MUNICIPAL DEMARCATION BOARD BRIEFING: PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON PROVINCIAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT

1. MUNICIPAL DEMARCATION BOARDBRIEFING: PORTFOLIO COMMITTEE ON PROVINCIAL AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT 17 August 2004

2. Presentation: Overview • Introducing the Board; • Mandate and Mission; • Organisational Structure & Staffing; • 2004/2005 Challenges/Programmes; • Financial Issues.

3. Introducing the MDB • Board established in terms of Local Government: Municipal Demarcation Act, 1998 • Independent from Government • Accountable to Parliament • 9 Members: Only Chair full time

4. Board Members and committees

5. Mandate and Mission • Mandate derives from the Constitution and the Municipal Demarcation Act and the Municipal Structures Act. • Board is responsiblefor: • the determination and re-determination of municipal boundaries; • Delimitation of wards for local elections; • Assessing the capacity of municipalities to perform their functions; and advising MECs in this regard for the adjustment powers and functions between district and local municipalities;

6. Organisational Structure and Staffing • Management: 1 Manager & 4 Cluster Heads • Clusters responsible for • Administration; • Finance; • Geographic Information Systems; • Research and Implementation. • Board’s staff establishment comprises a total of 27 positions – some positions vacant; • 85,7% of Staff Black; • 4,7% of Staff disabled; • 38% Female.

7. Programmes & Projects • The Board’s programmes and projects cover: • Ongoing Boundary Re-determinations; • Ongoing Technical Correction of Municipal Boundaries; • Alignment of service delivery boundaries with municipal boundaries; • Wards in 2004/2005 for the 2005/2006 local elections; • Investigation into metropolitan municipalities; • Investigation into the roads function; • Investigation into Cross Boundary Municipalities (commissioned by DPLG and finalised) • Consultation on and implementation of the report on future of District Management Areas; • Annual Municipal Capacity assessments • Investigation into municipalities performing poorly. • The focus for the 2004/2005 financial year is on ward delimitation for the upcoming local elections.

8. Challenges:Determination of Municipal Boundaries Background • Prior to 5 December 2000 elections 843 municipalities rationalised to 284 through demarcation process; • Work is ongoing as a result of requests being received, and technical correction of municipal boundaries. Requests received for Re-determinations • Since 5 December 2000 some 128 requests received of which 65 have been finalised or are in the legal process, and 63 are being investigated. Technical Correction of Municipal Boundaries • Advanced technology used to improve municipal boundaries; • Re-determination technical in nature and aimed at correcting existing maps; • Initial approach of the Board was to get affected municipalities to concur, thus eliminating the need for a section 26 process; • However there has been a poor response from provinces and municipalities; • Board has therefore decided to embark, where possible and with the understanding that ward delimitation may not be adversely affected, on a full demarcation process, beginning with section 26, during the 2004/05 financial year. • 564 cases have been identified for possible correction, of which 117 are already in the legal process. Programme for 2004/2005 • Finalise urgent cases and cases that will not adversely affect the ward delimitation process; • Do preparatory work on those that will adversely affect the ward delimitation process, but which will only be finalised after the local elections; .

9. ALIGNMENT OF MUNICIPAL AND SERVICE DELIVERY BOUNDARIES • Cabinet resolved that MDB must assist line function Departments to align their service delivery boundaries to municipal boundaries • MDB plays a supporting role • Survey done of national and provincial service delivery boundaries • Key focus areas for support: Magisterial districts and Police districts/wards; • Project to be finalised soon.

10. Challenges: Background: Wards: 5 December 2000 elections

11. Ward delimitation: Basics • Ward delimitation done in terms of Local Government Municipal Structures Act, 1998 • Ward delimitation to be finalised during current financial year (2004/05), in preparation for the 2005 local elections; • Wards to be delimited for 231 local and 6 metropolitan municipalities (Municipalities with less that 7 councillors do not have wards – 8 municipalities) • All 3754 wards will have to be reviewed as a result of registration of additional voters; migration and changes to the number of councillors in some municipalities;

12. Criteria for delimitation • All wards to have an equal number of voters (15% deviation from norm allowed) • Avoid splitting of communities • Ward boundaries must be identifiable • To take location into account: • communication and accessibility; • density of population; • topography and physical characteristics; • the number of voters that are entitled to vote within the required time-frame; • The safety and security of voters and election material. • By agreement with IEC: Use VDs as building blocks and do not split VDs • Retain existing ward boundaries if at all possible

