City Council moves to cancel all leases granted by Royston King
The Georgetown Mayor and City Council is set to cancel all leases approved by former Town Clerk Royston King. The announcement was made by City Mayor Ubraj Narine, at Monday‘s Statutory meeting.
Town Clerk Royston King
Mayor Narine said that Council is set to cancel the leases after careful examination of the deals made by King to a number of private individuals and companies.
During his tenure at City Hall, the former Town Clerk had been implicated for leasing out several river side and reserves under the Council’s purview.
In fact, one of the leases under contention was made to Quick Shipping Inc. for a water front property on Lombard and Sussex Streets.
King has reportedly been collecting a yearly rent from the tenants, despite claims that the State holding company– National Industrial and Commercial Investments Limited (NICIL)– owns the property. The dispute over the ownership came up before a Commission of Inquiry into the Council’s operations.
King was eventually dismissed for dereliction of duty as result of that COI.
On Monday, the Mayor noted that again the lease had nothing to do with the Council but was made by King in capacity as Town Clerk.
“Careful examination of transport and lease to Quick Shipping determined that it has no connection to Council. [King] took it upon himself and leased the property.
Mayor Ubraj Narine
There are a number of leases here that were made by King, himself and not the Council. We must admit that these leases were never brought before the Council or any committee. It is therefore within the rights of the Council to have all the leases he made cancelled.
Further, Narine said that the Quick Shipping lease should not have made by King since the property does not even belong to the Council.
That property by the documentation belongs to the National Industrial Commercial Investment Limited (NICIL).
“Quick Shipping would have leased that property for $625,000 a year that is such a meager sum for a water front property. If this was a Council property, would you lease for this amount of money?”
The Mayor noted that the matter was previously brought up before the Council.
“On this note, the matter was brought up on January 4, 2020 and there was an indication that the intention to withdraw the lease. “
He said, however, that given the property is not owned by the Council, City Hall will withdraw itself from the issue.
“It must be noted, though, that any monies garnered by Council as result of the leases will not be refunded,” Narine added.
