Dear SRA members and non-members who are also on this Newsgroup,
Many people have advised me not to be distracted by the loud and sometimes rude comments on this newsgroup but I cannot "tahan" anymore, so I may be rambling a bit but I want to have my say on all these nonsense that is going on. So please bear with me.
Many of us have expressed our thoughts about the green Seputeh we once knew. Having lived here for 39 years myself, I have very similar views.
But the insinuation that the elected committee of SRA is behind the new development or that it has the sanction of the present committee is uncalled for.
For those of us who would bother to recall, these are not projects that have occurred only after the new committee has taken over. Even if they have, it doesn’t take a lot to understand the long approval process and the gestation period required before they can take off.
These projects, even if they have recently started, got their approval much earlier, long before the current committee stepped in to work when the previous committee voluntarily stepped down in Dec 2008. Why the previous committee had not been able to stop them or even talk about them baffles me, with all their DBKL connections, hard talk and self-proclaimed prowess.
Let me reiterate that new tall high density buildings you see on your way up the hill didn’t come about without the previous SRA committee’s knowing.
Requests for minutes of meetings involving the previous SRA Committee were denied. These meetings cover a variety of matters with the authorities and stands taken by the SRA on development projects, correspondences and details of deliberations of the previous committee. Precious time was lost trying to piece together the puzzle. Even minutes of SRA Committee meetings were not handed to us. How can that be considered confidential?
Now individuals are demanding answers, suggesting collaboration with developers on high density development, discrediting and finding fault in everything the current committee seeks to do, when all that was said in the newsletter was that the SRA may not be able to stop the onslaught (just like the previous committee was not able to stop the tall high density buildings mushrooming around us).
This present committee is doing everything we can to engage with the authorities and the developers, when given any opportunity to do so. The goal is to ensure the social impact to the community, strained traffic, and all our common concerns are formally communicated.
The committee does not wish to be embroiled in open baseless debate in a public forum, which is both divisive and counter productive. That is not to say that people can simply accuse and discredit anyone.
There are those who want more clarification on the security scheme before they sign up. That is perfectly valid and the security sub-committee has repeatedly, and in good faith, dealt with these enquiries as best they can. There would always be some who will opt out or disagree. This is perfectly acceptable, as the scheme is voluntary and each individual is entitled to his/her opinion. But opinion alone does not help fight crime.
The committee, together with those who have signed up must not gripe over this. The silent majority, who are quietly footing the bill and have said little, have done it for sake of neighbourhood solidarity and security.
Maybe my mistake is to have an open and transparent style. The security committee has opened itself to scrutiny before, during and right up to the last-minute of the scheme’s launch. Let us ask long-time residents if the previous SRA Committee had ever opened its books and documents to such a level of scrutiny. Yet, we are still open to inputs even from detractors.
For all of you who have dug deep into your pockets to want to make this work, thank you. My wish is that we continue to improve upon any shortcomings as we go along and with more houses signing up, perhaps we could even address some of your concerns to up the level of service and perhaps more guards.
We are especially touched by those who struggle to make ends meet and yet dug deeper to demonstrate their commitment. I respect you sincerely in living your values, and honouring what you agreed when we did the dipstick. It is for residents like you that we find additional satisfaction in serving.
Yet, there those who have no plans to contribute, demand to verify and scrutinise a lot of documents and sought clarification beyond reasonable means, are provided those but are now doing everything to scuttle the scheme. Perhaps these people have lost the plot and instead of fighting crime, they are hell bent on fighting their neighbours. Remember, I too am a retiree with no active income but I am prepared to fork out what it takes to help enhance security.
The issue of addressing collective views and concerns on high density development in the area will perhaps be put into a formal referendum. We can act in greater unison and with greater effect, if we act rationally and in good faith. Suggesting developer collaboration from hearsay or selective interpretation of a factual statement in the newsletter can turn ugly and will do nothing towards bringing about an otherwise powerful united voice.
There is no need to slander or insinuate collaboration when you cannot cough up the proof. The SRA Committee owes its duty to the majority who have voted for them and they are the reason why many in the committee are plodding on. My suggestion is that those who are disgruntled with the efforts of the current committee to again stand for election and let Seputeh decide.
If I do not reply to your responses, it is because I do not believe prolonging this public debate is being productive. If any SRA member has anything to say to the Committee, they can either drop us a note at our SRA letter box at 2, Jalan Teluk Pulai or via email to SRA@seputeh.org.my or to email addresses listed on the committee blog at http://sracommittee.blogspot.com.
Of course, there will still be those who want to continue to comment, rave and rant because they need an audience and this public newsgroup is giving them this audience. Thankfully, this group is not the majority but they are loud.
We are encouraged there are many others who want to contribute and help defend the sanctuary that we have in Seputeh and these people have quietly given their inputs. We salute those who are willing to contribute as we need all the help we can get.
As someone who is old enough to be a father to most of these detractors, I say it is now time for all Seputeh to stand together and put aside petty differences, emotions and disagreement. The SRA Committee that I lead is prepared to do that and we hope all others will, as well.
