notification, in terms of Section 139(6)(b) of the Constitution, of an intervention by

the North West provincial government, in terms of Section 139(4) of the

Constitution, in the Mamusa Local Municipality. The Select Committee conducted

an oversight visit to the Mamusa Local Municipality from 12-15 July 2004, in

accordance with its support function to local government in terms of Section 154

of the Constitution.

The Select Committee delegation comprised the following delegates:

The delegation was accompanied by the Chairperson as well as Members of the

North West Portfolio Committee on Local Government. The Select Committee

proposed that the Portfolio Committee work in a strategic partnership with the

NCOP so that briefings and meetings with stakeholders were not duplicated and

their tasks could be co-ordinated.

Meetings were held with various stakeholders, which included the MEC for

Developmental Local Government and Housing, the Executive Mayor (Bophirima

District Municipality), the Administrator, the Municipal Manager, line managers,

representatives of SALGA, representatives of organised labour as well as

members of the organised business community, NGOs and CBOs.

Having conducted an in loco inspection at the Municipality, the Select Committee

reports as follows:

The Municipality experienced ongoing political and administrative instability. The

Council as well as the administration was divided into factions. These divisions

caused instability in the Municipality, which in turn hampered service delivery and

resulted in backlogs. There was also extensive political interference in the

administration of the Municipality. Most of the municipality’s by-laws are outdated

and not aligned with a developmental local government focus. Their relevance

must be examined and they must be realigned.

The Council was therefore dysfunctional on many levels:

and the administration was divided into factions. This prevented effective

service delivery and resulted in considerable backlogs. The budget of the

Municipality could not be developed.

On 22 December 2003 a Council meeting was held where it was resolved that an

Acting Municipal Manager should be appointed. The Acting Municipal Manager

appointed a number of general workers. On 10 January the Mayor recalled the

Municipal Manager. On 13 January a letter was written to the general workers

notifying them that they were not properly appointed. The substantive Municipal

Manager instructed the bank not to pay these employees but the Acting

Municipal Manager gave the bank a conflicting instruction. As a result, these

employees were paid.

On 16 January 2004 a Council meeting was, allegedly, held. At this meeting the

Council is alleged to have resolved the issue of the suspension of the Municipal

Manager and condoned the appointment of the employees by the Acting

Municipal Manager. It is believed that the meeting was disrupted by members of

the public.

During this period the MEC for Developmental Local Government and Housing

visited the Municipality three times, but the tensions were not resolved. When it

became apparent that the Municipality would not meet the 30 June deadline for

the adoption of the budget, it was agreed with the MEC that the Council would be

dissolved and an Administrator would be appointed.

On 19 May 2004 the Provincial Executive Council took a decision in terms of

Section 139(1)(c) to intervene in the Mamusa Local Council. The Executive

Council approved an intervention in the Council in terms of Section 139(4)(a) and

(b) of the Constitution. The MEC for Local Government and Housing was

delegated the authority to decide which option should be used in respect of

interventions approved. The Department was instructed to provide funding for the

appointment of an Administrator. In terms of Section 139(4) the dissolution of the

Council was effective immediately.

Mamusa has a Plenary Executive System combined with a ward participatory

system. It has twelve councillors, three of whom have been suspended by their

political party. Ongoing conflict between councillors has led to a breakdown in the

management and administration of the Council. The separation between

Councillors and the administration was often unclear with Councillors giving

direct instructions to officials, instead of through the Mayor and the Municipal

Manager.

In spite of the fact that all Councillors were part-time, they used the Municipality’s

facilities continually, to the extent of misuse in violation of the Code of Conduct.

Personal interest and corruption was a root cause of the Municipality’s problems.

There was fighting about the allocation of tenders, which has had a negative

impact on service delivery. Irregular decisions were taken by Council on the

awarding of tenders. Some contractors were appointed without a council

resolution. Officials were co-oerced into appointing contractors for jobs.

