In Sannieshof het rou riool weer in elke erf oorgeloop en straatlangs afgeloop weens die sloerstaking.  Inwoners is moedeloos met die wanfunksionerende krisis bestuur van Tswaing se tegniese afdeling wat oor die afgelope 5 jaar met rampbestuur in stand gehou word.

‘n Klag is op 25 Mei by die SAPS op Sannieshof ingedien oor die uitbrand van ‘n skakelaar by die Agisanang rioolwerke sonder enige kontrole of hulp van Tswaing Munisipaliteit.   Rou riool het vir meer as ‘n week uit die rioolstasie by Agisanang in die Hartsrivier  opvangsgebied afgestroom.  SIBU het die skakelaar herstel  om die riool oorloop na die Hartsrivier te keer en die Departement van Waterwese in kennis gestel.  Die Tswaing Munisipaliteit is daardie etlike kere geskakel, boodskappe is gelaat en niemand het opgedaag nie.  Die operateurs wat veronderstel is om aan diens te wees, kon ook nerens gevind word nie.   Waterwese het binne 24 uur ‘n inspeksie kom doen.  Die saak word vir nalatige bestuur ondersoek.

Die Tswaing Munisipaliteit, wat onder administrasie is, het ook sedertdien ‘n brief van Escom se Sentrale Streek ontvang.  Tswaing is daarmee in kennis gestel dat opdrag gegee is vir die opskorting van elektrisiteits toevoer na Sannieshof, Delareyville en Ottosdal nadat Tswaing die voorsienings ooreenkoms verbreek het deur nie die betalings ooreenkoms met Escom te eer nie ingevolge hul kontrak voorwaardes.  Dit stel Escom instaat om krag toevoer na die verbruikers op te skort.   Die inwoners van hierdie dorpe het gedurende hierdie periode hul elektrisiteits rekeninge betaal.  Die agterstallige bedrae is OTTOSDAL R2 287 660,67  SANNIESHOF R1 700 000,00 en DELAREYVILLE  R5 032 191,00.

Tswaing is 14 dae kennis gegee om die rekeninge te betaal.  Tot op datum is geen gelde vir die agterstallige rekeninge deur Escom ontvang nie.

Mev Visser van SIBU poog om kontak te maak met die Streeksbestuurder van Escom om te versoek om nie die elektrisiteits voorsiening na Sannieshof te onderbreek nie.  Die inwoners het hulle betalingsverpligtinge getrou nagekom, deur die maandelikse betaling van hulle elektrisiteits rekeninge aan Tswaing te betaal, maar Tswaing Munisipaliteit het nie hulle kontraktuele verpligtinge teenoor Escom nagekom nie.  Die kontrakbreuk waarin Tswaing Munisipaliteit skuldig is, is onder die aandag van NERSA gebring.  Die ANC regering is verantwoordelik vir die totale wanbestuur van die Noordwes Munisipaliteite wat tans almal op die afsnydingslys van Escom is. (Bewyse beskikbaar)  Die inwoners wat getrou hulle rekenings vereffen het, of wat van voorafbetaalde krag gebruik maak, het nie beheer oor die wanbesteding van fondse van munisipaliteite  en die derhalwe agterstallige elektrisiteits rekeninge nie.

Nadat transport besighede Mev Visser genader het en in kennis gestel het dat hule vragmotors met vrag en al gekonfiskeer word as ‘n gesteelde voertuig of swaar beboet word omdat ‘n padwaardigheidsertifikaat nie uitgereik is nie, het Mev Visser vir Mnr Mose, die Administrateur hiervan in kennis gestel.  Mev Visser het die maatskappy gekontak om die remtoetsmasjien te kom herstel.  Dit is binne 2 dae herstel en indien Tswaing nie die rekening kan betaal nie, het Mev Visser onderneem om die rekening te betaal uit die fondse van Delareyville, Sannieshof en Ottosdal.  Mnr Mose het gereel dat die Provinsiale inspeksie gedoen word sodat die stasie weer normale werksaamhede kan vervat.

Tswaing Munisipaliteit het ook vir die 5de agtereenvolgende jaar nie die wettige prosedures in die begroting gevolg t.o.v publieke deelname of insae nie.  Die inwoners van Sannieshof het weer die begroting afgekeur hoewel dit deur die Raad aangeneem is.  Een van die hoofredes daarin is dat die totale bedrag vir salarisse en lone R8 miljoen meer is as die verwagte inkomste ontvang van belastings.

Hoewel COGTA die omkeerstrategie bekend gemaak het om munisipaliteite reg te ruk, is dit nog nie in een munisipaliteit in Noordwes geïmplimenteer nie.  Inteendeel die afwesigheid in ondersteuning van COGTA na die Noordwes se insolvente munisipaliteite word daagliks meer sigbaar.

Tweespruit is a small town under the Mantsopa Muncipality in Ladybrand, Free State.

Our Ratepayers Assoc was formed in April 09.  We have had one meeting with councillors after they just did not arrive for a meeting the previous week.