13. Phases for ward delimitation and broad time frame • Phase 1 – Planning (October 2003 – June 2004) • Phase 2 – Consultation (June 2004 – December 2004) • Phase 3 – Legal process (January – April 2005) • Phase 4 – Electoral process ( April 2005 – March 2006)

14. Phase 1: Planning: What happened? Broad overview • Planning of delimitation process and programme with involvement of IEC and other stakeholders • MDB “closed” programme for changing outer boundaries of municipalities which will adversely affect the ward delimitation process; • IEC divided the national common voters’ roll – as on 20 Feb 2004 - into municipal segments • Minister (PLG) gazetted the formula for determining the number of councillors (22 April 2004) • MECs responsible for local government determined the number of councillors (10% deviation from formula allowed) • Outstanding number of councillors: KZN & Limpopo • MDB determined the number of ward and the norm (number of voters per ward) for each municipality

15. Phase 2: Consultation: What is happening/planned? • Draft first set of boundaries and make public for comments/alternative proposals (MP, FS, GT, EC, NC, NW and WC completed but KZN & Limpopo number of councillors outstanding) • Hope to have first set of ward boundaries in all provinces published in August 2004 • Closing date for submissions on ward set 1 – end August/beginning September 2004; • Accommodate public inputs and prepare second set of ward boundaries – September 2004 • Release second set of ward boundaries – October 2004 • Public hearings – October/November and if necessary December 2004 • Accommodate public hearing inputs in third set of boundaries – December 2004/January 2005

16. Phase 3: Legal process: What is required by the Structures Act? • Publish third set of ward boundaries in Provincial Gazettes for objections – Feb 2005 • Consider objections and prepare 4th and final set of ward boundaries • Gazette final set of ward boundaries; • Hand over to IEC • Phase 4: Electoral process to be dealt with by IEC

17. How do we do it? • Primarily GIS based • Cluster VDs to fit within minimum and maximum of norm • Apply criteria – 15%, community interest etc • Overlay maps to avoid splitting communities as far as possible • Consult IEC on split VDs on an ongoing basis, to minimise re-registration of voters

18. Problem areas Substantial delay • Behind initial planning. Wanted to start in Feb 2004 but was delayed by national and provincial elections, absence of the formula and the number of councillors MEC Sec 18(3) notices (number of councillors): • 2 Provinces still outstanding • Notice may be amended to correct information or to increase or decrease the number of councillors Splitting of VD’s • number of voters to be estimated • VD’s themselves split communities Cross boundary areas • Try to avoid wards crossing provincial boundaries Changes to outer boundaries • Not recommended – time consuming and can adversely affect ward delimitation process • Not feasible when a large number of voters are affected

19. Challenges: Capacity assessments • Board does capacity assessments annually in compliance with the MSA; • Focus on assisting the MEC’s to adjust municipal powers and functions between district and local municipalities; • Data obtained is used to prepare 47 districts reports, 9 provincial reports and an overall national report on municipal capacity. • As part of this project the Board does, if possible, an in depth study on one function annually. • Last year: Fire services. This year: Municipal roads function.

20. Capacity assessments: 2004/2005 work programme • August 2004: Distributed questionnaire to municipalities and complete field trips and  data collection.  • September 2004: Finalise data capturing and verify the  profiles of  municipalities based on information in the questionnaires.  • October 2004: Drafting of the DC reports.  • November 2004:  Complete the drafting of district reports. First draft of the MDBrecommendations will be sentto MECs. • December 2004: MECs to publish the adjustments so that there is  certainty at local level for the municipalities when they review their IDPs and when they prepare their budgets for the new financial year. • January 2005: Provincial overview reports will be prepared in December and made available to MECs. • February 2005: National overview draft report will be available. • March 2005: National overview report  will be made available to the Minister, MECs and Portfolio Committee.

21. Challenges: Municipalities performing their powers and functions poorly • From the municipal capacity assessments some municipalities identified as poor performers in respect of their powers and functions; • Some demonstrated in the 2003 and 2004 capacity assessments poor capacity and are performing less than 30% of their functions; • MDB recognises the fact that, apart from performance of functions, other factors contribute to the poor performance of municipalities, such as: • The economic, social and spatial realities in South Africa • Large areas both geographically and in population terms lack an economic base and for historical reasons, are plagued with poor institutional capacity • inadequate attention given to the municipalities by national and provincial departments in terms of capacity building.

