Dear Editor,
On June 14 of this year, an architect submitted to the City Council of Georgetown, on our Firm’s behalf, a Plan and application for approval for the construction of a new building in Waterloo Street, Georgetown. As acknowledgment, we have a receipt for the money paid bearing two “rubber” stamps of the City Council, one from its Tax Office and the other, from its City Engineer’s Department (CED). Over the approximately ten weeks since the application, we have received no written communication from the Council on the process involved, the time for the issue of the approval, or any requests for clarification.
Our understanding is that the plan is first referred to the Guyana Water Inc. for its approval that the Plan makes adequate arrangements for the building’s connection to the City’s sewage facilities. It is then returned to the CED which next submits it to the Central Housing and Planning Authority for review by the technical officers, placing it before a monthly statutory meeting for approval, and return to the CED. The third referral by the CED is to the Fire Department for its review and approval for safety arrangements. Our understanding is that it is only after all three external approvals have been received that the CED begins its own technical assessment before putting it to a statutory meeting of the City Council for approval.
It would be an insult to the average person not to expect her/him to realise the logic of requesting say four copies, thus allowing for the simultaneous review by the three external entities and the CED. Not only do such logic and common sense seem lacking, but so too is the apparent unfamiliarity with basic communication and business courtesies, principles, and practices.
Even if such common sense is not embedded in the City’s bylaws, nothing prevents the CED from applying administrative logic to its work. Rather, it seems that the CED applies its own logic, standards and priorities. Professionally and personally, I have dealt with some efficient central and regional bodies, but also some very bad ones. Even among the latter group, I rate the CED as way ahead of the pack.
Over the ten weeks, I have made numerous calls to the CED and the Mayor pleading, cajoling and imploring them to act on the application. On the occasions when my calls are taken, promises are sometimes made, but never kept.
There are many things wrong at the City Council requiring attention, including inadequate resources and low pay for which I have enormous sympathy. But the poor performance of the City Engineer’s Department simply ought not to be allowed to continue. That Department and its methods of operation, if that is not too generous a term, should be subject to an investigation and overhaul.
Sincerely,
Christopher Ram
Ram & McRae