Regards,
Robert Quah
SRA President
Many people have advised me not to be distracted by the loud and sometimes rude comments on this newsgroup but I cannot "tahan" anymore, so I may be rambling a bit but I want to have my say on all these nonsense that is going on. So please bear with me.
Many of us have expressed our thoughts about the green Seputeh we once knew. Having lived here for 39 years myself, I have very similar views.
But the insinuation that the elected committee of SRA is behind the new development or that it has the sanction of the present committee is uncalled for.
For those of us who would bother to recall, these are not projects that have occurred only after the new committee has taken over. Even if they have, it doesn’t take a lot to understand the long approval process and the gestation period required before they can take off.
These projects, even if they have recently started, got their approval much earlier, long before the current committee stepped in to work when the previous committee voluntarily stepped down in Dec 2008. Why the previous committee had not been able to stop them or even talk about them baffles me, with all their DBKL connections, hard talk and self-proclaimed prowess.
Let me reiterate that new tall high density buildings you see on your way up the hill didn’t come about without the previous SRA committee’s knowing.
Requests for minutes of meetings involving the previous SRA Committee were denied. These meetings cover a variety of matters with the authorities and stands taken by the SRA on development projects, correspondences and details of deliberations of the previous committee. Precious time was lost trying to piece together the puzzle. Even minutes of SRA Committee meetings were not handed to us. How can that be considered confidential?
Now individuals are demanding answers, suggesting collaboration with developers on high density development, discrediting and finding fault in everything the current committee seeks to do, when all that was said in the newsletter was that the SRA may not be able to stop the onslaught (just like the previous committee was not able to stop the tall high density buildings mushrooming around us).
This present committee is doing everything we can to engage with the authorities and the developers, when given any opportunity to do so. The goal is to ensure the social impact to the community, strained traffic, and all our common concerns are formally communicated.
The committee does not wish to be embroiled in open baseless debate in a public forum, which is both divisive and counter productive. That is not to say that people can simply accuse and discredit anyone.
There are those who want more clarification on the security scheme before they sign up. That is perfectly valid and the security sub-committee has repeatedly, and in good faith, dealt with these enquiries as best they can. There would always be some who will opt out or disagree. This is perfectly acceptable, as the scheme is voluntary and each individual is entitled to his/her opinion. But opinion alone does not help fight crime.
The committee, together with those who have signed up must not gripe over this. The silent majority, who are quietly footing the bill and have said little, have done it for sake of neighbourhood solidarity and security.
Maybe my mistake is to have an open and transparent style. The security committee has opened itself to scrutiny before, during and right up to the last-minute of the scheme’s launch. Let us ask long-time residents if the previous SRA Committee had ever opened its books and documents to such a level of scrutiny. Yet, we are still open to inputs even from detractors.
For all of you who have dug deep into your pockets to want to make this work, thank you. My wish is that we continue to improve upon any shortcomings as we go along and with more houses signing up, perhaps we could even address some of your concerns to up the level of service and perhaps more guards.
We are especially touched by those who struggle to make ends meet and yet dug deeper to demonstrate their commitment. I respect you sincerely in living your values, and honouring what you agreed when we did the dipstick. It is for residents like you that we find additional satisfaction in serving.
Yet, there those who have no plans to contribute, demand to verify and scrutinise a lot of documents and sought clarification beyond reasonable means, are provided those but are now doing everything to scuttle the scheme. Perhaps these people have lost the plot and instead of fighting crime, they are hell bent on fighting their neighbours. Remember, I too am a retiree with no active income but I am prepared to fork out what it takes to help enhance security.
The issue of addressing collective views and concerns on high density development in the area will perhaps be put into a formal referendum. We can act in greater unison and with greater effect, if we act rationally and in good faith. Suggesting developer collaboration from hearsay or selective interpretation of a factual statement in the newsletter can turn ugly and will do nothing towards bringing about an otherwise powerful united voice.
There is no need to slander or insinuate collaboration when you cannot cough up the proof. The SRA Committee owes its duty to the majority who have voted for them and they are the reason why many in the committee are plodding on. My suggestion is that those who are disgruntled with the efforts of the current committee to again stand for election and let Seputeh decide.
If I do not reply to your responses, it is because I do not believe prolonging this public debate is being productive. If any SRA member has anything to say to the Committee, they can either drop us a note at our SRA letter box at 2, Jalan Teluk Pulai or via email to SRA@seputeh.org.my or to email addresses listed on the committee blog at http://sracommittee.blogspot.com.
Of course, there will still be those who want to continue to comment, rave and rant because they need an audience and this public newsgroup is giving them this audience. Thankfully, this group is not the majority but they are loud.
We are encouraged there are many others who want to contribute and help defend the sanctuary that we have in Seputeh and these people have quietly given their inputs. We salute those who are willing to contribute as we need all the help we can get.
As someone who is old enough to be a father to most of these detractors, I say it is now time for all Seputeh to stand together and put aside petty differences, emotions and disagreement. The SRA Committee that I lead is prepared to do that and we hope all others will, as well.
Regards,
Robert Quah
SRA President
