AS debates and deliberations continue on the proposed plan of the Mayor and Councillors of the City of Georgetown (M&CC) to institute parking meters to regulate use of parking spaces and expand the City’s revenue base, the M&CC has to be mindful that the means to achieving this end can withstand scrutiny, and secure public appreciation for the project.The unfolding of the project dates back to an October 2015 statutory meeting of the Council, when a decision was taken to revisit plans to install parking meters and to build bus sheds in Georgetown. The latter project, notwithstanding reservation as to the size of cover for some sheds, seems to be rolling out smoothly.

During the recently held Local Government Elections’ campaign, the issue of parking meters was a major debating point among candidates vying for office.
In May, the newly installed City Fathers and Mothers made known their intent to proceed with finalising the implementation of the parking meter system. And it is fair to say that at the time of this announcement, residents were unaware that a proposal was before the Council. The provider whom the Council identified for the project has said the project would result in the creation of 100 jobs. In a city and country where unemployment is high, this is a welcome development. The employment of 100 persons would also redound to indirect employment and economic opportunities for others.

The proposed resultant positive notwithstanding, here is where everything started going in an antithetical direction to ethics.

There was the announcement of an identified contractor soon after the public learnt that, during 2006 and 2007, City Hall had engaged another contractor from whom it had received a proposal for the handling of such a project.

When the information became public, City Hall did not deny this previous interface, nor did it deny being in receipt of a proposal from this 2006/2007 exercise.

On the matter of the preferred contractor, questions are being raised, including from within the Council, regarding the authenticity of the credentials of this company, and the inability to verify these credentials by Internet research. This is a serious issue, and City Hall would do well to conduct its own due diligence on this company before it potentially saddles the City with another burden the likes of Synergy Holdings or Surendra Engineering Inc.

This newspaper continues to provide coverage on the different points of view regarding the matter as those unfold. In having a say in this section, there is no interest or desire to focus on the personalities involved; the exercise is merely to examine the importance of dealing with issues through the application of ethics, which are so badly needed in the management of the city’s affairs. If there is a proposal on a project with the intent to realise, be it expressed or implied, when that project is expected to be implemented, the proposer(s) should be called in and be treated with deserving respect. It is the ethical way of doing business, and speaks to the importance of valuing people or clients — resident, contracted or entertained.

The public is also being denied the benefit of being educated on the project: how and where it will be rolled out, even though this group is a vital stakeholder. Feedback on the ground is not only about addressing the conflicts in City Hall, but also includes wanting to know where the meters would be placed, and concern about what is being considered exorbitant fees that would have to be paid for parking.

Our City Fathers and Mothers need not ignore that times have changed. People are demanding that elected leaders conduct themselves with due regard for those who have put them in office, and people want them to manage the town’s affairs in accordance with certain basic universal standards. With the vendors’ imbroglio still seething, the M&CC could have avoided jumping smack into another debacle in the handling of the parking meters. Both issues have one thing in common: the absence of regard, real or contrived, for people. This ought to be of concern to the Council, and efforts must be made to avoid such a perception.

Influences of the Internet and social media are drastically changing expectations on how business is conducted, knowledge acquired, information validated; the way people see their leaders, and what they will not accept from them. Best practices in other societies in the management of the people’s business and treatment of them are confirming and driving the need for replication here.

Also, where persons who have offered themselves for leadership support the value of such practices, they will do likewise in their decision-making, or be pressured by their peers — be they in leadership or not — to confirm. Things at City Hall have to change, and that change must be for the better.