Six weeks ago a local farmer Mr M.Oelrich (a former M.E.C.for agriculture ) informed us that our sewerage works was disfunctional and that raw sewerage was flowing into one of his dams & then into the dam from which the town gets water!  I sent report to “Volksblad”newspaper who published the story.  I got abusive phone calls from councillors “who gives me the right to go to the media?”and from madam speaker “I an ordered to fax her the article?  My reply: “I am a pensioner,you get a huge salary,buy your own newspaper!”   Two days later Director of Enviro Sorb Company phones me & faxes daming report given to muncipality in Sept 2005, in 4yrs nothing done! Not even a fence erected around settlement dam 60metres from local school into which raw sewerage is deposited.

Last scheduled meeting with mun councillors, muncipality did not arrive.   On Tuesday 11 August Clr Tladi phones me & tells me meeting @ 17h00 cancelled, mayor demands meeting @ 12h00 the next day Wednesday 12 August at 12h 00 as Free State Premier would be in Ladybrand on the Friday 14 August! From 11h50 five members of Tweespruit Ratepayers Committee present untill 12h30.Mayor & councillors did not arrive.

Landline calls useless -never in offices-cell phones on voice mail-do not return calls? Have sent registed letters to Premier & District Mayor, asking for a WRITTEN acknowledgment and a WRITTEN reply ! After a month the Political Advisor to Madam District Mayor Mr Makhetha phones me and asks me what my problems are? He had NOT read our registed letter of two pages.   He was replying to our letter.  I stated we requested a WRITTEN REPLY! He replied I must listen, as he was replying.I asked if he was writing a reply as he was speaking.  His reply :”No,I am the phone.”  Then realized that Mr Makhetha did not understand what the word “written” implies??

The WRCF is a united ratepayers/residents Association [WRCF] formed to represent the areas of Drummond, Peacevale, Monteseel, Cliffdale, Hammarsdale, Harrison and surrounds.

It is a statutory recognised and constituted apolitical body; it is a forum representing the interests of ratepayers.   It is a member of both the Confederation of Mist-belt Ratepayers and Residents Associations [CONOMIRRA] and the Combined Ratepayers Association [CRA].   All bodies are run by volunteers.

The roots of where Drummond/Peacevale Farm Watch, and thus the ratepayers association, the WRCF, is today, lie in the Charlie Bravo/Citizens Band network set up by the Agricultural Association of Drummond, long before subdivisions changed the landscape of Drummond, and serious agriculture was a feature of the community.

In the 1980’s, Kathleen Mack became involved in what was then Neighbourhood Watch, with radio check a regular Sunday night event.   Regular meetings were held in 4 or 5 cells/neighbourhoods in Drummond.

Prior to 1996, peri-urban residential areas were run independently by Local Councils.   In the Outer West, also known as the Mist Belt, Drummond, for example, had a Health Committee;   Monteseel had the Development Services Board, existing from 1975 to 1994.  Funds to run both these bodies consisted of a grant from Durban Municipality, as well as collection of local rates.   A committee was elected from residents willing to serve on a voluntary basis.

In 1994, Monteseel came under the Transitional Local Council.  The DSB co-opted Charles Erridge as a representative .

In 1998, through network for FarmWatch, which included Monteseel, Charles Erridge encouraged Kathleen Mack to become involved in rate payer issues.  Lilian Develing and Charles Erridge were founder members of Conomirra, LD as Chair, and CE a committee member. The CRA had linked up with Lilian Develing [Hillcrest].

The national landscape was changing and many experts were contributing information about various changes.  In 2000, Roland Pardey, in his career as a property evaluator, had heard a forceful talk by a professor from Rand Afrikaans University about the need for a local body to monitor issues related to rates, as well as the threat accompanying centralisation.  This opinion reinforced the Outer West Local Council’s Auditor General’s report on widespread mismanagement of funds, with rates increases more than the general inflation rate.

And so the WRCF was born.

The name arose from government sentiments at the time, when ratepayer and civic associations were not in favour at all, but ‘development’ and ‘community’ forums were.   And further, the moniker ‘Western Rural’ indicates the inclusion of all communities in the Outer West, such as Cliffdale, Hammarsdale, Inchanga.

Sadly, response is apathetic.  We have a very small membership, and few willing helpers.

