A movement against the implementation of parking meters in Georgetown is calling for citizens to starve Smart City Solutions (SCS) out of the market.
“City Hall don’t have to cancel the contract. If they don’t get money to pay their workers they would pull out on their own. That is what we’re doing—stifling them. Cut off their air that they’re breathing,” Komal Ramnauth, founder of the Movement Against Parking Meters said during an interview yesterday.
“I think people started feeling the full effects of it when it was upon them…We do have a purpose and although we might be a little late, it’s better late than never,” he said.
Representing the initiative yesterday were Ramnauth, Don Singh, Marcel Gaskin and Dr Raquel Thomas-Caesar. The movement, which is apolitical, is intended to change the direction from what over the past year has been largely conversation and social media interaction, to action on the part of the citizenry.
“This was just one spontaneous thing. It’s like, going around, you can’t do your business…, you’re affected; really and truly it’s now become in your face. People have been speaking out for the past year, but now it’s a reality and it’s affecting your life,” Singh stated.
“My thing is that you have a project that’s not tendered… You didn’t get any options; we didn’t see any options. We’re not seeing the contract, even the councillors don’t seem to have seen the contract… It’s a lot of surprises hidden and we are concerned,” Thomas-Caesar inputted.
What the supporters of the Movement against Parking Meters are lobbying for is a boycott of the parking meter zones. Those in support of the initiative are encouraged to park outside of the zones and walk to their destinations instead.
Although those spearheading the movement are urging citizens to “Say no to parking meters,” they made clear that they are not completely against the implementation, just the manner of planning and execution, which they believe lacked transparency and overlooked critical factors such as the social impact of the project.
“The mere fact that they have to backtrack on schools tells me that they didn’t do a proper feasibility study. The mere fact that they’re backtracking on a lot of other issues tells me that they didn’t do a feasibility study,” Gaskin, one champion of the movement stated during a sit-down yesterday.
“So what they’re seeing now is people are not parking in the zone because nobody has embraced it… People pay for a lot of things, people embrace a lot of things that are fairly done and transparently done. This wasn’t. They are now seeing the impact. So they are going to come back with some fix for it, either to reduce the fee or something that will guarantee them some return on their investment,” Gaskin said.
In response to reports of persons vandalizing parking meters, the group chastised the act, and Ramnauth stressed that in no way is the movement in support of the destruction of property.
“We are not supporting vandalism of any sort… We will never support that. We are here to work with the people and stifle them in a way that if they do not want to renegotiate then they will leave because they cannot afford to pay their employees and their operational costs,” Ramnauth added.
The movement began only last Thursday with a WhatsApp group that has now grown to accommodate 250+ members and a snowballing Facebook following which had surpassed 900 likes up to last evening, after being created only the day before.
Collectively, the members have drafted a petition, which they hope will be able to pull the support of at least 5,000 persons within two weeks’ time.
The petition calls for the Mayor and City Council and Government of Guyana to disclose to the public the feasibility and impact studies conducted prior to the implementation of the parking meters; all reports, minutes and other relevant documents produced from meetings held prior to the meters’ implementation and evidence of the tendering process.
The petition then states: In the absence of any of the above then we, the supporters of the Movement against Parking Meters further petition the M&CC and the Government of Guyana to: (a) Rescind and revoke the current contract between Smart City Solutions and the M&CC and (b) Implement a transparent process that involves all stakeholders vis-à-vis the introduction of a parking meter system.
Should the contract be cancelled, the petition states, the call is for a reduction of the parking fee to a price that is affordable to all and special considerations/exemptions for certain categories of persons, including businesses, employees and residents.
“I met a gentleman yesterday afternoon that signed the petition. He parked in Quamina Street opposite my business place. So I was speaking with him and he says he comes from up the East Bank and it costs him with gas to come down and he has a little business by GPO. And so he can’t afford to pay gas, pay his rent and pay parking. So he parked in Quamina Street and walked… But he said before he reached to GPO he had to stop four times because he has a heart ailment. And if the zone expands that would affect him. There are many people with many different stories that this has a social impact on,” Ramnauth told, adding that the movement was about the ordinary man and giving a voice to the voiceless.
Interested persons can join the movement through its Facebook page: Say NO to Parking Meters in Guyana, or join its supporters in protest in front of City Hall on Friday between the hours of 12 pm and 1 pm.
On August 31, 2016 city councillors voted in favour of a motion to approve amendments to the contract between the government of Guyana and the National Parking Systems/SCS, which saw the reduction of the parking tariff to $50 per 15 minutes from the originally proposed “up to $125” per 15-minute interval, as well as the reduction of the length of the contract to 20 years from 49 years.
These amendments came following reviews of the contract by the Ministry of Finance and the Attorney General. The Ministry of Finance’s review severely criticised the deal, saying that government procurement rules may have been transgressed, while the AG’s review also pointed out that the terms highly favour the contractor.
The reviews, however, did not find the contract to be illegal and government recommended only that the city renegotiate the contract after seeking the advice of an accountant.
