The Tribune

By NEIL HARTNELL

Tribune Business Editor

nhartnell@tribunemedia.net

The $200m Rosewood Exuma project’s leading opponent is accusing its rival developer of using environmental approvals, granted for limited land preparation studies, as ”cover” to begin the construction of roads and other major infrastructure on Big Sampson Cay.

Jeffrey Clark, chief financial officer for the neighbouring Turtlegrass Resort & Island Club, alleged in a March 27, 2026, affidavit that the Department of Environmental Planning and Protection’s (DEPP) decision to grant Miami-based Yntegra Group certificates of environmental clearance (CEC) to conduct geotechnical studies for its development, and “temporary housing” for the required workforce, have “secretly carved out” portions of the project from public scrutiny and consultation.

He is claiming that CEC approval relating to these studies, an extension for which was granted by DEPP on October 8, 2024, was only just disclosed on March 23, 2026, as part of Turtlegrass’s Judicial Review challenge that is seeking to overturn the main permit granted for the whole of the Rosewood Exuma development. As a result, Mr Clark and his principal, Bob Coughlin, are arguing that this situation is another reason why the Supreme Court should issue an injunction to halt all work by Yntegra.

However, sources close to the Miami-based developer, speaking on condition of anonymity, yesterday described the allegations that it is starting work on the project’s roads and other key civil infrastructure as “garbage”. This newspaper was shown photo comparisons between site clearance work that took place in March 2025 and now, with one contact asserting: “They are clearing the exact same spot that was there before. It is purely geotechnical work.”

Tribune Business was also informed that Yntegra’s Bahamian environmental consultants, BRON, were present on Big Sampson Cay to monitor the developer’s activities and ensure it complies with the approvals granted by DEPP and other government regulatory agencies. The Rosewood Exuma developer has also recently challenged the veracity of previous allegations by Mr Clark’s relating to its activities at the project site.

The Turtlegrass chief financial officer had previously claimed that the nature of construction equipment and materials being offloaded on Big Sampson Cay signalled that Yntegra was about to undertake major development activity. However, Felipe MacLean, the developer’s president, asserted in a March 19, 2026, affidavit that these were “inaccurate representations”, and alleged that the photographs and videos cited by Mr Clark to back his claims were of Dennis Cay - located seven nautical miles away - and not of Sampson Cay.

But Mr Clark, in his latest Supreme Court affidavit, alleged that Turtlegrass employees provided him with more videos showing “machinery clearing land, removal of brush, workers engaged in land‐disturbing activity and freshly exposed soil” on March 23, 2026”. He admitted, though, that he did not personally witness these activities but said the location appeared to the southern part of Big or East Sampson Cay where Yntegra has stored equipment.

Mr Clark added that “the full nature and extent of the works” permitted by CEC2400A, which was granted by the DEPP to solely facilitate geotechnical studies requiring 31 boreholes to be dug to a depth of 30 feet, was “not at all clear”. A BRON report pledged that just 3 percent of vegetation would be cleared for these purposes, but Mr Clark alleged that this percentage potentially translated to “as much as 3.72 acres” that may be disturbed if it was referring to all of Rosewood Exuma’s 124 acres.

“The borehole layout plan in the BRON report shows 31 boreholes distributed across the island, where all the buildings are planned to be built according to the master plan,” he asserted, referring to Rosewood Exuma.

“The placement of multiple boreholes in areas where geological conditions would be uniform suggests that the boreholes are being used to justify road creation and infrastructure layout, rather than simply for geotechnical necessity. The BRON report therefore demonstrates that the works described as ‘geotechnical investigations’ are not simply for pre-development exploratory engineering studies.

“It is clear that the euphemistically described “geotechnical investigations” are far more than initial studies when one reviews the application for CEC 2400, the revised CEC 2400A and its renewal.” Mr Clark alleged that this “self-evidently forms the horizontal works foundation of the entire Yntegra proposed development”.

Mr Clark argued that these CECs, which permit the geotechncial studies and associated works only, should have been accompanied by an Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) and Environmental Management Plan (EMP), as well as a site plan approval application to the Department of Physical Planning.

Instead, he alleged that DEPP had adopted an “iterative secret process” around the “serial secret” geotechnical CECs and other permits. And Mr Clark added that these were considered and approved by the environmental regulator at a time when Yntegra’s application for a CEC for the entire Rosewood Exuma project was still being considered.

“The effect of CEC 2400, CEC 2400A and [the latter’s] post-expiration renewal was to secretly ‘carve out’ substantial parts of the proposed development from that overall CEC application.. and to grant them secret, early environmental clearance without reference to any EIA, EMP or consultation,” Mr Clark claimed.

And he added that DEPP “revoked” CEC 2400, replacing it with CEC 2400A, after Rosewood Exuma’s proposed service dock and jetty - and their location - became controversial during the public consultation. The former permit, issued in August 2024, was for the construction of a service dock and jetty as well as geotechnical studies, but its replacement - issued barely two months later - eliminated these facilities and focused just on the latter.

“The effect of CEC 2400A was to generalise, minimise and obscure the true scope of the works carved out from the original CEC application under the broad and anodyne label of ‘geotechnical investigations’,” Mr Clark alleged. “The use of the CEC process in this manner has circumvented the statutory transparency and consultation requirements of both the Planning and Subdivisions Act and the Environmental Planning and Protection Act.

He added that DEPP has also granted another CEC to the Rosewood Exuma project, this time for a 48-worker camp with 32-seat eating facilities, a nursery and maintenance area “to support the road work and geotechnical studies”.

“In my experience with construction at Turtlegrass, the scale of accommodation and support facilities authorised under CEC 2884 is far greater than what would ordinarily be required for genuine geotechnical investigations, which typically involve a small drilling crew and limited support personnel for a short duration,” Mr Clark alleged.

“The scale of accommodation, dining, maintenance and support infrastructure authorised under CEC 2884 appears consistent with broader enabling works or construction activities, rather than limited borehole drilling or a small nursery. CEC 2884, therefore, reinforces my concern that the term ‘“geotechnical investigations/studies’ is being used to facilitate and support substantial enabling works for the proposed development.”

He further asserted: “In my view, Yntegra has been using… CEC 2400, CEC 2400A and now the renewed 2400A to carry out the foundational infrastructure works for the project while side-stepping the process for environmental clearance of the proposed development.

“A CEC application for the whole development was in process, but in the midst of that process Yntegra secretly ‘carved out’ major… parts of the proposed development from that overall CEC application, which was subject to an EIA, EMP and consultation, and DEPP granted them secret, early environmental clearance without reference to any EIA, EMP or consultation.”