THE HENNENMAN RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
HENNENMAN RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
P.O. Box 447
Hennenman
9445 Fax: (057) 5733 143
THE MUNICIPAL MANAGER
THE HONOURABLE SPEAKER
THE HONOURABLE MAYOR
Mathjabeng MUNICIPALITY
P.O. Box 708
WELKOM
Fax: (057) 353 2161 / 352 1267
PER FAX
THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH
PRETORIA
FAX NO 012 323 0093
THE DIRECTOR-GENERAL
DEPARTMENT OF WATER AFFAIRS AND FORESTRY
PRETORIA
FAX NO 012 326 2715
THE MEC FOR LOCAL GOVERNMENT AND HOUSING
BLOEMFONTEIN
THE OFFICE OF THE AUDITOR –GENERAL
BLOEMFONTEIN
27 May 2008
Dear Sirs/Ms
DECLARATION OF DISPUTE
A. As you were informed in our earlier correspondence, the HENNENMAN
RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION was formed during the past year by
Hennenman and Phomolong residents and mandated by these residents during
public meetings to address the concerns of residents in respect of the
deterioration of the basic services under the present Municipal administration.
You are hereby notified that the HENNENMAN RESIDENTS
ASSOCIATION has been specifically mandated at public meetings in
2
Hennenman to declare, as it hereby does, a dispute against the Mathjabeng
Municipality and which is based on the following grounds:
1. Sewerage
The dilapidated state of the sewerage works plant in Hennenman where
important components of the plants machinery are out of order, water
enters the Sand River, and all speak of incompetent management. Raw
sewerage is spilling onto the streets in Phomolong. This creates health
risks to all its residents. It is further placed on record that private
individuals had, out of their own accord and at their own expense,
repaired the sewerage truck in Phomolong as the Municipality failed in
its duty to do so. The fact that sewerage in an untreated form ends up
in the Sand River creates an ecological disaster waiting to happen. It
also contaminates the drinking water and serious health hazards exist
for all the residents in Hennenman and Phomolong alike.
2. Refuse removal
The community objects to the obviously disorganised and unhealthy
manner and the uncontrolled situation at the dumping sites in
Hennenman and specifically in Phomolong.
3. Infrastructure
Our problems with the general deterioration of the infrastructure
include, but are not limited to:
(a) The failure to properly maintain roads in Hennenman and in
Phomolong. Damage to the vehicles of residents occurs on a
regular basis due to potholes not being fixed in time despite
request being made for such repairs. Streets in Phomolong are
absolutely unusable by normal vehicles.
(b) The deterioration of sports facilities in Hennenman. Uniepark is
used by the residents of both Hennenman and Phomolong on a
regular basis but the facilities, especially the ablution facilities,
leaves a lot to be desired. It needs urgent repairs. .
(c) Street lights that are out of order. Private individuals are
replacing, as far as possible, light bulbs in Hennenman in order
to ensure well lit and safe streets. Once again this voluntary
work is being done at great personal expenses to the individuals
concerned.;
(d) The lack of control over the maintenance of sidewalks. Weeds
are taking over.;
(e) The deterioration of the Community hall is a disgrace. No
working electrical appliance exists any more. Tiles in the
3
entrance hall are broken and in some places making unsafe
bulges which will break at any time. The toilet facilities are an
absolute mess and are not in working order. The kitchen in the
community hall is totally dysfunctional.
(f) The deterioration of the cemetery facilities in Hennenman. No
taps are to be found on the premises as al taps have been
forcibly removed.
(g) Road signs are either missing or so faded that it can not be read
any longer. This causes great safety risks to both motorists and
pedestrians alike in Hennenman and Phomolong.
(h) Stray animals on the main entrance road from Kroonstad as well
as on the entrance road servicing the smallholdings are a cause
of concern. Stray animals on municipal sites such as those
grazing around the Fire Brigade constitute a health and safety
risk.
4. Erroneous accounts
The many erroneous accounts received by residents during the past
months (and even letters of demand by attorneys based on erroneous
figures and faulty readings) speak of incompetence on the part of the
technical and financial departments of the Municipality. Section 95(e)
of the Municipal Systems Act states ensure that persons liable for
payments receive regular and accurate accounts that indicate the basis
for calculating the amounts due. This is not the case in Hennenman.
5. Financial Reports
It is known that the Municipality has failed for the past three financial
years to receive an unqualified audit report due to incompetent
administration. It is not known what steps the Municipality took to
address issues raised by the Auditor-General in this audit reports. The
enormous amounts that are spend on travelling cost especially the
Mayor and Municipal Manager.
6. Budgets
No invitation was given to members of the public to comment on any
portion of the Municipal Budget as contemplated in Act 56 of 2003.
We reserve our rights in this regard and herewith request the
following:
6.1 As required by Chapter 4, section 17 (3) of the Municipal Finance
Management Act no 56, 2003:
measurable performance objectives for revenue from each source
and for each vote in the budget; (MFMA Circular 28 – Annexure 4
supporting table 10);
4
6.2 a projected cash flow for the budget year by revenue source,
broken down per month; (MFMA Circular 28 – Annexure 4 –
supporting table 9);
6.3 any proposed amendments to the Municipality’s IDP following the
annual review of the IDP in terms of section 34 of the Municipal
Systems Act;
6.4 particulars of the municipality’s investments; (MFMA Circular 28
– Annexure 4 – Supporting table 4 + 4a)
6.5 the proposed cost to the municipality for the budget year of the
salary, allowances and benefits of –
each political office-bearer of the municipality;
councillors of the municipality;
the municipal manager, the chief financial officer, each senior manager
of the municipality and any other official of the municipality having a
remuneration package greater than or equal to that of a senior
manager; (MFMA Circular 28 – Annexure 4 – supporting table 8 + 8a
+ 8b)
6.6 the total expenditure on salaries and wages be in balance on the
budget as opposed to the government guideline of maximum 35%.
