Former Prime Minister and long-serving Mayor of Georgetown, Hamilton Green, has launched a sweeping and sharply critical attack on what he describes as growing central government overreach into the affairs of the capital city, warning that the ongoing dispute between the State and City Hall reflects deeper historical patterns of control, exclusion and democratic erosion.
Green, who was elected mayor following the 1994 Local Government Elections and served until 2016 when the next local government polls were held, used his letter to draw on more than two decades of direct experience at the helm of the Georgetown municipality.
In the correspondence, he framed the current tensions as part of a broader and troubling trajectory, cautioning that unchecked attempts to dominate municipal authority could have far-reaching consequences. “This letter seeks to bring forth some salient truths, hoping and praying to avoid further rancour and recrimination… to be reasonable and so save our capital city Georgetown,” he wrote.
Drawing on historical parallels, Green argued that struggles for control over capital cities have often been linked to authoritarian impulses. “Human history is punctuated with examples of unhappy events… driven by men who hold fast to certain beliefs, determined to impose their views…,” he said, citing figures such as Lenin, Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. He pointed specifically to the Battle of Stalingrad as an example of extreme consequences tied to such ambitions, noting the massive loss of life in that conflict.
While acknowledging the gravity of those comparisons, Green said the intent was to underscore a recurring “obsession to have absolute control over capital cities,” warning that “in our circumstances [this] can be avoided, even as this weakness seems to be emerging in our Co-operative Republic Guyana.”
The former mayor anchored his critique in Guyana’s political history following the People’s Progressive Party (PPP) return to government after the 1992 General and Regional Elections. He made known that then Mayor Campton Young was pressured by central authorities, leading to his resignation and the installation of an Interim Management Committee (IMC).
Green said that despite significant state support to the IMC, longstanding structural challenges persisted, particularly the inability of traditional revenue streams to sustain essential municipal services such as waste collection, drainage, markets and public health.
Upon assuming office in 1994, he said he sought to address these limitations, including pursuing the establishment of a municipal lottery as an alternative revenue stream. A delegation subsequently met with then Prime Minister Sam Hinds to seek approval.
“Prime Minister Hinds… stated that government could not support the lottery, since it was gambling and the religious community… ‘would be up in arms’,” Green recalled. “A few months later the government had a lottery up and running, and not one cent went to the city council.”
He further accused central authorities of repeatedly undermining municipal governance, particularly through interference in staffing. Green contended that qualified candidates for the position of Town Clerk were overlooked in favour of individuals imposed by the minister, resulting in “awkward and tedious” administration.
Efforts to modernise city management were also, he said, derailed. A programme to train and deploy 30 “city wardens” to enforce municipal by-laws was “soon dismantled,” while a proposal to introduce biodegradable shopping bags—modelled on reforms in Antigua—was delayed due to commercial interests linked to imported plastic supplies.
Green acknowledged shortcomings within City Hall, including weak enforcement of by-laws and challenges in drainage management due to blocked waterways and unregulated development. However, he argued that a critical factor lies beyond municipal control—the failure of central government to maintain drainage outfall channels along the Demerara River.
“These outfalls… are compromised by the constant accumulation of sling-mud,” he said, noting that responsibility for dredging traditionally rests with the Ministry of Works. “The question is; Is this being done? My information is, there is no regular clearing of these ten outfall channels… and no further comment is necessary.”
At the centre of the current dispute is government’s reported move to assume control of a municipal facility on Upper Water Street. Green described the action as “absurd,” insisting the property has long been under the jurisdiction of the Mayor and City Council and served multiple functions, including training for the city constabulary, housing, archives and community use.
“For the government, or anyone else, after 60 years of independence, to claim this property is beyond belief,” he said, adding that he had resisted numerous offers over the years to dispose of the site.
He also criticised what he described as a lack of consultation in broader governance decisions, including infrastructure and energy issues. Referencing recent blackouts despite significant daily expenditure, Green argued that authorities are taking on new responsibilities while failing to address existing ones.
“What is disturbing about this takeover… is that there have been no discussion, and no consultation of any kind,” he stated.
Even if government could establish legal ownership of the disputed property, Green maintained that democratic principles require engagement. “The only proper and decent thing would have been notification, discussion, and consultation,” he said, invoking Shakespeare: “Oh judgement, thou art fled to brutish beasts, and men have lost their reason.”
Green’s intervention adds a forceful voice to an intensifying debate over governance, local autonomy and the balance of power between central government and municipal authorities in Guyana, particularly in Georgetown, where longstanding structural challenges continue to intersect with political tensions.
