CONSUMER CONCERN…WHITHER THE PARKING METERS?

Sep 17, 2017 News

---

By PAT DIAL
We did not expect to revisit the Parking Meter issue so soon after the Report of the Commission of Inquiry was debated by the City Council since we felt that a more rational spirit would have subsumed the issue. But the issue is almost at the same point from which it started: The City Council has decided that the Contract with Smart City will stand and will be effectuated but certain parts of it would be re-negotiated.
The decision to re-negotiate the Contract came as a great surprise as there were a number of factors which positively militated against such a decision. In the first place it is generally felt in intellectual and consumer circles that a large majority of the citizens of Georgetown as well as people countrywide reject the imposition of Parking Meters on the City.
And this position seemed to have now infected the City Council itself which was regarded as the bastion of pro-Parking Meter support; now, the Council is almost equally divided between supporters and opposers of the Parking Meter scheme. It would be foolhardy to attempt to carry out a scheme to which the majority of people were opposed.
In the second place, the Council should have precluded itself from doing any further business with Smart City since that Company had publicly insulted the City Council when it refused to make available to the Council’s Commission of Inquiry certain basic documents such as the Feasibility Study of the Parking Meter scheme which were essential for the thoroughness of the Commission’s work.
Smart City’s refusal to make available such records also transgressed the Government of Guyana’s policy of transparency in conducting the affairs of Government.
A number of other such factors were mentioned in the City Council’s debate and in the media. We could not reiterate these but one example would suffice: Councillor Duncan’s questioning of the bona fides of the Smart City Company and the past brushes with the Law by some of its senior personnel. The Councillor had done his research on the Internet and from current magazines.
The M&CC mentioned that its re-negotiating team would be drawn from the Council and from citizens who possess the skills relevant to such negotiations. The Mayor has divorced herself from serving on this team. But so far M&CC has not indicated that Smart City would be amenable to re-negotiation of the Contract.
In consumer circles there is a strong body of opinion that Smart City would not go any further with the Parking Meter scheme. The main reasons proffered are that, firstly, there is a precondition to any renegotiation which is that the quantum of Smart City’s profits would be reduced. When it is realized that Smart City would be making an investment of about US$10 million as against the Guyana side whose share of the investment would be the road system of Georgetown worth billions of dollars as well as M&CC’s obligation to maintain the parking meter areas in good repair for the next 20 years at least, it would be realized that Smart City would be making 1% to 5% of the total investment while M&CC would be making at least 95%. With this kind of investment proportions, Smart City would have to be allocated far less profit than the 80% they were expecting.
Secondly, the validity of the Contract they originally made is under question and if it is found that the Contract has no validity and could be voided at any time, Smart City may be unwilling to continue in such a situation.
Thirdly, the Company would have to make regular foreign exchange remittances abroad and should have the acceptance of the Ministry of Finance and the Bank of Guyana. As far as we understand, both agencies have not been engaged in this respect.
And fourthly, there is a large body of local opinion at all levels of the Society which is against Parking Meters and there is no guarantee that it would not continue to be adversarial. Smart City would find it uncomfortable to operate in such a milieu.
The M&CC must therefore ascertain with Smart City whether they are interested in continuing and if they are, the minimum conditions on which they would be renegotiating the Contract.
In Traffic Control, there are three phases: In the first phase, users of the roads regulate themselves; in the second phase, regulation depends upon the Police; and it is only when personal and Police regulation become ineffective that Parking Meters come in as a last resort.
Most of downtown Georgetown is far from congested and the comparatively small areas which become congested at some hours of the day and some days of the week could be managed by the Police. Indeed, whenever the Police are manning traffic at rush hours or certain days with heavier traffic, they do so quite effectively. If there is a constant Police presence, there would be no traffic problem.
There are two observations we would like to make for readers to think about: All Parking Meter proposals and schemes have had their origin abroad; no rooted and resident Guyanese citizen has ever proposed a Parking Meter scheme for Georgetown. The second observation: The M&CC went into the parking Meter scheme primarily to raise revenue and not to control traffic. The motivation of the Parking Meter scheme has been financial on all sides, talk of traffic control and traffic congestion has been an afterthought.

---

---