Hallo Hilda,

Refer to our earlier telephone conversation.

As I have explained, we (Action Group Colesberg – a ratepayers association) are involved in a court case with the Umsobomvu Municipality (Colesberg) regarding their refusal to sell pre-paid electricity to some of our residents. This case was heard yesterday and postponed to a later date.

We urgently need a copy of the license agreement between NERSA and our Municipality  to serve as proof in this case. Would you please be so kind as to e-mail me a copy of the license as soon as possible.

Kind regards

Johan Matthee

Chairman: Action Group Colesberg

13 July 2009.

The Honourable, Mr K Mmoiemang
Minister of Corporate Governance, Human Settlement and Traditional Affairs
Provincial Legislature
Northern Cape

Dear Sir

KAMIESBERG MUNICIPALITY: LACK OF SERVICE DELIVERY AND INCOMPETENCE OF OFFICIALS AND BOARD

We would like to bring the following under your attention and ask that you, as a matter of urgency, investigate Kamiesberg Municipality. We have previously written letters to the Premier of the Northern Cape, with no result.

Our issues are:

1. General: Kamieskroon is part of Kamiesberg Municipality (offices in Garies) and we have a service point here in Kamieskroon. Since 2001 we have had problems with service delivery and it is rapidly escalating. The officials treat the taxpayers with utter disrespect and do not give any attention to our problems. Since 2001 not a single letter written to the municipality was replied to. Staff members are never available if you call, or promises to call back not adhered to. So, there is little or no communication from their side.

Kamiesberg Municipality is responsible for a very large area, but only 12 000 inhabitants. This includes economic active people, pensioners and children. It is also an extremely poor area with a very high percentage of people without jobs and a high percentage of people dependant on a welfare pension. The total salary package for the municipality is R12 000 000 per year. This means that R1 000 000 per month must be generated by all inhabitants (including pensioners, children and jobless people) just to pay salaries. It is a fact that the Kamieskroon service point the workers are totally unqualified and unproductive. If one looks at the lack of services in the other villages, the same certainly applies for all service points including the head office in Garies.

Once a year, the municipal manager advertises meetings to discuss the proposed budget for the following year. Sometimes they just do not turn up. In 2008 we received notice of the meeting during the morning of the day the meeting was to take place. During the lunch hour, the time was changed, with the result that the tax payers did not attend. The conclusion was made that there was a lack of interest. This year (2009), at a meeting to discuss the proposed budget and tariff increases, serious questions were asked and complaints made because of an increase of more than 100% in our property taxes. The financial manager and 2 Board members promised to come back to us. They never did that, implemented the new tariffs and even added rates not shown in the proposed budget. The unit costs of electricity was increased by 34% even though NERSA allowed for a 31.3% increase . Even the basic availability rate for electricity which was shown as a 5% increase in the concept budget, was increased by 34%.

2. Municipal bills: Since 2001 we have received not one correct bill. Despite numerous meetings with various officials, they are not capable to correct that. Meter readings are plucked out of the air and sometimes water meter readings are recorded as electricity meter readings and vice versa. The person responsible for meter reading has no idea about decimal points. The accounts are in such a mess that we have to calculate our own accounts and pay accordingly. To communicate with the person currently responsible, is also difficult. This staff member lives in Tweerivier and does not have his own transport. A municipal worker has to pick him up with municipal transport which means they only depart from Garies after the offices had opened for the day. He is picked up at his home and brought to work which means that he often only arrives after 10h00. That is if a vehicle is available!

3. Municipal taxes: New valuation of properties were done earlier in the year. In most instances property values were increased by more than 100%. Some, however, were not increased at all. In Kamieskroon no properties were inspected. The procedure of informing the taxpayer of the new value was also very confusing and late – so late that we received some of the notices only three days before the closing date for complaints. The notices were hand written and there were so many commas, dots and zeros that one had no idea what the true figure was (one had no idea of it was 100’s, 1000’s of 100 000’s or 1 000 000’s). We also received notices for properties not belonging to us and some of the properties were valued at R0.00.
The increase of more than 100% on the value of the property and the fact that the Board decided to keep the rate the same as before, now means that we have to pay 130% more property tax than last year. Some tax payers have to pay up to 700% more. This, we, and any of the inhabitants of Kamieskroon and the Kamiesberg Municipal area, cannot afford.
The Municipality claims that the new rates were advertised in a newspaper, as is required by law, but it was certainly not advertised in a paper distributed here.

