City Engineer say Mayor, `few of his councilors’ targeting him
…accuses council of not providing department with resources
City Engineer Colvern Venture has accused Georgetown Mayor Ubraj Narine and a group of councillors of targeting him in relation to the failure of the engineer’s department to properly manage the city.
Venture’s statement yesterday came following the tabling of a motion on December 7, 2021, by councillors Heston Bostwick and Clayton Hinds calling for his removal.
The motion, which was supposed to be discussed at the December 20 statutory meeting but was deferred to December 28, states “be it resolved: the Council hereby recommend the termination of service of the City Engineer Mr Colvern Venture in the public interest, said termination shall take effect immediately and he shall be paid all benefits due and payable to him including one month’s pay in lieu of notice.”
In the recital to the resolution, the movers of the motion stated that the Georgetown City Council had given ample time to Venture to improve his lacklustre and poor performance but he has failed to do so. As a result, his actions have brought the council into public disrepute.
In a statement issued last night, Venture said that that the motion is personal rather than one that questions his professional capabilities. He explained that since 2019 after Narine and the current council was installed, they have been making untrue statements causing him to continuously write then Town Clerk Sherry Jerrick and the Local Government Commission to complain. Venture pointed to public threats to fire him, by Narine, which were transmitted by various media outlets.
“The most recent letter I wrote to the Local Government Commission was on January 18, 2021, on statements made by the Mayor. I must indicate that to date, I have received no response or update from the Local Government Commission on that matter,” he said.
Laying his case in the public, Venture said that the proper functioning of his department is dependent on the timely acquisition of tools, materials, parts or components by the Finance Department of the Council, which rarely happens. He added that over the years, he has continually written Jerrick for her intervention and presented many lists of requisitions that were not addressed by the Finance Department. Additionally, he sought the intervention of the City Works Committee but they just acknowledged the reports and nothing ever came out of them.
“At a City Works Meeting held 7th October 2021, I presented an assessment of the vehicles and equipment managed and controlled by both the Solid Waste and City Engineer’s Departments. At the end of the deliberation of that report, the committee only focused on one vehicle to be repaired. Currently, my department is operating with one tractor and trailer to address all the issues of drainage, transporting of materials, workers and other allied works within the city. Therefore, one must ask the question, how can a Department or the Council as a whole function effectively under these circumstances?” Venture’s statement read.
Venture believes that his refusal and objections to accede to the Mayor’s requests to have persons vending on the reserves are contributory factors to the quest to have him removed. He explained that in 2020, the Council approved an application to lease someone a portion of the drainage reserve along the East Ruimveldt Front Road and subsequently allowed another individual to place a container along the said drainage reserve to operate a business, despite his stern objections.
Venture further added that his recent objection to the Council purchasing two second-hand garbage trucks that were manufactured in 2003 and had odometer readings above 300,000 are all part of the reason that he is being targeted.
“Concerns were also raised by the Workshop Manager, who works under my supervision, of the hydraulic system of those trucks. In 2017 the council sold six (6) garbage trucks that were manufactured in 2002, via auction, due to the many challenges it was facing to maintain those trucks. I am of the view that my strong objections towards certain matters or applications for certain individuals may have caused persons in the council and elsewhere to view me as a hindrance in achieving certain personal and special interests,” he alleges.
The City Engineer explained that it is the Council’s decision to approve vending along the road and drainage reserves and the collection of revenues from persons selling from caravans and within certain areas of the City, which results in the present untidy state of the capital. Referencing the recent decision of the High Court in the case of Shamdas Kirpalani vs the Town Clerk of Georgetown, Venture pointed to the Council’s non-regard for the city’s by-laws as it relates to encumbrances on the pavements.
Contempt
Venture’s lawyer Ronald Burch-Smith wrote to the