA’s Business Plan—that a 150 percent increase in Jekyll’s built environment—would no longer appear to be financially necessary in order to meet the JIA’s long-term revenue goals. 

Thanks, Kevin, for giving me an opportunity to talk about some of the issues that attend Jekyll’s redevelopment."