6.7 Repairs and maintenance to infrastructure being adjusted in the
budget to the guidelines stipulated by the government to be no less
than 15% of total budget.
6.8 With the budget, a breakdown of the expenses listed under General
Expenses to be provided.
2. As required by Chapter 5, section 34 (a) (i) of Municipal Systems
Act 2000; Assessment of Performance measurements in terms of
section 41:
No measuring or review performance reports have been measured or
reviewed as required by Section 41 (1) (c) (ii) of Municipal Systems
Act 2000.
Key performance indicators and performance targets have not been
made known to the public as required by Section 44 of the Municipal
Systems Act 2000. (MFMA Circular 28 – Annexure 5)
Annual reports on the previous Financial year and the Auditor
Generals reports thereon have not been presented by the Mayor to the
public as required by Section 46 of the Municipal Systems Act 2000.
Alignment of Budget with Integrated Development Plan – showing
REVENUE, OPEX and CAPEX. (MFMA Circular 28 – Annexure 4 –
supporting table 1 + 2 + 3)
Grant allocations (MFMA Circular 28 – Annexure 4 – Supporting table
5)
DRAFT TARRIFS:
Service tariffs are intended to fund the cost incurred to provide
municipal services by a municipality, to the community.
As intended by the various Acts, specifically the Municipal Systems
5
Act, section 74, and a detailed presentation are required that reflects
the costs reasonably associated with rendering these services and
including:
1. capital costs,
2. operating costs,
3. maintenance costs,
4. admin costs
5. replacement costs and
6. interest charges, if any.
Further we would appreciate information on the following:
When was the budget published for comment?
How was the public informed of their right to comment on the
budget?
B. The Residents Association informs you that we believe that the deterioration
in the service levels is due to sheer incompetence and not to a shortage of
financial resources. However, if a shortage of funds are a relevant factor, we -
(a) assume that the Municipality will be able to provide proof of
complying with all aspects of section 135(3) of the Municipal
Financial Management Act, 2003 (Act No. 56 of 2003) (although the
Municipality is not known to have publicly announced a serious
financial problem as contemplated in that section). The question must
also be raised as to whether the Municipality had done everything in its
power to access Government and public sector funding, which we
doubt;
C. You are further informed that unless -
(a) appropriate action is taken and clear progress is made by your
Municipality in addressing the various complaints within fourteen days
from date hereof, and of which the Association expects to be informed;
(b) the Municipality, within the mentioned period and as part of the
appropriate mechanisms, processes and procedures to enable the local
community to participate in the affairs of the municipality which the
Municipality is obliged to create in terms of the section 17(2) of the
Municipal Systems Act, 2000 (Act No. 32 of 2000), establish a
standing monitoring committee, consisting of both Association
members and Municipal Councillors/Officials, in order to assess the
quality of services in Hennenman and Phomolong on a continuous
basis;
(c) the Municipality agrees to an independent performance audit of its
various departments,
6
appropriate action will be taken by the residents. Such action may include, but
is not limited to, the withholding payment of the tariffs and charges payable in
respect of:
(i) Property assessment rates.
(ii) Reclaiming the costs incurred by individuals to do necessary repair
and maintenance work which should have been done by the
Municipality
It is hereby confirmed that residents do not intend to refrain from paying these
tariffs and charges but instead to deposit same in a trust bank account pending
the outcome of the dispute. We are not going to accept any interest charges on
the accounts of the residents who are deposit their money in the trust account,
because this account will also generate interest. Once the residents start to
withhold their rates and taxes, we will present the Chief Financial Officer with
a list of the residents who pay their rates and taxes into the trust account on a
monthly basis. Appropriate deductions will, however, be made in respect of
any expenditure incurred in procuring the services of contractors should your
Municipality fail to continue rendering any basic municipal service.
You are referred to section 102(2) of the said Municipal Systems Act which
provides that you are prohibited from applying credit control and debt
collection until such time as a dispute has been resolved.
D. Finally, we place on record that this extraordinary action will be taken
(a) as a last resort by a unified Hennenman public after -
(i) various complaints were laid by the residents and this
Association and community members about the state of
services and requests were made for a systematic program on
the part of the Municipality to tackle and finally solve all
deficiencies; and
(ii) various requests were made for consultations by this
Association which were, contrary to sections 5 (1)(b) and
17(2)(d) of the said Municipal Systems Act, never reacted to;
(b) as a clear vote of no confidence by the public in the competency and
quality of the administration of the Municipality. Please note that the
public does not have any desire to interfere in the running of local
government services but are now forced to do so;
(c) with the intent of arresting the further deterioration in local government
services in our area and not with any ulterior motives in mind, especially
not any motives aimed at inciting conflict with any particular councillor or
staff member or motives of a political nature.
(d) This dispute could be altered at any given time as new disputes arise.
7
Yours faithfully,
_____________________
IA DE VILLIERS
(CHAIRPERSON)
______________________
______________________
On behalf of the HENNENMAN RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
Committee Members:
IA De Villiers 082 570 1031
J Kemp 082 555 1268
JJ Calitz 083 281 1168
A Greyling 082 909 2132
W Badenhorst 082 925 5562
8
RECEIPT OF :
DECLARATION OF DISPUTE
From the
HENNENMAN RESIDENTS ASSOCIATION
(Letter dated 27 May 2008)
……………………………………………………………………………………….
Name of person accepting dispute
…………………………………………………
Signature
…………………………………………………
Date
……………………………………………………………………………………….
Name of person accepting dispute
…………………………………………………
Signature
…………………………………………………
Date

