An overworked Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission (GL&SC) is approving plans that have resulted in key public infrastructure being essentially handed over to private developers including at Houston, East Bank Demerara where a critical drainage canal is being filled in by developers.
The lack of staffing is being blamed. The Houston area lands are in high demand as Guyana prepares for the oil and gas sector and developers have taken to filling in the drainage canal with soil. This has seen the Georgetown Mayor & City Council having to order the stopping of some works.
“We get hundreds of these things per week. I have said that we do not have the capacity needed but we are working on developing skills to ensure they can keep up with the demands placed on them. There is serious need for capacity building,” GL&SC Commissioner Trevor Benn told Stabroek News when contacted.
Only recently, an announcement in the Official Gazette stated that Redstart Investments, which owns Unicomer and similar businesses in Trinidad, the British Virgin Islands and Belize, was buying just over 52 acres of land in the Houston/Rome area, where a number of oil and gas services companies are currently developing operations.
The notice was placed by the Vieira-owned Plantation Houston Sugar Estates Company Limited.
The area where the lands are located was the source of a legal action as the GL&SC took issue with the surveyor for the transaction, Enrique Monize, allegedly including a state canal in lands he surveyed.The inclusion of the canal had seen land buyers filling in the area, which the GL&SC said poses a risk of flooding since it was set up for drainage of that and surrounding areas.
Currently, most of what was once the Houston Estate Canal, where airboats and estate punts once traversed, have been filled up and only a small section of the waterway remains. It is unclear what drainage systems are in place for the area.
The GL&SC had taken Monize, a former manager of land administration at the agency, to court for allegedly including the canal areas in surveyed properties. A disciplinary committee, according to Benn, had fined him for the inclusion. However, Monize took to the courts to challenge the finding and that matter is ongoing.
The Disciplinary Tribunal of the Board of Land Surveyors was established under Section 21(1) of the Land Surveyors (Profession) Act, No. 4 of 2014. The Tribunal may investigate those matters set out in Section 22 of the Act. Disciplinary action may only be taken against a surveyor for conduct specified in Section 22 of the said Act.
Once the Board decides that the conduct of any land surveyor should be investigated by the tribunal, it shall direct the Registrar to lay a charge, containing particulars of the grounds on which disciplinary action is being taken against that land surveyor.
The role of the Tribunal is to investigate facts and determine whether the facts as alleged and if proved, would constitute any one of the identified grounds for disciplinary action set out in Section 22 of the Act.
As it pertained to the hearing and subsequent decision for Monize’s sanction before the committee, it was stated that he “superseded plan numbered 62324 dated the 13th June 2015 with plan numbered 65446 dated 22nd November 2016. The first plan showed a middle walk trench at Plantation Houston, but the second plan did not. The second plan omitted to show the said trench within the middle walk of Plantation Houston.”
“A transport was subsequently issued on Mr Monize’s superseded plan and included the said middle walk trench as part of the transported land. The said trench was determined by the Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission to be reserved for the present and future use of all,” documents from the proceedings states.
Several persons had complained to the Ministry of Public Infrastructure about the blocking of the Houston Canal and it was through Minister of Public Infrastructure David Patterson, that an inspection was conducted at Plantation Houston.
“That on the 12th November 2018, I observed at Plantation Houston that the irrigation canal running west to east was blocked from the north eastern boundary of Lot 1 Area G.That on the 13th November 2018, myself and Rayan Harte visited the Mayor & City Council’s office and the Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission to conduct research on the said canal that was blocked with sand. That at the Guyana Lands & Surveys Commission, I discover a cadastral plan #62324, dated 2015-08-03 by E.G. Monize Sworn Land Surveyor that showed the irrigation canal and reserve to the north of Blocks AD and CB respectively. That at the Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission I also discovered cadastral plan #65446, dated 2016-1-22 also by E.G. Monize Sworn Land Surveyor which supersedes plan #62324 and extended the boundaries of blocks AD and CB eliminating the canal and its reserve,” MPI Surveyor James Lindon had told the Tribunal.
“That on the 13th November 2018, I informed Mr Geoffrey Vaughn of our findings and a report was submitted to him and a complaint was made to Guyana Lands and Surveys Commission,” he added.
Monize gave sworn testimony outlaying varying reasons for his omission of the canal/trench in his second plan.
Monize’s evidence was rejected by the tribunal. The reasons are that “since the historical analysis by him would have existed even when he did his first survey plan and he nevertheless depicted the canal/trench which, as a sworn land surveyor, was his duty to so do. Secondly, it is clear that Mr Monize lied when he said the trench was filled when he did the second survey since it was the uncontradicted evidence of Mr Lindon, that on arrival at the site (12th November 2018) almost 2 years after the survey plan was created, persons were filling the trench. This commenced the investigation which then revealed the two plans. Hence the second plan was done almost 2 years before the trench was filled.”
Having rejected his explanations, the tribunal sought, on the totality of the evidence, to determine whether they were satisfied that Monize’s conduct constituted any of the grounds for disciplinary action outlined in section 22 of the Act.The tribunal found unanimously that “Mr Monize’s actions constituted misconduct of a sworn land surveyor, which is unacceptable or improper conduct since he while having knowledge of the trench/canal he was under a duty to depict same on his second plan and he failed to so do.”
Having regard to his plea of mitigation, according to documents, and after considering aggravating factors and mitigating factors, Monize was “ordered to pay a fine of $50,000 (fifty thousand) within one week of the delivery of the tribunal’s ruling.”
He has paid the fee and continues to practice his trade.
Questioned on why the GL&SC granted approval for a plan that, when compared to the agency’s master plan, showed differences, Benn said that sometimes errors occur and are made because of the magnitude of the workload of his staff. He said he also wanted to make it clear that the agency could only note disparity in surveys submitted and does not grant permission for the passing of those surveys.
“We don’t grant permission. People come to us with a survey and we approve. That [granting of permission] is a City Council and [Central Housing and Planning Authority matter]. If the survey is not submitted in the form it was supposed to, we should be taking note. We should note the observation made, with respect to if there it is an omission on not,” he said.
“When it comes to filling in, this is something the developer has to get from City Hall and CH&PA. A lot of surveyors are going out there and misrepresenting what is in the field because they know of the lack of capacity and our weaknesses in here,” Benn added.