22. Municipalities performing poorly (cont) • Meetings with affected Provincial departments held in KZN; Eastern Cape; Mpumalanga; Limpopo;North West; • Investigation done in 3 phases: • preliminary assessment; • Study on poor performing local municipalities; • Study on poor performing district municipalities • Based on the preliminary assessment undertaken as phase 1, twenty nine local municipalities were identified for the phase 2 detailed assessment and are spatially represented in the map below:

23. Depiction of Municipalities Identified

24. Capacity: 12 Municipalities performing very poorly; to be closely monitored and further investigated • EC126 Ngqushwa Municipality – Eastern Cape; • KZ211 Vulamehlo Municipality – KwaZulu-Natal; • KZ213 Umzumbe Municipality – KwaZulu-Natal; • KZ215 Ezinqoleni Municipality – KwaZulu-Natal; • KZ233 Indaka Municipality – KwaZulu-Natal; • KZ281 Mbonambi Municipality – KwaZulu-Natal; • KZ283 Ntambanana Municipality – KwaZulu-Natal; • KZ293 Ndwedwe Municipality – KwaZulu-Natal; • MP315 Thembisile Municipality – Mpumalanga, and • NP352 Aganang Municipality – Limpopo • DC16 Xhariep District Municipality • DC17 Motheo District Municipality

25. Challenges: Metropolitan Municipalities • Six metros demarcated by the Board for the 2000 local elections; • Incumbent on the Board to regularly review the boundaries of municipalities to establish as to whether they comply with section 2 of the MSA, and, if so, to determine them as metropolitan municipalities; • The Board has investigated the need to demarcate further metropolitan areas in South Africa; • Data collected on 24 major conurbations, consolidated and analysed. • The Board’s view following the provisional investigation is that no additional metros be declared at this stage • A further study on metros has been commissioned and will be finalised during the 2004/2005 financial year.

26. Challenges: Cross Boundary Municipalities • Board contracted by DPLG in 2003 to prepare report for the Department with options as to how provincial boundaries could be adjusted to dispose of all cross boundary municipalities; • Report submitted to DPLG in July 2003; • Indications from the DPLG that the matter will be attended to in 2004/05; • Requests for re-determinations and technical corrections being attended to on an ongoing basis • Parliament to be approached this year or early next year to authorise some 26 changes to the boundaries of cross boundary municipalities, by national legislation

27. Challenges: District Management areas • Study completed on the future of DMA’s, as part of the Board’s policy review process; • The Board has adopted a policy position on the future of DMA’s; • Only National Conservation Areas and Heritage Sites to be kept as DMA’s; • The rest to be incorporated into local municipalities; • Comments from the Minister for Environmental Affairs and Forestry, some provinces, SALGA and others are awaited • Will also liaise with provinces and IEC on possible disestablishment of some before the local elections

28. Strategic Context: Project prioritisation – 2004/05 • Ward delimitation • Capacity assessments • Monitoring of poor performing municipalities • District Management Areas • Re-determinations of municipal boundaries – except urgent cases • Metropolitan study • Roads study

29. Finance • For the year 2004/05, Board allocated R17,023,000. • Amount inadequate to cover the costs of fulfilling the Board’s mandate properly; • Budgetary shortfalls with respect to the Board’s core responsibilities: • Assessing capacity of municipalities and advising MEC’s; • Delimiting wards for each metro and local, for 2005 local elections. • Activities related to the above.

30. Finance and MTEF Issues • Assistance has been requested from DPLG to secure the additional funding required; • In addition, we have secured some NOK2 million from the Norwegian Embassy • Board’s total shortfall amounts to R5,553,000, but only with respect to ward delimitation, and after taking into account the Norwegian funding.

31. Conclusion • Failure to obtain the additional funding needed by the Board will: • Compromise the ward delimitation process seriously; • Compromise other core functions of the Board; • Disempower the Board to fulfil its constitutional and legal obligations; • Make the Board more dependent on donor funding to fulfil its legislated mandate; • Open up the Board to legal challenges.

32. Thank you