The rates in Beaufort West have gone up by 700-800% because of the new rating of farms.  There is, however, a provision in law that the minister can put a cap on increases and Louis Reynolds wants to know if anyone can assist him how they go about approaching the minister for help on this subject.

The people of Louis Trichaardt have become organised and are preparing the ground for action.  Their association has about 102 members, they have declared a dispute and are paying their rates into a trust fund.

At present – 1 July 09  – the Municipality has gone ahead an implemented the new rates despite the ~9000 objections and exercise done twice As well as the “PMB / Msunduzi”  Northern Areas Ratepayers Association having lodged complaints of major discrepancies
- I assisted with the analysis and found easily 10 000 residential errors in 60 000 entries residential & non residential => easily over 20% Valuations are flawed

My thoughts on the subject :-

1. All property owners understand that rates need to be paid – in the
case of a residential property it has become ridiculous
2. As mentioned on your site – 20% middle income earners are expected to
carry the weight  – the other 80 % made of the poor & the Business
magnets.
3. My personal experience  the property rates have jumped 400 % in the
last 8 years & property value on roll jumped 700% and adjusted to
600% which is still ridiculous
a. Purchase  Price  R220,000 + Renovations to-date approx R90,000
=> R310,000 Total Value
b. 2000 – Rates = R2,500 p.a        vs    2004 rates p.a R5,500
vs    2009  rates R12,788
c. We understood in 2004 that we need to help the poor so we
accepted  the 100% jump
i.     The government of the day has had 15 years to sort
itself out.

4. Rates has become a tax on Personal Savings
a.    - It is only because of affordability that a home owner has
purchased  a home as opposed to renting
b. At the point of purchase some of the considerations that go
through your mind are :-
i.     How will the bond affect my monthly budget ?? [ keep
in mind interest rate  changes ]
ii.    How will utilities affect my monthly budget ??
iii.   How much Rates will it cost me to own this house ??
c. On that basis you choose a dwelling according to your means
you have decided to for-go certain activities [ movies /
clubbing / pubbing etc ] this means you are SAVING to pay for
the bond and renovations & maintenance that go hand in hand
with owning a house
d. Now it becomes nonsensical to get taxed because you improved or
afforded a better home.
e. Because of your savings you can afford bricks instead of blocks
– Tiled floors instead of lino on cement, Tiled roof instead of
Tin Sheeting
f. IT IS ILLEGAL IN SA TO BE DOUBLE TAXED – who will take up this
challenge to constitution court ??
5. To say that the valuation is based on market value [R1,700,000 absurd
amount] and not on purchase price [R220,000 + renovations to date
R90,000] is ridiculous -
a. Most of the middle income earners buy a home to live in not
re-sell – ie Long Term usage
b. This means that the market value has not been realized – ie
cash flow or money in your pocket
c. You are taxed on the Realised Gain if you were to sell it under
CGT – Capital Gains Tax
d. So this means that we are being double taxed when we use Market
Value method for rates
e. Show me how  the inflation rate is being circumvented in this
case ??
f. Market Value has been driven by Estate Agents my guess is 5%
really achieve this price at the time of selling. [ If I am
wrong please buy my house for R1,7 Million – bring the
paperwork ]
g. Some people have done research that in their suburbs  over 50%
of house have a Market Value as per municipality of more than
R1 Million – they have yet to find 1 house sold more than
R800,000
h. So clearly the pricing is HYPER INFLATED
6. We understand the plight of the poor – we grew up there-from  but
consider that if any house is more than R100,000
a. 0.5% per annum on R100,000 = R500 /12 = R41 per month
b. R500 times 200,000 houses [cheap houses per city as an
example ]  gives you R100,000,000
c. It lightens the burden – It fosters responsibility – ie freebie
days are gone
d. Drive through the poor areas & “Black Townships”  – see taxi
drivers with a fleet parked outside his shack which has DSTV
Dish – [ I still cannot afford one because I pay the same money
it into my bond ]

7.       Finally the Quality of service for Rates
a. Constant non delivery – cutting of the grass on street in front
of your home – you have to pay a gardener to do this
b. You have to pay for security alarm because of safety
c. You are already paying for Garbage & Sewerage costs separately
& VAT on top of it
d. You are already paying for Lights & Water
e. So where exactly does the money Go To ????
i.    -  Fat Cats with 1 week MBA Diplomas ??  R 1 Million p.a
salary [ so they can afford their rates on their
Mansions ] ???
ii.    People who need to give themselves bonuses because
they have done an excellent job in collecting exorbitant
Rates  ?????
f. Street lights more off than on
g. Potholes un-attended to more months on end some areas even more
than a year in some cases
h. Can you drive in the city with Taxi drivers as a law unto
themselves ???
Pedestrians walking all over the road ??

