An observer's view of the meeting held in the Chapel of St Cajetan on
4thOctober 2009.


 A meeting was called by the Chapel Committee to discuss it's immediate
requirements.

I appreciate the efforts of the members of the committee for being concerned
about the Chapel, and putting in a lot of effort to see to the upliftment of
the chapel. At this meeting many points were discussed the major points
being. :-

   1.

   Immediate need for a toilet for the priest
   2.

   construction of the pavement in front of the chapel
   3.

   Fencing the boundaries of the chapel property near Dilip's shop and
   Maurice Britto's “cantare”
   4.

   Waterproofing of the chapel porch.
   5.

   Landscaping the property in front of the chapel with the addition of
   benches to facilitate an atmosphere of evening prayer.
   6.

   Future plans for re-tiling the main part of the chapel.
   7.

   Cutting off  five coconut trees too close to newly come up and existing
   structures.

The toilet was approved of with the objection just one member who felt that
the toilet should not be built for the benefit of the priest/people due to
the fear of bad odour.   If the objection to this is due to the fear that
the soak pit may be close to the party's well, the solution could be I) the
soak pit could be far away from the well or ii) the party could permit the
usage of his soak pit.

 Any fencing done for demarcating neighbouring properties, the cost should
be shared equally rather than the use of the chapel funds for the purpose.
Chapel funds, means the funds of the people and if for fencing our own
properties we are splitting costs, then probably a similar approach should
be used. Anyway, if there are extra funds, then there is no problem if we
fence all the neighbours properties.


 Waterproofing of the chapel porch : needs the supervision of a proper
architect and engineer to make sure expenses do not keep recurring
frequently.


 The four out of the five coconut trees are fruit bearing and proper thought
should be given before considering the cutting of such trees.  A coconut
tree takes about 100 years to grow. Proceeds of sale of coconuts go to the
Chapel.  Existing structures have come up recently, with full knowledge of
the tree being there previously, is there need to cut the trees?

In my view, we need to feel a sense of belonging to the chapel and if the
chapel is our's we will not be so eager to part with our ancestral heritage
at the cost of good will.


 I am fully of the view that all this was done in the interest of the
Chapel. The intentions of the Chapel Committee are very good, i.e. to help
the Chapel, her people, and the people/society at large and the neighbours.
We can be good, but why give away our own property/assets just for winning
the hearts of our neighbours.

The proper forum for addressing this would be at the General Body Meeting of
the Chapel, and I do not, and I once again stress, that I am not questioning
the decisions of the meeting.

….. and if we cut down fruit bearing coconut trees or build common walls for
our neighbours at the cost of the Chapel, it does not make any differnce at
all, since I too am a observer like all the others who were silent when such
decisions were made. Cut the trees, 'coz even I value relationships higher
than coconut trees, but one thing I can tell you, that I will grieve when
the coconut trees are gone.


 Once again, let me be clear, I support the general body decision.

Regards,

Ajay D'Cruz

--~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~
This message comes via the Google Groups "Saligao-Net" group.
To post to this group, send email to [email protected]
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
[email protected]
For more options, visit this group at
http://groups.google.com/group/saligao-net?hl=en
Please post regularly to keep the e-village active!
-~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---

Reply via email to