The three suspended ANC Councillors orchestrated the appointment of the

acting Municipal Manager as well as certain of the line managers, who lacked the

ability to run the Municipality. However, these three Councillors could not have

constituted the necessary quorum on their own and therefore could not have

taken decisions without the collaboration of other Councillors. Since these other

Councillors largely kept silent, they contributed to the breakdown of the Council’s

functions. The inference that can be drawn is that all Councillors are, to some

extent, blameworthy for the breakdown of the Council.

The Councillors, a few days preceding the Section 139 application, began a

process to oppose the intervention. Obtaining a Council resolution would have

enabled them to access funds from the Council budget to fund a legal process to

oppose the intervention. The Councillors briefed an attorney to obtain an interdict

to oppose the intervention and stop the MEC. The Department convened a

meeting with the attorney as well as with Councillors. The attorney sought an

agreement for the MEC to withdraw the intervention. However, there was no

legal basis for the MEC to do so. It became clear that Councillors were

concerned about investigations against them and they argued that there were no

problems in the Municipality’s administration.

Many stakeholders expressed their concern about the return of the same

Councillors following by-elections. Although the MEC has expressed little

confidence in the Councillors he has noted that he is unable to ensure that not all

return. He would leave it up to the political parties to nominate the appropriate

people for re-election. Only once the investigation into the misuse of Council

funds and property is completed, can recommendations be made on the

indictment and arrest of particular Councillors. But this process will not be

completed before the election of a new Council on 18 August 2004, the date

established by the Independent Electoral Council.

Representatives of the business community requested that a forensic audit be

conducted at the Municipality.

The Executive Mayor of Bophirima District Municipality reported that they had

regular interaction with the Mamusa Local Municipality, taking advantage of the

capacity within the District Municipality and SALGA. The last meeting with

Mamusa was around February 2004 with the CEO of SALGA’s national office

and its Support and Intervention Unit. They had met with the then Mayor and the

substantive Municipal Manager and later with the Acting Mayor and the second

Municipal Manager. However, the problems faced by the Municipality were not

only governance issues. Other party political issues were not within the scope of

the District Municipality. It appeared as if these issues have played a greater role

in the collapse of the Municipality. When the decision was taken to dissolve the

Mamusa Council, the District Municipality received a report outlining the reasons

for the dissolution.

In terms of the governance issues, SALGA and the District Municipality engage

with all Municipalities in the district to discuss such issues and workshops are

periodically held. There is no municipality which has not participated in

workshops on local government legislation.

The Portfolio Committee on Local Government noted that it has had limited

interaction with Municipalities in the province, including the Mamusa Local

Municipality. The Committee has, however, agreed to draft recommendations on

procedures to be followed in future interventions. The Committee is still awaiting

a second briefing from the Department on the role of the Portfolio Committee in

the intervention. The Committee argued that it is necessary to avoid a literal

reading of the relevant legislation, namely, that only the concurrence of the

NCOP is required to approve an intervention. This undermines the Portfolio

Committee’s role and is not consistent with the spirit of co-operative government.

The Administrator was appointed from the 23 June 2004 and is expected to

retain the position for a three-month period, ending on 3 September 2004. The

budget of the Administrator is still being finalised with the provincial Department

of Local Government, which is responsible for his payment.

The Administrator must begin to create an administration. To do so he must

undertake a skills audit and thereafter appropriately draft policies. Six key

policies are needed. These include:

The Administrator will be augmented by competency teams using experts and

consultants. An implementation plan will also be developed.

placement etc.

without reference to the necessary financial resources and whether they

were available.

also assist in the arrangements for the elections.

The Administrator is now getting the co-operation of the Managers. However,

capacity is lacking and all municipal staff and managers need to be capacitated.

There is an IDP in place but it was never interacted with and implemented and

there was no meaningful engagement on the document. On 23 July 2004 a

meeting was held with relevant stakeholders to begin reviewing the IDP. One of

the tasks of the Administrator is to ensure that the IDP is aligned with the budget.

For the past nine years, there has been no visible development in the municipal

area. There are allegations that development projects only benefit the friends and

family of Councillors. These projects need to be widely advertised; there are no

opportunities given to young people. It also appears that bursaries are not made

widely available to scholars.

