Dear Editor,

I am writing in response to Advisor Lelon Saul’s recent letter, which presents a fascinating case study in creative writing. Although I have provided facts and figures in my previous correspondence, Councilor Saul has done no such thing. His letter is riddled with “straw man” arguments and red herrings. For clarity, a “strawman” argument distorts an opponent’s position to make the attack easier, while a “redherring” argument distracts from the actual problem by introducing irrelevant information . Councilor Saul’s reliance on these tactics does a disservice to the discussion.

His letter is structured around two major themes.

It portrays the Council as a helpless victim, forever thwarted by evil bureaucrats and central government meddling.
He seeks to discredit my arguments as politically biased and uninformed.

Perhaps the most egregious misdirection in Councilor Saul’s letter is his theatrical invocation of “parallel executions.”

“…I hope, for the sake of the working class, that Mr. DeArmas is not suggesting that we resort to “parallel executions,” as that would lead to homelessness for thousands of residents.

This statement is as absurd as it is dishonest. I never suggested “parallel executions”. In fact, it was Councilor Saul himself who raised this specter during his budget presentation on June 4. Were it not for the strong objections of my colleague, PPP/C Councilor Steven Jacobs, this draconian policy could have been adopted.

The fact that Councilor Saul is now invoking the “working class” is extremely hypocritical. Where was his concern for the working class when the PNC-led council decided to reduce interest rates payable by political parties – to the benefit of its political masters at the expense of the people of Georgetown?

As chair of the Finance Committee, Councilor Saul refuses to take responsibility for the city’s dire financial situation, instead pointing the finger at others. Yet no citizen of Georgetown, regardless of political affiliation, can absolve the council of responsibility for its continued failures.

In his letter, Councilor Saul notes that “…crucial decisions are made following a voting process…” but omits that the PNC holds 19 seats on the council, compared to 11 for the PPP. This majority ensures that decisions, such as reducing political party interest rates, are driven by PNC advisors. It is not surprising that Councilor Saul forgot to mention this fact.

He further states that I am feigning astonishment at the council’s continued difficulties in producing a budget on time. Yet, year after year, budget forecasts are submitted months after the deadline. As chair of the Finance Committee, one would expect Councilor Saul to have at least some ideas – or perhaps a timeline – to ensure the budget process is completed on time. If the administration is as ineffective as he claims, surely it doesn’t take a financial genius to suggest starting the process earlier in the year. His inaction only serves to mask his own incompetence.

Councilor Saul also touts that the council has hired an auditor to review its finances and help it prepare a budget. This claim deserves further examination. The auditor was indeed hired, but not to help write a budget as Councilor Saul dishonestly suggests.

Rather, the auditor was hired because the city has not had its accounts audited for decades, in blatant and consistent violation of the Municipal and District Councils Act and the Fiscal Transfers Act.

This lack of financial oversight has contributed to the council’s inability to maintain even basic financial records, such as an asset register, let alone a balance sheet. The auditor’s role is therefore to remedy these long-standing failures and restore some semblance of financial accountability, not to assist in the preparation of the budget, for which Councilor Saul already has access to the Treasurer’s financial reports detailing revenues. and expenditures from previous years, which can serve as a solid basis for launching the 2025 budget process.

Likewise, he noted that the engineering department was tasked with identifying the locations and numbers of the billboards. What he fails to mention is that this directive was only recently issued, despite his bold statements in June on the monetization of council assets. Months have been lost and the process has only just begun.

Finally, Councilor Saul completely evades the facts I raised in my previous letter. I asked him to address the following points as chair of the Finance Committee:

Budget consultations: Last year’s budget was approved without consulting city residents. Why was there no consultation? How can the council create an effective budget without input from the citizens of Georgetown?

Payroll Expenses: 70% of all revenue collected goes toward city payroll. Why didn’t the board conduct a human resources audit to optimize human resources and reduce inefficiencies?

Waste collection delays: According to my last letter, the city was 79 days late in payments to solid waste contractors. What impact has this had on waste collection in Georgetown?

Capital Projects: Despite budgeting a substantial amount for capital projects, the city has not spent a single dollar since the beginning of the year. Could Councilor Saul please explain what projects were budgeted for and how the council’s failure to deliver them affected residents?

Revenue Collection Software: The software managing the city’s revenue collection is riddled with data errors. What impact has this had on fare collection, and why has this problem persisted for years?

Monetization of assets: what concrete measures (and not empty words) has the board taken? How much additional revenue did the city gain from this much-vaunted initiative?

The time for excuses is over. Councilor Saul can no longer hide behind speeches, distractions and omissions. Georgetown residents are tired of paying the price for council’s ineptitude and self-serving decisions. Leadership requires accountability, transparency and action, not vague promises and empty posturing.

History will judge those who, when given the chance to serve, chose to blame and protect their political allies. Councilor Saul, the people of Georgetown deserve better than this. The question is not whether you will respond to my letter, but whether you will finally meet the needs of the people you claim to serve.

Sincerely,
Alfonso De Armas
PPP/C municipal councilor