Latest update April 6th, 2026 12:35 AM
Latest News
- Gov’t rejected three cheaper Chinese bids to finance, construct gas plant
- Corentyne mom kills 7-year-old daughter, injures infant son
- Trump threatens ‘hell’ for Iran over Hormuz Strait as deadline approaches
- US$214M still with Exxon – AFC warns of quiet deal as audit dispute drags on
- Govt. launches border patrol unit in Region Nine
Don’t renegotiate parking meter deal – MAPM
The Movement against Parking Meters (MAPM) is against any plans to renegotiate the parking meter contract signed between the Georgetown Mayor and City Council and Smart City Solutions (SCS).
FLASHBACK: MAPM said it is ready to take to the streets again to call for a revocation of the parking meter deal.
The MAPM has been aggressive in its stance against the implementation of the parking meter system and have been calling for a full revocation during its many protests in front of the M&CC on Regent Street.
Having learnt of the M&CC decision to renegotiate the contract with SCS, the MAPM said yesterday that it remains adamant that the contract should not be renegotiated and that it is ready to resume ‘vociferous protests’ against what it believes to be an attempt by the M&CC to implement an unpopular project.
“MAPM would like to reiterate its position that we are not against a structured system for traffic regulation within the central areas of the city including measures for the orderly parking of vehicles and the need for the M&CC to increase their revenue base.”
Despite having this position, the group said that the fact remains that parking meters must be implemented as part of a complete system consisting of other elements. These elements include garage facilities for persons wanting to park beyond three hours and a reliable public transportation system.
“It is ludicrous that the M&CC would allow this project which is an imposition on the Guyanese people to proceed without these elements being in place. The MAPM will remain resolute in our call for full revocation of the contract and feel strongly that a project of this magnitude must benefit from a comprehensive feasibility and social impact study, a cost benefit analysis and full adherence to Guyana’s procurement laws.”
The group, yesterday, expressed concern that there are certain officials at the M&CC who are continuing in their efforts to foist what can only be described as a corrupt contract on the citizens of Guyana.
According to the MAPM, on several occasions, it and members of government and the private sector have made public the numerous deficiencies in the process of selecting and engaging SCS as the provider of parking meter services in Georgetown.
“Concern has been expressed at the onerous terms and conditions to be imposed upon the people, the users of the City and outlying areas. The Ministry of Finance review, the review by the Attorney General’s Chambers and the Parking Meter Review Committee cannot be ignored.”
The group said that the 13 Councillors who voted to renegotiate the corrupt contract seem to have little or no understanding or regard of the need for transparency and due process.
Further, the MAPM commented that the original contract for parking meters suffers a number of procedural and other deficiencies and may be deemed illegal due to breaches of various laws such as Section 229 of the Municipal and District Councils Act, Cap. 28:01.
The group said that this section provides that notice must be given and invitation sought from the general public, bids by way of sealed tenders bidding for execution of contracts exceeding $250,000. In addition, under the Act, the Council is to select a bidder from among those bids using a fair and transparent process, abiding by fixed and pre-informed guidelines of eligibility.
Going further, the group referred to Section 231 of the Act which states that the Council must exercise its discretion to contract prudently with sound financial principles, accepting the most advantageous of the bids received.
“Further, no evaluation of Smart City Solutions was undertaken by the M&CC before that entity was selected to undertake the contract and no assessment was made of its prior experience, asset base and required competencies to undertake the contract, as is implicitly required under Section 231 of the Act.”
Discover more from Kaieteur News
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Similar Articles
THE BLUNT OF THE DAY
Sports
Features/Columnists
Sir. Ronald Sanders
The GHK Lall Column
Weekend Cartoon