This has been budgeted for and was adopted by Council on 22 December 2003.

A placement committee had made recommendations on staff placements to the

Council, following which, Council adopted the organogram. By December 2003

placements were, therefore, nearly finalised. However, Councillors then began to

tamper with these placements. Organised labour, through IMATU, also raised

problems with the placements. Certain Councillors had a vested interest in

placements and it appeared that the workforce was divided along the same

factions as Council.

In addition, there are no job descriptions in pace and no job evaluations have

been done and this impacts negatively on placements. Competencies and skills

attached to jobs were not taken into account. The Administrator is to ensure that

job descriptions and evaluations are completed in order to finalise placements.

The Administrator will have to ensure that the process placement is continued

and finalised. The Administrator is using professionals to assist in developing job

descriptions and placements.

Only the Municipal Manager has an employment contract; none of the other line

managers have such contracts. The Administrator is currently finalising these

and is being assisted by Bophirima District Municipality in finalising performance

contracts. Evaluations are not within the Administrator’s scope. Rather, his role is

to ensure that performance agreements are signed.

The Municipality has approximately 171 employees and the salaries bill amounts

to around R1,2 million per month. All information with respect to human

resources has always been dealt with by the Finance Department. Since 1

October 2003, the newly appointed Corporate Services Manager has been

battling to get information. There was no Human Resources Department in the

Municipality until the organogram was finalised.

An Equity Plan was developed with consultants but was never adhered to.

Appointments were haphazard and along faction lines.

With respect to the fifty additional general workers who were appointed, the

Labour Court has ruled that they are now all permanent employees. The initial

number to be employed was 26. The acting Municipal Manager appointed 24

general workers. Upon his return, the substantive Municipal Manager appointed

an additional 26 workers. The case before the Labour Court was pending one

week prior to the intervention. This case was pursued by Councillors against the

advice of the Department. The Labour Court decision can be taken on review but

it is not easy to succeed in such cases. The excess employees are now

permanent employees. Both Municipal Managers will be disciplined as the

appointment of these employees was a purely administrative function and

resulted in great costs to the Municipality. The Municipality did not budget for the

26 additional staff, who were not in the organogram.

The Administrator has undertaken to deal creatively with the additional staff. The

Administrator, has, for instance, noted that many staff members are past the

retirement age. Council has placed a moratorium on filling of vacancies in the

organogram due to cash flow constraints.

There are virtually no HR policies in place. These policies need to be drawn up

and aligned with the organogram as well as key performance areas (KPAs) and

key result areas (KRAs).

An Equity Plan was developed with consultants but was never adhered to and

appointments were haphazard and along faction lines. The Administrator must

also clarify whether labour was consulted on the policy. Labour itself appears to

be divided. SAMWU’s local branch is about to be dissolved by the provincial

office.

2.3.4 Financial management systems

These systems are mainly in place but there was a great deal of interference in

financial management decisions. Council decisions never took into account the

financial position of the Municipality. There was poor VAT recovery by the

Municipality. Projects were approved and executed without the necessary

funding being available.

The Municipality has no IT division and not all computers have been enabled to

provide internet access.

An evaluation roll and indigent register is in place. The drawing up of a new

evaluation roll has been approved.

By 18 August there must be an induction plan and training programme in place

on the roles and functions of councillors, following the elections.

A temporary budget was approved by the Administrator on 30 June 2004. The

budget is being monitored and reports are sent to the provincial Department of

Local Government.

Before the adoption of the interim budget on 30 June, meetings were held with

the community. The community was concerned about the lack of consultation on

previous budgets.

Although there are ward committees in place, they are factionalised and nonfunctional.

There are now attempts under way to revive the ward committees,

which need to be more involved in other processes, such as the review of the

IDP.

Payment levels in the municipal area are low; the average payment level is 57%.

The payment level in Schweizer-Reinecke is 95% and Tzaneen is 53%. In

Ipelegeng it is only 5%. A joint programme with the national Department of

Provincial and Local Government will be executed to ensure that payment levels

are improved.

