In response to Linnaeus article (30 November). Thanks to the mayor for proposing the back zoning and councillors for support. It doesn’t rescind the zone change that allowed the inappropriate ecotourism facility and Community Title but may restrict future development.
Mr Duchen’s comments about being the target of accusations is misrepresentation. Community concerns have included the lack of compliance with prior consent conditions, particularly regeneration works and the recent inadequate biodiversity assessment. He states they have always followed best practice, but accountability is lacking. The prior zoning issue is a complaint against Council.
Also, his claim of leading the way in Broken Head is disrespectful. The community have delivered significant regeneration for decades, including covenants and agreements. Private regeneration of hundreds of hectares without commercial development trade-off is a reality. A major Coastcare regeneration project in the Broken Head Nature Reserve in the late 1990s was a community-delivered initiative.
The biodiversity agreement for 50ha doesn’t appear to do more than reflect prior approvals for protection.
Linnaeus hasn’t led the way on conservation, its focus has been on development creep. Mr Duchen’s support for the ‘downzoning’ is only after significant unwarranted development gain. If I’m incorrect, please make the details of the conservation plan and works and a comprehensive compliance audit publicly available.
For four decades The Echo has printed the stories some people loved, some people hated, and some pretended not to read. If you want us to keep telling the truth, the real truth, not the sugar-coated version. We’ll need your support to keep the presses rolling. 
