CONTROVERSY is brewing over some row houses in Port Royal, which were built as part of the 1951 Hurricane Charlie relief effort. Residents claim management company, the Port Royal Brotherhood, is trying to strong-arm them into buying the houses at unreasonable prices.

At the same time, however, chairman of the Brotherhood, Paul Buchanan said residents were being unreasonable as the Brotherhood had dropped the sale price of the houses on two occasions.

“Everybody want it, but it’s the price,” one resident, Cecille Robinson, told the Sunday Observer. Furthermore, she said, she understood from her grandparents that the house would be theirs after 25 years.

The Brotherhood first offered to sell the houses at $700,000, which was later lowered to $600,000, then finally to $500,000 in July 2006.

Robinson said most residents had agreed that they could only pay $75,000.

“It would be unfair,” Buchanan said, “you can’t even transfer a property for $75,000. We would give them generous terms. Our job is not to drive out anybody,” Buchanan added.

After the 1951 hurricane, the Port Royal Brotherhood was established to manage pooled lands that residents gave up for houses to be built. In turn, those who signed on and gave up their lands would have shares in the Brotherhood. The houses, which were built by the then colonial government, would then be rented to the former landowners.

Section 11 of the Port Royal Brotherhood Act, which came into law in 1953, states that it shall be the duty of the Board, on behalf the Brotherhood, to “undertake and encourage the reconstruction and development of Port Royal.”

“The board shall have the power for the purpose of the discharge of their duty to do anything and to enter into any transaction (including the allotment and issue of shares under this act, whether or not involving expenditure, borrowing, granting of loans, or investment of money, the acquisition of any property or rights) which in their opinion is calculated to facilitate their functions or is incidental or conducive thereto,” the act states.

And according to Buchanan, that is exactly what the Brotherhood is doing in trying to sell the cottages now. Additionally, he said, even though rentals start as low as $1,500 per month, there is “chronic delinquency”.

“Some of them owe 48 months’ rent, and you have to be repairing, repairing,” Buchanan complained.

“Part of the whole rationalisation process was to sell the things to the people so they could have more responsibility and self-discipline,” Buchanan said.

The residents who spoke to the Sunday Observer said, however, that they did not owe any outstanding rent on the properties. They also criticised the Brotherhood for not having open dialogue with them.

Anthony Wade, 75, said Buchanan attended a meeting with the residents for only 10 minutes, in which he did all the talking and then left. But Buchanan also refuted this claim.

Hillary Prawl, 88, had a document showing a member of her family as an original shareholder in the Brotherhood. Buchanan said residents who had documentation to prove their ancestors as the original shareholders, may not be asked to pay for the properties. The shares will just be swapped.

“They say I’m alright because I show them my paper,” Prawl said.

Meanwhile, Buchanan said some residents had signed on for the current sale price of $500,000, while some had not. But, he said, there was no way the price could go any lower. He said the Brotherhood did not intend to displace the residents, and an invitation had been extended for price discussions on “unit-specific” basis.

One resident, Sonia Robinson, said, however, that she felt the whole process by which the Brotherhood was established was suspicious. She accused the organisation of already hoodwinking one generation and attempting to do it to yet another. “Quite frankly, I think this law (the Port Royal Brotherhood Act) should be abolished,” Robinson said.