My experience as a BCM ward committee member
Building greater trust between communities and municipality can be achieved through consistent, honest communication
A new system of governance was introduced in SA in 2000 to position local government as the sphere of government best placed to serve the needs of communities.
Wall-to-wall municipalities were established throughout SA, with local municipalities delimited into wards. Every ward must have a functional ward committee chaired by the ward councillor.
The Municipal Structures Act of 1998 states that the “objective of a ward committee is to enhance participatory democracy in local government”.
In 2005, the then department of provincial and local government developed a resource handbook for ward committees.
It states that their role is to “advise the ward councillor in identifying the needs and concerns of the ward” and to actively help the “ward councillor tell the community about their rights ... and help the ward councillor with grievances and complaints”, among other things.
Simply put, ward committees serve as a link between the councillor and the community, ensuring that communication takes place and communities have input into the decisions the city makes.
This article presents my experience as a ward committee member in ward 15 of Buffalo City Metro (BCM).
My experiences may not necessarily reflect those of other ward committee members across the 50 wards of BCM. However, there are lessons to be learnt.
After the 2016 local government elections, BCM ran advertisements calling for the election of ward committee members for all its 50 wards. Each ward committee would consist of 10 members (representing different geographic areas in the ward and different sectoral interests).
The ward councillor, with the support of a ward secretary, would also form part of the committee.
The exact number of geographic areas and the types of sector representatives depended on the circumstances of each ward, but the number of members each committee could have was finite across all wards.
In ward 15, I represented the geographic areas of Abbotsford, Dorchester Heights, Dorchester Heights informal settlement and Nahoon Valley Park, with Ducats and Nompumelelo also forming part of ward 15. The appointment was for the period 2016 to 2021.
The appointment process was transparent and entailed either calling a community meeting or obtaining signatures from residents to support the nomination.
After meeting the ward councillor, it was decided to obtain signatures from residents. As there was a vacancy and no other nominations, the process was uncontested.
Over the years, there has been a request that ward councillors should not chair ward committees to avoid it becoming politicised. In our ward, ward committee meetings were chaired by the councillor.
However, the councillor, as well as the BCM official from the public participation unit, ensured that meetings and discussions were not politicised as ward committee members represented different parties. Ward committee members were also instructed to not attend meetings in political party regalia.
BCM, through its public participation unit, provided continuous support and capacity building for ward committee members, including paying each member a monthly stipend of about R1,300 to cover incidentals such as transport to meetings, airtime or data.
This equates to an estimated annual budget of R7.8m for ward committee stipends.
The total stipend budget looks like a huge amount but one has to bear in mind the socioeconomic context of the country and the burden of work placed on ward committee members.
It is my opinion that a monthly stipend of R1,300 is grossly insufficient for the extent of travel, phone calls, data and work undertaken by members.
The stipend was almost always supplemented by money from my personal salary. This financial burden is more onerous on ward committee members who are unemployed, in lower-paid jobs or experiencing financial difficulties, and is even more burdensome on those who reside in rural wards.
One of the duties of ward committee members is to attend monthly meetings chaired by the councillor. These meetings are a space where members can report service delivery issues.
In our case, these included pothole repairs, tarring of roads, water leaks, electricity problems, illegal dumping, grass cutting, bush clearance, billing issues and the water hyacinths that continuously invade the Nahoon River.
Service delivery complaints from residents were received mostly via Facebook, Whatsapp, phone calls and through observations when driving or walking through the community.
In most instances complaints were dealt with through the city’s existing fault reporting mechanisms; however, sometimes it required escalation to the councillor for intervention.
The monthly meetings were also a space where the councillor reported on the implementation of projects that would benefit residents of the entire ward.
One of the projects that raised a lively debate within the community was the proposal (in
2018) by the provincial departments of education and public works to build the Khayalethu Special Needs School in Dorchester Heights.
There was general support for the project within the ward committee, but it was felt that the environmental impact assessment report needed to be shared with the community.
In a community meeting held in Dorchester Heights, residents were clearly against the building of the school in their area, citing an alarming increase in crime in the area and that the police were often slow to respond.
The vocal voices in the meeting also argued the school would have a negative impact on the existing road infrastructure and sanitation services, which were already deteriorating.
No further meetings were held on this matter and it is unclear if the project was discontinued or if an alternative site was identified.
The school would have benefited a section of the population that is already underserviced. The road issues raised, as real and concerning as they were, could not have been resolved by the departments of education or public works.
There was clearly a need for a collaborative approach involving various state departments and municipal stakeholders that would have placed the education needs of special-needs children first. In this meeting, this did not happen.
This highlights the limitations of the powers of ward committees against the greater interests within communities.
Apart from addressing day-today service delivery issues, one of the key activities that took place in our area was the identification of projects funded through the ward allocation programme, where each ward in the metro is allocated R1m for the implementation of projects in the ward.
Residents must be urged to engage ward committees and their respective councillors on how the ward allocation is spent annually. These projects should also serve to consciously link to the city’s strategic vision, ensuring that the work of ward committees is not only reactive but proactive in nature.
Ward 15 consists of two townships, one informal settlement and three suburbs. Representing the interests of these areas came with its own set of challenges such as fixing water leaks versus the provision of water, or the ever-growing mistrust between many residents of the suburbs and the informal settlement.
I was fortunate that when possible, my employer allowed me time off to attend the monthly ward committee meeting. However, others struggled getting time off or in accessing public transport.
Many suburban communities use digital platforms to facilitate communication between residents.
Digital platforms allow people to connect, but they can also serve as breeding grounds for intolerance in communities.
People in rural areas and the poor in urban areas have far less access to the internet than their affluent urban counterparts.
From my observations, it was also evident that most of the residents accessing the ward’s Facebook page were not from Nompumelelo or Ducats, but rather from Dorchester Heights, Abbotsford and Nahoon Valley Park (the more affluent suburbs).
A further observation was that because of the speed at which service delivery complaints can be expedited using technology, this resulted in quicker turnaround times to address service delivery needs in the wealthier areas.
The following are some key lessons worth sharing:
● There needs to be clearer mechanisms for advertising and appointing ward committee members and ensuring that all geographic areas and relevant sectors in the ward are represented.
Before electing members, as a minimum, municipalities must ensure compliance with the Municipal Structures Act and the National Guidelines on Ward Committees. Municipalities also need to consider nomination criteria used. Members representing sectoral interest groups need to be from the interest group being represented.
● As much as ward committees need to be clear on their roles, communities also need to have a clear understanding of what this entails. Ward committees are the legislated link between communities and the municipality, whereas ratepayers’ associations, church or sports groups are stakeholder groups.
Often, communities are left confused about to whom they should report service delivery issues.
● Ward councillors and ward committee members need to ensure that greater trust is built between communities and the municipality.
This can be done through consistent and honest communication.
● Ward committees need to play a more meaningful role in the ward priority processes, IDP and budget process, as well as in projects implemented by other state actors.
● There needs to be an effective handover from outgoing councillors and ward committees to the new councillors and ward committees.
This could assist in ensuring continuation of projects.
● Vacant ward committee positions must all be filled. To my knowledge, the ward committee representative for the geographic area of Abbotsford, Dorchester Heights, Dorchester Heights Informal Settlement and Nahoon Valley Park in ward 15 is vacant.
Hopefully, when the national department of co-operative governance and traditional affairs completes its local government legislative review process, some of the issues mentioned above will be addressed, thereby improving the efficacy of ward committees.
If not, we may end up seeing that “the more things change, the more they stay the same”.