The following letter was sent to the Municipal Manager (with Council CC’ed):
“Dear Sir.
RE: OBJECTION TO PUBLIC PARTICIPATION PROCESS – IDP, BUDGET, WSDP,
ELECTRICITY AND RELATED DOCUMENTS | RESERVATION OF RIGHTS
We refer to the current public participation process relating to the draft IDP, budget, WSDP,
Electricity and all associated policies, plans, and documents under review by the Overstrand
Municipality.
As the comment period now draws to a close, the Overstrand Accountability Collective (OVAC)
places on record its objection to the process as conducted.
While we note the Municipality’s position that the process complies with the timelines set out in
the Municipal Finance Management Act, this does not address the practical ability of affected
parties to meaningfully engage with the volume, complexity, and scope of the documents
presented for public comment.
OVAC specifically records that:
- The number and technical nature of the documents placed under review materially limit the ability of stakeholders to properly analyse and respond within the prescribed timeframe;
- Key information is often only available at a late stage in the process, further constraining meaningful engagement;
- Relevant information and supporting documentation have been requested but have not been supplied, making it impossible to comment in a properly informed and responsible manner; and
- OVAC engaged with the Municipality on electricity-related matters and submitted various queries, some of which were responded to. However, a specific request for a meeting to meaningfully engage on these issues was not addressed. This is indicative of a broader lack of meaningful engagement and responsiveness within the process.
OVAC further records its strong objection to the assertion by the Municipal Manager that the
time spent engaging on these concerns could have been better utilised to review and comment
on the documents. This statement fails to recognise that raising concerns about the adequacy
and integrity of the process forms an integral part of meaningful public participation.
It must also be recognised that members of the public, including ratepayers, are not resourced
in the same manner as the Municipality. Expecting the average working person to meaningfully
interrogate extensive and technical municipal documentation within limited timeframes is
inherently unreasonable, particularly when municipal officials are tasked and remunerated to
perform such functions on a full-time basis.
In these circumstances, OVAC does not consider that sufficient time or opportunity has been
afforded to properly interrogate and respond to the full suite of documents under consideration,
which raises concerns regarding the overall fairness and reasonableness of the process.
Accordingly:
- OVAC records that it has been materially constrained in its ability to provide comprehensive and informed comment within the prescribed timeframe;
- OVAC does not accept that the process, in its current form, meets the standard of meaningful public participation as contemplated in the Constitution of South Africa; and
- OVAC hereby reserves all its rights in respect of the process and any decisions arising from it.
In particular, OVAC places on record that it does not recognise or accept the validity of any
decisions, approvals, or documents adopted pursuant to this process, to the extent that they
rely on a public participation procedure that has not allowed for proper and meaningful
engagement.
This objection is submitted without prejudice to any further submissions, actions, or remedies
that OVAC may elect to pursue.
Yours Truly
Anton Kruger
OVAC”
