KINGSTON, Jamaica – The political impasse gripping the Clarendon Municipal Corporation continues to escalate following the by-election in the Aenon Town division. With both major parties now holding an equal number of seats, governance in the parish has stalled, leaving residents and stakeholders uncertain about the future of local decision-making.
The November 22, 2024, by-election resulted in a deadlock, splitting the council 11-11 along party lines. This unprecedented situation has sparked intense debate, with rival factions vying for control. The absence of a clear legal precedent for resolving such a tie has fueled controversy, leading to repeated disruptions of municipal meetings and an increasingly hostile atmosphere among councillors.
In response to the crisis, Minister of Local Government and Community Development, Desmond McKenzie, sought legal clarification from the attorney general and the solicitor general. According to their joint legal opinion, the Local Governance Act dictates that in the event of a tie following a by-election, the incumbent chairperson retains their position until a formal local government election is held. Furthermore, any attempt to remove the chairperson before then requires a no-confidence motion supported by a majority of all councillors, which can only be introduced after 12 months have passed since the last election.
The ruling means that Mayor Joel Williams will remain at the helm of the Clarendon Municipal Corporation, while Deputy Mayor Clive Mundle continues in his role. However, this decision has done little to quell tensions, as opposition members argue that the current system does not adequately reflect the will of the electorate.
Speaking at a press conference at Jamaica House, Minister McKenzie expressed disappointment over the continued discord within the municipal corporation. “The legal position is clear, and it is now up to the councillors to respect the law and refocus on their duties. The people of Clarendon deserve effective governance, not political theatrics,” he stated.
Despite this legal clarity, the situation remains volatile. Observers warn that unless both sides find a way to collaborate, the stalemate could hinder the corporation’s ability to execute key infrastructural and social development projects. Residents of Clarendon, many of whom rely on the corporation for essential services, are growing increasingly frustrated with the lack of progress.
Political analysts suggest that this deadlock could prompt calls for legislative reform to better address tie situations in local government bodies. Until then, the fate of Clarendon’s municipal governance remains uncertain, with both sides locked in a power struggle that shows no sign of resolution.
As the situation unfolds, all eyes are on the next municipal meeting to see whether cooperation prevails or whether Clarendon’s governance crisis will deepen.
