Dear Editor,
We have read a letter written by Mr Ramon Gaskin on the Mayor and City Council (‘City councillors from all the parties should be dismissed,’ SN, May 21). We thank him for his keen and active interest in the affairs of the council. However, the contents of his letter seem to suggest that he may have missed a few important points on the current challenges affecting the work of the council. In fact, many of the things he has said in his letter really come down to his opinion and in some cases wild accusations about the council and its members. Therefore, we are obliged to distinguish between Mr Gaskin’s personal opinions and the current reality at City Hall.
Frankly, we disagree with Mr Gaskin that the council is illegitimate and a total disgrace. Judgments about legitimacy should be rooted in the law. The council is provided for under the constitution. It is an institution that functions within the ambit of the law in two senses: it is the rightful authority to take action on issues affecting the city; and secondly, it does not violate a legal or moral norm. The Mayor and Councillors are carrying out their responsibilities as stipulated by the Municipal and District Councils Act, Chapter 28:01.
It is common knowledge that the stay of the incumbent council was extended by parliament. It is not the fault of the Mayor and councillors that they are still in place; it is the lack of local government elections. Therefore, it is wrong for anyone to attempt to chide the city council for remaining in place. In fact, they should be commended for holding the organisation together and providing service in very daunting circumstances.
Also, to say that the council is a disgrace without addressing certain constraints that continue to limit its ability to perform is really to approach the situation from a perspective that is not grounded in truth and the current reality within the municipality. The main constraint affecting the council is lack of resources ‒ money, management and manpower. It is not necessary for us to elaborate. Every citizen knows that the council is seriously underfunded. This year’s budget is $2.4B. An estimate from one of our engineers to overhaul the city’s drainage system is $1B. This is just one aspect of our responsibility. Admittedly, we can and should do more to improve our debt collection. We have been working on improving this aspect of our work. But even if council were to collect all monies owed by defaulters, it would still fall far short of the amount needed to manage the city in an efficient and effective manner.
Then there is the problem of manifest indiscipline in our local communities. This transmutes itself into unsightly garbage heaps and other environmental and public health nuisances that compromise the health and well-being of the city and its citizens. However, we have noticed that it is now fashionable for everyone to blame the council for everything that goes wrong in the city, even the negative attitudes of citizens towards the environment. It is unfair.
It is easy to talk about dismissing the council as Mr Gaskin has suggested, but that would not necessarily solve the many problems affecting the development and progress of the city. Beyond the talk of dismissing councillors, there are vital questions about reforms, economic empowerment of the council, the role of government, and the mechanisms for governance of the municipality and the responsibilities of citizens.
Again, we could not agree with his accusation that “Mr Green and some of his councillors are waging a multi-pronged war on Ms. Sooba.” In the first place, the Mayor and Councillors agreed to work with the present acting Town Clerk until a substantive Town Clerk is appointed. In spite of this, there have been dysfunctional conflicts. It has been hindering the ability of the council to provide core services to citizens. This is not to say that there were no problems before this very nebulous state of affairs came into being, but that the present managerial and administrative interim arrangements in a council that is in crisis has exacerbated the situation. Moreover, it has facilitated a myriad of different and confusing signals on the general performance of the City Council. The council has taken steps to ensure that the situation returns to normalcy, and that the existing boundaries of authority are observed and respected.
Also, we reject the view by Mr. Gaskin that councillors “never raised their voices against those involved in racketeering and lawlessness.” It was the intervention of the Mayor and Councillors that facilitated several inquiries into the affairs of council, including the Sandra V Jones Study and the Burrowes Commission. In fact, it was the intervention of the council that permitted Mr Gaskin to examine the Burrowes report to determine the status of certain recommendations of that report.
While we are at it, let us point out that Mr Gaskin’s report was flawed; it was devoid of accuracy in many aspects, and needed further evaluation. For example, the report stated that there were 400 phantom employees. However, the Auditor General carried out an investigation and did a verification of the payroll. It revealed that all persons stated on the payroll existed. This is an important point because it demonstrates that not every suspicion or opinion about an organisation is necessarily true or can be substantiated.
One other thing, Mr Gaskin stated that the Town Clerk is not subordinate to the council. He is wrong. Under the law the Town Clerk has reporting responsibilities to the council. At section 75 (2 & 3): “The clerk shall be the chief administrative officer of the council of which he is the clerk and shall have the general responsibility of co-ordinating the whole of the work of the council.
“In the discharge to the functions of his office the clerk shall have all the powers and duties conferred and imposed upon the clerk by or under this Act or any other law, and, in particular, but without prejudice to the generality of the foregoing, he shall have the powers and duties assigned to him by and be responsible for the matters specified in Part I of the Sixth Schedule, and such other duties as may be assigned to him by the council of which he is the clerk.
The clerk or other officer authorized in writing by the clerk may, subject to the general or specific directions of the council, exercise the powers of the council, and all acts done by the clerk or such officer in the exercise of those powers shall be deemed to have been done by the council.”
Like every other organisation council has a structure; the formal system of task and reporting relationships that controls, coordinates and motivates employees so that they work together to achieve organisational goals. No one should be allowed to breach that structure even if that person is the Town Clerk. The Municipal and District Councils Act Chapter 28:01 and policies that evolved over the years through discussions and negotiations with stakeholders set out the standards by which the municipality should operate.
The office of the Town Clerk does not and cannot function in isolation from the general council and other departments. When the council sits the Town Clerk is the secretary to the council. He/she takes instructions from the council and implements its decisions. The Town Clerk has coordinating authority not functional authority. Therefore, the Town Clerk is subordinate to the elected representatives of the people ‒ the council.
Then there are certain ethical, professional and administrative protocols that guide relationships within an organisation. Such protocols are necessary to engender teamwork, to maintain relationships, to minimize conflicts, maximize cohesion and generally to account for the interdependence between the various parts of the organisation and also between the organisation and its environment. Failure to understand and appreciate the importance of such protocols leads to organizational confusion, indiscipline and poor organizational performance.
We thank Mr Gaskin for his letter but its contents are groundless and could not be substantiated.
Yours faithfully
Royston King
Public Relations Officer