4. Electricity: 4 years ago, during our peak season, Escom warned the municipality that they are heading for a problem with supply in Kamieskroon village– the transformer was overloaded and at peak times not able to handle the load. It was then advised to install a bigger transformer. Nothing was done and now, for the past 4 months, we have constant powercuts. These unexpected cuts have a huge affect on businesses in the village. Many households use prepaid electricity. In about 50 households meters are out of order – some for more than 5 years. These meters had been bypassed by the municipality and electricity usage is unlimited and a flat rate of R78 is charged. No attempt had been made by the municipality to repair the meters or install new meters.

5. Water: In 2006/2007 budget some water tariffs were increased by 1246%. We raised our concerns with the municipality and the national minister of local government. In the following years the water rates were decreased slightly. The initial increase was done because of a “water shortage”. The irony is that we have, according to a report by consulting engineers, more than enough water for Kamieskroon. The engineers concluded the shortage was caused by incompetent staff and by mismanagement. The telemetric system was left to break down and this meant that workers have to travel to the various pumps and switch pumps on and off by hand. This was not done regularly and diligently and resulted in boreholes and pumps being overutilized. The end result is that the municipality now have to spend a lot of money to have all this replaced and at the moment Kamieskroon inhabitants receive water which is not fit for human consumption.

6. Sanitation: About 3 years ago the sewage pump on our premises broke. The municipality had no money to pay for a replacement and we paid for it ourselves. Since then, because of poor maintenance, a relay switch on the pump broke. For the past 2 years the pump is switched on and off manually and this means 2 trips per day to our premises. This is still going on, despite numerous calls to the municipal manager. It is certainly not cost effective to make 2 trips per day and to have someone on duty (also over weekends and public holidays) to do this.

7. Roads: The majority of the roads in Kamieskroon are gravel and are in an appaling state. They are so corrugated that vehicles can hardly drive on them and they are even worse after the rainy season. We are now heading for our flower season and we receive tourists from all over the world and our roads are impassable.
8. Waste: Our local dump area looks terrible. It is a fenced off (low fence) in an area of 200 X 200 metres but, wth rubbish over an area of one square kilometre. The wind takes waste over the fence and around the dumping area. All kinds of waste get dumped outside of this area.

9. Municipal Property: There is no or little control over municipal property. We have a community hall in Kamieskroon. It was stocked with 200 each of cutlery and crockery plus pots and pans and cooking utensils and a stove. The hall and equipment were rented out, but nobody took responsibility to see that the equipment was returned in good order. Today there is not a single item in the kitchen. The local library is part of the municipal buildings and the municipality receives funds from the Dept of Sport, Arts and Culture to pay the salaries and for upkeeping of the libraries. Over the past 6 – 7 years, during the rainy season, the roof leaked and a number of books were damaged. We now have large holes in the ceiling, it is still leaking and more books are damaged. Nothing is done. This list of neglect of municipal property goes on and on.

10. Mismanagement of funds: Rumours of money disappearing or priority funds used for salaries surface very often and needs to be investigated. Huge salaries are paid for workers not qualified or just incompetent. Provision in the budget is made for projects not necessary, but delivery of basic services to the inhabitants is neglected. Previous investigations were hampered by officials when the investigators delved too deep and discovered irregularities, misappropriation of funds and mismanagement.

We strongly feel that the Kamiesberg Municipality is dysfunctional and mismanaged and the Board is not capable of any contol measures or informed decisions. We feel that it is of the utmost importance that there should be an independent investigation and independent forensic audit and that the personnel and board should be suspended while the investigation is conducted. The taxpayers of this area are totally disregarded by the Board and municipal officials and we beg you to please take immediate and serious action in this matter.

Yours faithfully

Maryna Kohrs

Copies to:

President Jacob Zuma
National Minister of Corporate Governance, Human Settlement and Traditional Affairs Municipal Manager: Kamiesberg Municipality
Chairperson: Kamiesberg Municipal Board
Provincial Leader of the ANC
Provincial Leader of the DA
Provincial Leader of the ID
Provincial Leader of Cope
Anel Heydenrich: Sakpas-RSG

News from Colesberg is that the town has recently won a court interdict to force the municipality to provide pre-paid electricity.   The interdict and the court order makes interesting reading.  At the moment it cannot be loaded on the site, but I will send you a copy on request.

The SPRA has begun to engage with their municipality, requesting meetings with regard to mismanagement of service delivery and the reasons for water cut-offs in the town which apparently were as a result of unqualified people being appointed to posts within the municipality. This is a very organised rate-payers association, with an extremely good website: Sol Plaatje Municipality

Dear Sir/Madam

Reference: Urgent Application for Provincial intervention into the Elias Motsoaledi Budget for 2009/2010 as per Constitution Art 139 (1)(4).

We take note of the fact that the Budget was tabled at a ‘Special Meeting’ of the Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality held on the 29^th of May 2009. At this meeting the budget was proposed for acceptance by Councilor Maepa, seconded by Councilor Masomela and accepted with by 30 votes for and 3 against.

