Dear Editor,
I write in response to Councillor Lelon Saul’s recent letter, which provides a fascinating case study in creative writing. While I provided facts and figures in my previous correspondence, Councillor Saul has done no such thing. His letter is riddled with straw man and red-herring arguments. For clarity, a straw man argument misrepresents an opponent’s position to make it easier to attack, while a red herring distracts from the actual issue by introducing irrelevant information. Councillor Saul’s reliance on these tactics does a disservice to the discussion.
His letter revolves around two overarching themes.
1. He portrays the Council as a powerless victim, forever thwarted by bureaucratic villains and central government meddling.
2. He seeks to discredit my arguments by framing them as politically biased and uninformed.
Perhaps the most egregious red herring in Councillor Saul’s letter is his theatrical invocation of “parate executions”:
“…I hope, for the sake of those in the working class, that Mr De Armas is not suggesting that we resort to ‘parate execution,’ as this would lead to homelessness for thousands of residents.”
This statement is as absurd as it is dishonest. I have never suggested “parate executions.” In fact, it was Councillor Saul himself who raised this spectre during his budget presentation on June 4. Were it not for the strong objections of my colleague, PPP/C Councillor Steven Jacobs, this draconian policy might have been adopted. For Councillor Saul to invoke the “working class” now is hypocritical in the extreme. Where was his concern for the working class when the PNCR-led Council decided to slash rates payable by political parties—benefiting his political masters at the expense of the people of Georgetown?
As Finance Committee Chair, Councillor Saul refuses to take responsibility for the City’s dire financial state, instead pointing fingers at others. Yet, no citizen of Georgetown, regardless of political affiliation, would absolve the Council of blame for its ongoing failures.
In his letter, Councillor Saul notes that “…crucial decisions are arrived at following a voting process…” but omits that the PNCR holds 19 seats on the Council, compared to the PPP/C’’s 11. This majority ensures that decisions, such as slashing rates for political parties, are driven by PNCR councillors. It is unsurprising that Councillor Saul conveniently fails to mention this fact.
He further asserts that I feign astonishment over the Council’s persistent challenges in producing a timely budget. Yet, year after year, budget estimates are submitted months past the deadline. As Chair of the Finance Committee, one would expect Councillor Saul to have at least a few ideas—or perhaps a calendar—to ensure the budgeting process is completed on time. If the administration is as inefficient as he claims, surely it doesn’t take a financial mastermind to suggest starting the process earlier in the year. His inaction only serves as a smokescreen to mask his own incompetence.
Councillor Saul also touts that the Council has hired an auditor to review its finances and help prepare a budget.
This statement deserves closer scrutiny. The auditor was indeed hired, but not to help draft a budget as Councillor Saul dishonestly implies. Rather, the auditor was engaged because the City has not had its accounts audited for decades, in blatant and consistent breach of both the Municipal and District Councils Act and the Fiscal Transfers Act. This lack of financial oversight has contributed to the Council’s inability to maintain even basic financial records, such as an asset register, much less a balance sheet. The auditor’s role, therefore, is to address these longstanding failures and restore a semblance of financial accountability—not to assist with budget preparation, for which Councillor Saul already has access to the Treasurer’s financial reports detailing revenues and expenditures from previous years, which can serve as a solid foundation for initiating the 2025 budgeting process.
Similarly, he notes that the Engineer’s Department has been tasked with identifying billboard locations and numbers. What he neglects to mention is that this directive was issued only recently, despite his bold pronouncements in June about monetizing the Council’s assets. Months were wasted, and the process has barely begun.
Finally, Councillor Saul completely sidesteps the facts I raised in my previous letter. I ask him to address the following as Finance Committee Chair:
1. Budget Consultations: Last year’s budget was approved without consulting the City’s residents. Why were no consultations held? How can the Council create an effective budget without input from Georgetown’s citizens?
2. Payroll Expenditures: Seventy per cent of all revenues collected go toward the City’s payroll. Why has the Council not conducted an HR audit to optimize human resources and reduce inefficiencies?
3. Waste Collection Delays: As of my last letter, the City was 79 days behind in payments to solid waste contractors. What impact has this had on waste collection in Georgetown?
4. Capital Projects: Despite budgeting a substantial sum for capital projects, the City has spent zero dollars year-to-date. Could Councillor Saul explain which projects were budgeted for and how the Council’s failure to execute them has affected residents?
5. Revenue Collection Software: The software managing the City’s revenue collection is riddled with data errors. What has been the impact of this on rate collection, and why has this issue persisted for years?
6. Asset Monetization: What concrete steps (not empty rhetoric) has the Council taken? How much additional revenue has the City earned from this much-touted endeavour?
The time for excuses is over. Councillor Saul can no longer hide behind rhetoric, distractions, and omissions. The people of Georgetown are tired of paying the price for the Council’s ineptitude and self-serving decisions. Leadership requires accountability, transparency, and action—not vague promises and hollow posturing.
History will judge those who, when given the chance to serve, chose instead to pass blame and protect their political allies. Councillor Saul, the residents of Georgetown deserve better than this. The question is not whether you will respond to my letter but whether you will finally respond to the needs of the people you claim to serve.
Sincerely,
Alfonso De Armas
PPP/C City Councillor
