On March 18 this year, the citizens of Georgetown—at least those who ventured out to vote—elected public officials to whom the careful and responsible management of the city was entrusted. Having lived in a city that had been thoroughly abused for more than 15 years by people playing politics, some voted in the hope that the encouraging signs of care evidenced by the clean-up that started last year, would not only continue, but expand from central Georgetown to all boroughs and wards. To date, that has not happened nor is there any indication that such a plan exists.
Instead, citizens are expected to pay upwards of $200 million for a Presidential Park that no one asked them if they wanted. Even before the elections, they were told of plans for petting zoos at Merriman Mall and in the Promenade Gardens that they were not consulted about. In addition to this the lives of several dozen city residents, who formerly made a living vending—albeit illegally—in downtown Georgetown, remain in limbo as there seems to be no clear long-term plan to address their situation. It is particularly disturbing that these and other ill thought-out ideas seem to be the purview of Mayor Patricia Chase-Green, Town Clerk Royston King and perhaps two other councillors, all of whom were members of the previous ineffectual council.
Why then were other councillors elected? Are they are expected to simply show up at statutory meetings and sit there dumbly? Should they not be making representation on behalf of their constituents?
When he addressed the Mayor and councillors—and through them the entire city—on Monday last, President David Granger spoke of the need for councillors to speak to their constituents; and rightly so. Councillors need to get the insight and approval of the people they have been elected to represent as regards plans for the city, the execution of which will involve the spending of these citizens’ tax dollars.
Any councillor who has held or even attempted to hold a clinic in his or her constituency to hear from the residents there what their needs are, should take a bow. But to the best of publicly available knowledge this has not been done once in the three months since elected city officials were sworn in.
If it had, they would have heard that although Georgetown is a jewel now compared to just over a year ago, there are still many things that are troubling. One of them is the daily continued dumping of rubbish at Camp Street and North Road. A man who appears to be a street dweller can often be seen in the mornings emptying a black plastic bag of an assortment of cardboard boxes, plastics and other garbage at the side of the trench. How can we boast of having a clean city when this reprehensible practice continues?
In case anyone has forgotten, Georgetown does not only mean the city centre. So while the beautifying of the Merriman Mall and the cleaning up of Stabroek Square are all well and good, what of Quamina Street, between Camp and Waterloo Streets which still floods as soon as there is a drizzle? And what of North Ruimveldt where some streets are perpetually waterlogged because of a lack of drainage?
And how about maintaining the areas where millions have already been spent—a lot of it by central government and private citizens—on effecting proper drainage? Maintenance involves the upkeep of property—in this case Georgetown—at a certain standard. And that would include paying attention to alleys, roads, drains, outfalls, canals, kokers, solid waste management and street lights. This list is by no means exhaustive. Stewardship of this city also involves the timely collection of such rates and fees that citizenry must pay in order to receive the services outlined above. It means going after the defaulters of these payments however difficult that may be or however unpopular it makes the council. It means spending the money thus collected in ways that would enhance the quality of life of all of its citizens in all 40 square kilometres—from the Atlantic Ocean in the north to Rome (Agricola) in the south and from the Demerara River in the west to Cummings Lodge in the east as amended under the Municipal and District Councils (Amendment) Act of 1970.
The councillors who sit at the horseshoe table at City Hall are sometimes referred to as the ‘city fathers and mothers.’ However, it is important that they realise that this reference is colloquial only and it certainly does not give them the right to treat the citizens as though they are children.
