City council votes for special committee to oversee City Hall restoration

City councillors on Monday afternoon accepted the recommendation for the establishment of a special committee to supervise the restoration of City Hall.

The recommendation, derived from an ExtraOrdinary Statutory Meeting that was held on July 12th , was presented at the council’s statutory meeting on Monday.

Mayor Patricia ChaseGreen said that the committee will be headed by a councillor, as required by law, and would consist of members who are experts in the fields of engineering and construction.

During the meeting, she asked Town Clerk Royston King to schedule another special meeting where councillors can develop guidelines and terms of reference for the committee’s operations.

In addition, councillors accepted a recommendation for a broad-based consultation and the mayor said the earlier the committee is established, the sooner consultations with stakeholders could begin as the council seeks to generate much-needed revenue to execute the restoration. “The longer we take to develop a plan of action, the higher the price would be to do works on building… we need to act fast and find the money,” Chase-Green said.

A Comprehensive Restoratio n and Sustainable Conservation Management Plan was prepared by Euronet Consulting.

The consultants, Ed Morton and Francis Maude, have estimated that US$4.3 million will be needed to execute the works.

It was noted that 90 percent of the materials which were used to construct City Hall over 100 years ago can be reused during the restoration. Both Morton and Maude had pointed out that water damage was one of the major factors for the current state of the building and its continuous decay.

City Engineer Colvern Venture has advised that the council operate in the building until the end of the year. Venture noted that while the building can be used within the next five months, steady assessments of its deterioration need to be conducted.

“I would say we could operate until the end of this year but we will have to continue to monitor the deterioration on the third floor. We have further deterioration on the roof of this building and as such we will have to do an inspection… this floor and the ground [floor] can be occupied but there will be discomfort because of the leakages,” he said. As a result of Guyana’s application on March 29th, the ICJ in early June announced that it would receive the Representatives of Venezuela and of Guyana on June 18th, 2018, in order to know the points of view of the parties regarding procedural issues in Georgetown’s move for a juridical settlement of the controversy.

It was at this meeting that Venezuela advised the ICJ that it would not be taking part in the process and did not recognise the court’s jurisdiction.

In its press release, the ICJ said that pursuant to Article 31 of the Rules of Court, its President, Judge Abdulqawi Ahmed Yusuf, met with representatives of the Parties, on 18 June 2018.

At this meeting, it said that Greenidge, the Agent of Guyana, indicated that his Government wished to have at its disposal a period of nine months for the preparation of its Memorial. Guyana has, however, been given six months.

Delcy Rodríguez Gómez, Vice-President of Venezuela, stated, according to the press release, that her government considered that the Court manifestly lacked jurisdiction and that it had decided not to take part in the proceedings.

She handed to the President of the Court a letter, dated 18th June, 2018, from President of Venezuela Nicolás Maduro, in which he pointed out, in particular, that there was no basis for the jurisdiction of the Court and that Venezuela would not participate in the proceedings.

In response to the statement of the Vice-President of Venezuela, the release said that the representatives of Guyana reiterated that their government wished to proceed with the case.

In its Order of June 19th, the release said that the Court pointed out that in the circumstances of the case, it must first settle the question of its jurisdiction and that “this question should accordingly be separately determined before any proceedings on the merits” of the matter filed by Guyana.

The release said that the Order notes that “the possibility for Venezuela of availing itself of its procedural rights as a Party to the case is preserved.”