We draw your attention to the following non-compliance to the Constitution of South Africa, various clauses in the MSA as well as the MFMA with regards to the compilation, procedure of presentation as well as in the accepting of this budget. On these grounds we call on you to investigate the legality of our request to have this budget revoked and that by MFMA Article 27 (1) be brought into effect by yourself.

1. Compiling of the Budget:

Section 152 (1)(a) of the Constitution calls for the provision of democratic and accountable government for local communities, (b) calls for the provision of services to communities in a sustainable manner whilst (e) calls for the encouraging of involvement of these communities and community organizations in the matters of local government.

Accountability, sustainability and involvement all rest on the provision by the Local Government to provide for such to happen. Elias Motsoaledi has not provided for accountable government in that they have withheld from Council the Auditor – General’s report, a management summary was tabled only on the 19^th May of which no finality was reached or all outstanding matters resolved from the 2008/2009 Audit. Ten days later a budget was accepted based on irregularities still existing in the opening balances of the 2007 Financial Year. The MFMA Article 17 (1)(d)(ii) calls for the actual revenue and expenditure by vote for the financial year preceding the current year. Although these figures were presented on the budget accepted on the 29^th May according to the Auditor General’s summary (actual Auditor-General’s audit report (in terms of section 126(3) was never presented to Council let alone made public). The summary of the Auditor General’s report was tabled 10 ¾ months after year end for the first time and not within the required 7 months as stipulated in Section 127 (2) of the MFMA. Let it also be noted that this report has to date not been made public in accordance with section 21A of the Municipal Systems Act or in terms of MFMA Section 128(2)(a)(i). MFMA Section 128(2)(a)(ii) has also never been complied with.

- 2 -

Based on the above we submit that the irregularities, (not yet resolved in Auditor General’s Report on the 2008/2009 audit) of overstatement of expenditure as well as the subsequent inability to accurately accept the financial reporting on the control and statement of the:

Investments listed, the operating expenditure, the accounts receivable,

the accounts payable and accruals, the provisions stated,

the revenue figures or the commitments stated, as well as the Cash and Cash equivalents,

make it impossible to state the actual revenue and expenditure by vote for the financial year preceding the current year with any accuracy.

Please investigate the Auditor General’s Report in light of Section 138 as well as 138 (f). It’s non-disclosure and withholding from the Council may be to cover up the seriousness and the extent of the report. The Municipal Manager’s submission and comment on the extent of the seriousness of the Auditor General’s report contained in M08/009 is understated to say the least.

2. The MFMA Section 17 (3)(c) calls for a projection of cash flow for the budget year by revenue source, broken down per month to be adopted along with the budget. This is, in a sense to give a guide as to how the budget will be worked out throughout the year. However, the cash flow proposed, seconded and accepted by the Council on the 29^th was the draft cash flow and not the revised and proposed budget. The differences between these two budgets is significant. The income from the draft budget to the actual was increased by R81,443million. R50million being added to income from interest on investments in ONE year and the bulk of the balance from additional Government Grants and Subsidies. This difference has a significant impact on the sources of revenue and as such the cash-flow as accepted is not an accurate working document in the proposal and acceptance of the budget for this year.

3. This cash flow document is also to reflect the revenue generated from the tariff increases. The Electricity, water and Property Rates Tariffs were all adjusted between the draft and the final budget presentation. All of the above has a direct effect on the realistically anticipated revenues to be collected. Although there is frequent reference to the NERSA ascribed percentage increases on tariffs for the BULK purchasing of electricity this year’s tariff has increased with 34%. Actual figures (obtained under much force and coercion) show that a 63% profit will be made on the purchase of bulk supply to revenue generated for this financial year. Can such unrealistic increases be in line with Section 229 (2)(a) of the Constitution which calls on municipalities to exercise its powers to impose…surcharges on fees for services provided…in such a way that they do NOT materially and unreasonably prejudice national economic policies. To which we would state that the increase in BULK SUPPLY purchases of an estimated 25% does not equate to a reasonable or sustainable income opportunity of charging 34% to the end user for a service that is already generating a profit of 63%! The MSA Section 74 (2)(d) further states tariffs MUST reflect the costs reasonably associated with rendering the service… Section 74 (2)(e) further states, “tariffs must be set at levels that facilitate the financial sustainability of the service.” We have stated on numerous occasions that Elias Motsoaledi is busy pricing itself out of the market with their tariffs.

Page 3…

- 3 -

This increase in revenue generation is not realistic based on the tough economic climate in which we find ourselves as well as the stated intention of National Government to curb (even reduce) inflation as set out in the then Finance Minister’s address on the 11 February 2009.