The driving force behind this action is Lee Cahill, and here are all the contact details:
JOBURG RATES BOYCOTT
Tel: 011 614 0690
e-Mail:    joburgratesboycott@telkomsa.net
Web:   http://joburgratesboycott.blogspot.com
Facebook: @Joburg Rates Boycott http://groups.to/joburgratesboycott/
Twitter: @BoycottGirl http://twitter.com/BoycottGirl
Gatorpeeps: @JoburgRatesBoycott http://gatorpeeps.com/JoburgRatesBoycott

OUR REF: C SCHOLTZ
YOUR REF: TW MOETI

ACTING MUNICIPAL MANAGER
EMFULENI LOCAL MUNICIPALITY

BY HAND

DEAR SIR,

RE: OBJECTION AGAINST NEW RATES TARIFFS ON VACANT LAND AS PER NOTICE NO. 62/2009 & 64/2009 (IMPACT OF NEW PROPERTY RATES POLICY AND TARIFFS).

As per the above notices published in the local newspapers it appears to be misleading in the sense that it does not allow the public to make any objections within a specified time frame, although the law allows for 30 days and the general public is not aware of this. We would also appreciate it to confirm in which publications did the adverts appear on 1st June 2009.

The status of rates tariffs up to 30th June 2009, applied to properties in Vaaloewer (average land valuation ranging from R5000.00 to R18 000.00) are as follow;
1. Developed property based on land value only of R13 000.00 @ 0.0966 = R104.65 per month.
2. Vacant residential land value of R5 000.00 (low) @ 0.15270 = R63.63 per month.
3. Vacant residential land value of R9 000.00 (average) @ 0.15270 = R114.53 per month.
4. Vacant residential land value of R18 000.00 (high) @ 0.15270 = R229.05 per month
All vacant land is rated at a much higher tariff equal to the business tariff applied to business properties, to promote and encourage development of land.

Based on the new proposed rates tariffs (average land valuation of R85 000.00 to R245 000.00) it will be as follow;
1. Developed property based on new valuation (land & improvements) of R500 000.00 less R150 000.00 rebate @ 0.0064 plus 30% discount = R130.66 per month.
2. Vacant residential land value R130 000.00 less R40 000.00 rebate @ 0.064 = R480.00 per month.
3. Vacant residential land value R180 000.00 less R40 000.00 rebate @ 0.064 = R746.66 per month.
4. Vacant residential land value R230 000.00 less R40 000.00 rebate @ 0.064 = R1013.33 per month.

As can be seen from the above examples this is our main reason for concern, which could impact negative on the growth and development of our Town Vaaloewer and many other developments within the municipal boundaries of Emfuleni. This could also have an impact on existing home owners in our area should a large number of vacant property owners abandon their vacant land due to not being able to afford the high rates & taxes.

Vaaloewer was originally proclaimed as a Holiday Township with the intention for owners to develop homes for weekend and holiday leisure, retirement or even permanent living. Due to this most properties are owned as second properties. You will realise that if economical times are good, this is an area where people want to and can afford to purchase property and develop homes on it. During bad economical times or when the country is in a recession like currently the situation, it is difficult for people to afford looking after their primary homes and second homes & properties have to take second priority. We all know that the Vaalriver is a major attraction for tourists and people from all over the country, which is also a good source of income for our region and generates work for many.

As from 2000 our town was demarcated back into the municipal boundaries of Emfuleni Local Municipality. Prior to this Vaalower as a Town functioned as an independent Rural Council under Western Gauteng Services Council. We had our own budget compiled yearly since 1994 and been able to contribute largely to the development of Vaaloewer by having various services upgraded and many projects completed.

For the past few years Vaaloewer was a forgotten & neglected area in terms of service delivery and upkeep, part of the major Emfuleni area with one budget for the whole area. Through our Rate Payers association we have over the past year been able to re-establish and build up strong ties with the various departments of the Municipality in assisting us with upkeep and upgrade of various services rendered (ie. roads, water purification & reticulation, electricity, refuse removal). The Rate Payers association has also negotiated for the subdivision and transfer (currently in process) of a portion of land in extent of ±8516m² on which the current municipal water purifying works are situated, to enable the council to take full ownership of that land which is still currently privately owned land. The current owners were taxed on the valuation of the land including the council water works and paid rates & taxes accordingly without any compensation from the council.

During the past few years when the property market was booming all over South Africa, many new people acquired land in Vaaloewer and within Emfuleni boundaries with the intention to develop a home on. As we are all fully aware that during the past year things have changed drastically with interest rates hikes, high cost of petrol and the increase in just about anything we need on a daily basis to live on. This caused that although property values were very high prior to the new valuations compiled as at July 2008, properties are now worth a substantial amount less due to the global economic situation affecting just about every citizen in South Africa.

All major Banks have made is more difficult for anyone to obtain bond finance to purchase property and or to develop it due to the National Credit Act that was promulgated and due to the affordability of individuals who are battling to cope with existing bond repayments, vehicle payments, loans and other credit etc. Due to this situation it has also impacted on all industries and business and job losses rise on a daily basis. Although various interest rate cuts have been given through to consumers, it is going to take some time for the whole market to recover.