The Municipality has a bank balance of R115 000. Debtors amount to R27 million

and creditors to R3,6 million. Investments amount to R300 000. Schweizer is a

semi-rural area. In terms of its income generating capacity, it is very poor and

unemployment levels are high. Farm workers are frequently evicted from farmers

and resort to squatting. There are no factories or businesses to provide

employment.

There is some difficulty with implementing the credit control policy. Although

arrears have been handed to attorneys, the recovery levels are poor. The

Municipality is considering the employment of debt collectors to raise the

payment levels.

The Deputy Director of Finance in the Department of Local Government is

auditing the finances of the Municipality. The legal division of the Department is

also conducting its own investigation into kickbacks and so forth. This does not

form part of the Administrator’s mandate and the Department will therefore

decide on the relevant action to be taken against particular Councils and officials.

Councillors living in Ipelegeng did not properly scrutinise those classified as

"indigent". The result is the inclusion of people on the indigent register who can

afford to pay for services.

Beyond the dissolution, there is a team working jointly with SALGA’s Councillor

Training unit. SALGA is able to send the Unit into Municipalities where there are

training needs. The University of the North West is also involved in programmes

to train and capacitate Councillors. A joint programme between the University

and the provincial Department of Local Government has been initiated and a

training programme for Councillors has been developed.

There is a Mayor’s forum, which includes all the Mayors in the District and the

Executive Mayor who periodically meet to discuss issues facing the district.

There is also a Municipal Manager’s forum to discusses issues and problems

facing municipal managers in the district and begin identifying ways to solve

these problems. In the forum, responsibilities have been allocated. If a

municipality is seen to lack capacity, an intervention is initiated to assist and the

provincial Department and SALGA may also be approached.

There were concerns expressed regarding the accountability of the Councillor for

the ward, since the Councillor is also chair of the ward committee. It was

proposed that the Councillor should just be a member of the ward committee so

that he can account to the ward committee and not vice versa.

The ward Councillor has a responsibility in the ward. Ward committees should

ensure that there are regular meetings, that together, with the Councillors, they

serve the Committee in that ward. They are non-functional and this is

problematic. Those who do not function must be replaced continuously.

Representatives of civil society reported that they were never informed directly of

the problems experienced by the Municipality, but instead heard through the

media. This highlighted the need for greater community participation and

involvement in the functioning of Council.

resolutions must be also be costed.

developmental local government focus. Their relevance must be examined

and they must be realigned.

Municipality must be a catalyst for economic development within the area,

with a particular focus on Black Economic Empowerment among its

residents.

for the requirements for the posts which they currently fill.

period of the intervention as well as following the intervention.

With respect to the procedural and monitoring aspects of the intervention, the

Select Committee notes the following recommendations:

capacitating the incoming Council.

Portfolio Committee on Local Government, that they should have been

briefed on the intervention prior to the Department’s briefing of the NCOP.

These concerns will be taken into account when national legislation on

interventions is prepared by the NCOP. In the formulation of such

legislation, Provincial Portfolio Committees should be afforded a more

prominent role in relation to the monitoring of municipalities.

Municipalities in the province, such as Mafikeng and Lekwa-Teemane,

where interventions are ongoing, and the Kgetleng Local Municipality. The

Committee will continue to monitor the situation in those Municipalities,

together with SALGA, the Portfolio Committee, as well as the Bophirima

District Municipality.

6. Ending of the Intervention

The Department cannot turn the situation around in three months. On the 18

August, following by-elections, a new Council will be instituted. This means that

legislative powers will be restored to the Council. However, there is an option to

extend the intervention using Section 139(1)(b) of the Constitution, which will

focus on taking over the executive functions of the Municipality, particularly those

functions which the Municipality is unable to fulfil.

Having considered the inputs from the administration of the Municipality and the

relevant stakeholders, the Committee resolves to support the intervention by the

North West provincial government, in terms of Section 139(4).

Further, that the MEC submits a report to the NCOP at least every second

month, in order to enable the Select Committee to exercise oversight over the

intervention regularly. These reports should focus on the terms of reference for

the intervention, areas of concern raised in this report, especially on the progress

made in these areas.