4. Publication and Consultations on Tabled Budgets:

Although Section 22(a)(ii) of the MFMA was adhered to in that a draft budget was proposed and the local community was asked to submit representations in connection with the budget we would refer you to the ‘Full Year Forecast” in the draft to the Actual presented on 29 May. These:

a. Firstly, differ so radically and fundamentally from one another that there is no way that there is any correlation between the budget accepted to the one proposed in the draft and

b. Secondly, it is hard to imagine that in a budget of R108million that the adjusted budget (after 6 months) will work out to the forecast in every vote or type.

c. Thirdly, Bad Debts, Collection Cost, Depreciation were not budgeted for in the draft but are included in the final whereas Insurance, Legal Fees, Seminar/Conference and Travel/Accommodation were budgeted for in the draft but left out in the final.

d. Insurance was a zero line item in the draft and left out in the final. This is an unresolved question on the Auditor General’s report questioning the lack of insurance on the assets of the Municipality.

We submit that representations asked for in terms of section 22 could not be meaningful with such drastic changes to the make up and composition of the budget.

5. In addition we note with concern and frustration that Section 23 (1) (a); (2) (a) and (b) were not complied with in any way. It states that the municipal council must consider any views of the local community. After considering all budget submissions, the council must give the mayor an opportunity to respond to the submissions and if necessary, to revise the budget and table amendments for consideration by the council. Our submissions (there were two dated 6 May and 25 May) NEVER got to the council because they were never a part of any documentation that any councilor received. Not only that but the Municipal Manager acknowledged receipt of our first submission but referred it to our Ward Councilor (who had submissions of his own ward not dealt with either). Our ward councilor did not even receive copies of our submissions. Therefore the presentation that took place by the Mayor on the 29 May 2009 where this budget was accepted was done without any knowledge in the council of any submissions from the local community. Not only that but the Mayor in his presentation did not refer to any submissions received or revise the budget in any way, or table any amendments for consideration by the council.

6. Of major concern in this budget is the continued promise of service delivery (to quote the Mayor – 90% of last year’s capital projects were rolled out, where we submit Capital Budget 2009/2010 including roll-over from previous year where his percentage is not carried out in the budgeted for to nil adjustments for the year as well as in the requests for roll-over of funds. A case in point is the capital request in 2009/2010 budget for R4.1million for roads in Groblersdal. They had R4million last year of which only R352,534 was spent. The budget stated as being in line with the proposed IDP. However, very little of the capital expenditure budgeted for actually realizes in completed projects on the ground.

Page 4…

- 4 -

This is borne out by the Auditor Generals comment that R58.9million of capital projects listed on the Asset Register could not be found or verified to have been completed in the areas stipulated. Section 21 (1)(a) of the MFMA is thus not being adhered to due to the fact that such plans are not in place or else there would be non-performances reflected against the Municipal Manager or his section heads based on KPI’s not being realized. Measurable Performance Objectives and SDBIP’s were submitted, however the resolution to accept these was withdrawn from the agenda by Councilor Maepa, seconded by Councilor Masemola. No accounting for assessment of bonuses to be paid out has been accepted as yet although this forms an expenditure line on the budget.

In the light of the above we would urgently request that there are enough irregularities and non-compliances contained in this budget to warrant a serious investigation and if necessary intervention on behalf of the Provincial MEC for finance. We do not have access to all the information relating to the processes followed – however, based on what little information we do have we have pointed out many irregularities.

We submit that section 21(2)(c) has also not been adhered to by the Mayor of this Municipality. There is a repeated unwillingness on behalf of the Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality to adhere under duress to the minimum letter of the law. The Freedom of Information Act hasn’t even been referred to in this submission, suffice to say that it’s easier to do dental work on the teeth of a chicken than to acquire any meaningful and intelligent information from the Municipal Manager/the Municipality. Even Councilor’s cannot obtain information required for their meaningful participation in matters tabled for voting.

We submit that Article 139 (1) and revised section (4) of the Constitution 108/1996 MUST be applied. We await your urgent response to our request for intervention in the Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality Budget for 2009/2010.

Failure to respond to our request will force us to take this request to the High Court for ruling.

Kind regards

(Facsimile’s and originals in post are signed – no digital signature facility available for emails)

__________________________

Shaun Mellors (Chairman)

CC: Mr Lionel Seloane – Mayor of Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality

Mr Langa Kabini – Municipal Manager of Elias Motsoaledi Local Municipality

Mr Pierre de Ru – Manager, Auditor General’s Office Polokwane at pierre@agsa.co.za

Mr Pravin Gordhan – Minister of Finance (Fax) 021-461-2934

Mr Dumisa Jele – National Treasury Chief of Staff at dumisa.jele@treasury.gov.za

and fax 012-323-3262