We promote development in our area but have also experienced various difficulties in the past by getting developments off the ground due lack of getting the right support from the council. Some subdivisions have taken several years to be finalized before properties could be sold and houses developed thereon. There are also cases were owner’s battle for 6 months plus to get building plans approved through the correct channels just to find that other individuals develop without proper approval and having less problems getting their plans approved on the end of the day. This also causes people to loose interest in an area.

Currently ratepayers within Vaaloewer fund a security service at own cost to prevent brake-ins into houses, which occur often and we have very little support from the Police as they are far away and also do not have the manpower to deal with the large demographic area of Vanderbijlpark and surrounding areas. This also has a negative impact to any new buyers in the area that want to develop. No point in developing a weekend/ holiday home to find it broken into several times a year.

As we are situated ±35 km’s from Vanderbijlpark it is clear that all residents residing at Vaaloewer have to travel long distances at great cost, shops are not close by and more expensive than in town were large retail stores are situated. Development cost is much higher and more expensive to build so far out as high delivery cost applies to all building material needed on site.

We hereby attach a comparison of tariffs and rates levied in various surrounding towns based on a residential vacant land value of R130 000-00, R230 000-00 and R500 000-00 just for calculation purposes. On this can be seen what other towns charge for the same values. The tariffs and rates that Emfuleni intends charging are much higher, exorbitant and totally out of line than even charged in JHB, which we surely cannot be compared with.

We hereby propose that the council charge the same rate as for businesses as is currently the case or to compile a rate based on combination of what the neighbouring towns are charging. We further look forward to a positive response and mutual understanding for future dealings.

Yours faithfully,

_________________________________________
For VAALOEWER RATE PAYERS ASSOCIATION
CARL SCHOLTZ – CHAIRMAN
083 6304619

COPY: ALL VAALOEWER RATEPAYERS

VAALOEWER

Vaaloewer is the most south-western point within the area of jurisdiction of the Emfuleni local Munisipality and is in extent approximately 2.6km² in size, thus representing a very small area of the total geographical area of the Emfuleni Local Municipality. The town previously formed part of the Western Gauteng Services Council within situated

Vaaloewer was declared an approved township by the Administrator of the former Transvaal Administration through Administrator’s Notice 1386 as published in the provincial Gazette of 29 August 1973. The approved township was made subject to the conditions as set out in the Schedule that accompanied Administrator’s notice 1386.

In terms of section 89 (1) of the Town-planning and Townships Ordinance, 1965, the Administrator has further approved of the amendment of the Malelane Town-Planning Scheme, 1972, to conform with, the conditions of establishment and the general plan of Vaaloewer Township. This amendment is known as the Malelane Amendment Scheme no. 7 (Administrator’s Notice 1389 published in the Provincial Gazette of 29 August 1973).

Vaaloewer Township is thus subject to the conditions as set out in the aforementioned Schedule as well as the Malelane Town-Planning Scheme, 1972.

• Proclaimed as a Town in 1973 by Rimba Investments (Pty) Ltd – Developers. Craboni Investments owned Rimba Investments with directors Prof. Jan Crawford, Piet Botha and Nicolaas v Niekerk who were all auditors from Pretoria. Werner Ackerman (Mimi Coertze’s husband) was also later involved and his holiday house was built were Goose Bay Canyon Conference Centre is today situated and the amphitheatre was originally built for Mimi to sing from.
Abri & Pieter Struwig acquired Volksland Estates (Pty) Ltd in 1981 as sole agents for Vaaloewer.
Abri & Pieter Struwig later acquired Rimba Investments from Craboni Investments in 1983.
Hugh Temlett and Johnny Breedt took over Rimba in 1990 and later Evert Scholtz and a Malasian Company also became involved until all properties were sold to individual owners
• 1973 – 1990 services maintained by developers – Private Town
• 1991 – Services taken over by Peri Urban (Local Government Affairs Council) on request of the Vaaloewer Action Committee (property owners thinking that we would get better services for less money and also receive government grants for projects). The Vaaloewer Action Committee was chaired by Hennie vd Walt a weekend homeowner (councilor in Edenvale and also served on the Regional Services Council) and Eddie v Zyl a permanent resident.
The only grants obtained at the time were for the development of the Water reservoir, purchase of a TLB and tractor all financed by Regional Services Council funding. All services ie. roads, water reticulation, electrical network, parks and open spaces were transferred by Rimba Investments to Peri Urban as per original township proclamation conditions.
• 1993 – Vaaloewer Rate Payers Association formed under leadership of Ben Smith, a homeowner and ex President of SASBO Union. Other chairpersons were André Benadie, Ben v Niekerk, Flip v Zyl, Lappies Labuschagne, Hugh Temlett and Carl Scholtz (current).
• 1994 – Achieved after arbitration, Agreement between LGAC, Rimba Investments & Rate Payers: approval of subdivision of Erf 1 Vaaloewer (riverfront) for development and portion to be donated to the ratepayers of Vaaloewer. Erf 3/1 Kingfisherbend riverfront homes. Erf 4/1 Boatclub & units. Erf 5/1 Conference centre & accomodation. Erf 6/1 stand zoned for 2 homes, Erf 7/1 Birdhaven residential development. Rem Ext Erf 1 now owned by Vaaloewer Voluntary Association formed in 1997 (riverfront nature park area for use by all residents) to control and upkeep area for use of residents, by paying yearly subscriptions.
• 1994/5 – Services taken over by Western Vaal Metropolitan Council (VDBP Municipality)
• 1995 – Vaaloewer Rate Payers Association registered as a Party to contest in the municipal elections
• November 1995 – Vaaloewer municipal services moved from VDBP Municipality to Western Gauteng Services Council (demarcation of areas) with the municipal elections and the Vaaloewer Rural Council were formed and ratepayers were elected as councilors to represent Vaaloewer. Councilors during this period were Hans vd Merwe, Martin Struwig, Ans & Raul Stausebach, Dennis Wilson, Ben Smith, Norman Cassel, Johan Werner and Hugh Temlett all residents of Vaaloewer.
• 1997 – Vaaloewer Voluntary association was formed by the Rate Payers Association to take ownership of the remaining ext erf 1 Vaaloewer. Transfer of the property was only finalised into the name of the association on 30 November 2005 due to various reasons, mainly from Rimba Investments (developers) side.
• 1997 – Land Development Objectives (LDO’s) phase 1, for a five-year period was compiled. The community of Vaaloewer was involved in the process and through this certain projects and developments were identified and prioritized and completed during 1998.
• 1998 – LDO’s phase 2
• 1999 – LDO’s phase 3
• 2000 – LDO’s phase 4
• December 2000 municipal elections – Vaaloewer demarcated back to Emfuleni Local Municipality (VDBP) and Vaaloewer Rural Council cease to exist. Vaaloewer’s budget, employees, assets and liabilities will now be part of Emfuleni.
• Rate Payers Association to be more active to ensure that basic services are rendered, necessary upgrades done and new projects identified and implemented.
• 2001 – 2009, Emfuleni Local Municipality – not much achieved to date and Ratepayers association again communicated with various departments (2008/9) in order to deal with problems, identified by the community.
Rate Payers through Vaaloewer Voluntary association negotiate with Council to obtain the town hall (Rimba originally built the hall and later transferred it to Peri Urban at no cost). Due to moratorium on sale of council owned property nothing has been finalised to date.
• 2008/9 – ???????????????????????????????????? Carl to complete negotiations with council ****************
• 2009 – The Rate Payers association has negotiated for the subdivision (currently in process) of a portion of land in extent of ±8516m² on which the current municipal water purifying works are situated. This will enable the council to take full ownership of the land, which is still currently privately owned land by Vaaloewer Voluntary Association. The current owners were taxed on the valuation of the land including the council water works and paid rates & taxes accordingly without any compensation from the council since 1997.
• 6/2009 – Emfuleni Local Municipality publish new rates tariffs in local press to be implemented 1/7/2009. On vacant land the tariff is ten times higher than on a developed property. See objection of the Vaaloewer Rate Payers Association.

=======================================================================================

1997 – Land Development Objectives (LDO’s) for a five-year period was compiled. The community of Vaaloewer was involved in the process and through this certain projects and developments were identified and prioritized and completed during 1998;
1. Water inlet structure/ pump station and new pipeline to reservoir, R550 000
2. Vaaloewer ave from Entrance to Candy’s was tarred, R698 000
3. Fire Hydrants, R11 000
4. Six street lights at strategic points, R11 000
5. RAID project – main entrance building upgraded to establish offices for administration, R140 000
6. Kopano Housing project – R15 000 grants from government for first time homeowners. Fifteen beneficiaries identified through public participation. Six stands purchased from individual owners and subdivided into eighteen stands of ±300m² on which sixteen houses were completed. Project cost R300 000. To date none of these properties were legally transferred to the owners as was originally agreed to by all parties concerned, which needs some clarity with Emfuleni council.
7. Protection, Security and access control
8. Fencing of town, Secure and Maintain
1998 – LDO’s phase 2;
1. Tarring of roads River, Vink & Visarend, R500 000
2. Upgrading storm water system, R200 000
3. Installation of street lights, R30 000
4. Active promotion of town with newsletters
5. Installation of fire hydrants, R10 000
6. Upgrading of internal electricity distribution network and completion of ring network, R100 000
7. Fencing of refuse dump & planting of trees, R30 000
8. Beatification of town by planting indigenous trees, R10 000
9. Notice board at entrance, R1500
10. Maintenance of the water reticulation network and regular monitoring of the water quality
11. Compilation of a strategy to restrict traffic violations in the town
12. Establish, in conjunction with Vaal River Representative council, emergency services to include fire and ambulance to be implemented in Aug 1998 at Vaal River Representative council – Louisrus
1999 – LDO’s phase 3;
1. Advertising sign at the intersection to Vaaloewer/ Lindequesdrift/ Potchefstroom, R30 000
2. Extension of electrical network in River, Vink and Korhaan streets, R113 000
3. Stormwater projects in Hadeda, Riverview, Katlagter, Hoep-Hoep and Suikerbos streets, R177 000
4. Further upgrade of water purification works, R64 000
2000 – LDO’s phase 4; All plans and projects were re-prioritized and will be handed to the new Council