Cape Town - Community activists are slamming the City of Cape Town for using manipulative tactics to get their way with budget related proposals.
They claim this is due to a lack of information to the people on the ground and a broken communication system.
They call for an inclusive and transparent approach in addressing issues such as the expenditure of public funding and changes in municipal tariffs.
Peter Martin, the chairperson of the Steenberg Community Forum, said they were calling for transparency.
“What we see within the City of Cape Town is the manipulation of the masses and the misuse of power by both the political structures and the administration,” he said.
“All that people get is a glimpse of what the politicians have decided, and very few people can see they are being misled and manipulated into believing that the government is for them.
“That's not democracy. It's monarchy covered in lies.’’
He said the manner in which public participation processes are structured and presented to people spoke in favour of the government and not for the people.
‘’Communities receive an already complete draft which is presented over an hour, then it is briefly explained in 30 minutes, and the people are given 20 minutes to ask questions or give an input,’’ he added.
“At that time, they hadn't processed the concept and barely understood it.
“How do you then expect them to make an informed decision? ”Obviously, the ratepayers want to see change in their communities and get excited when they are promised new developments.
‘’We say create a table for the people in the council, involve them throughout the stages of all planning.
“Budgets, investment, public loans and expenditures should be brought before the people prior to the professional approvals."
Secretary of the Princess Vlei Forum, Craig Cerff, said they have been receiving positive responses from various communities.
They are continuing with workshops and direct engagements with groups and organisations to explain their vision and brainstorm to better address the issue.
Cerff said they are not against the government but rather want fairness and the voices of the people to be heard.
Mboniswa Chitha, a councillor in Philippi, previously told the Weekend Argus the City was expecting people to take part in public participation without fully engaging them.
He said the majority of people in underprivileged communities had little knowledge, and only a few participated due to lack of information.
“How do you expect them to comment on something they don't know?” he said.
“As good as it sounds, we know they're quick to make promises and then leave us (councillors) in the communities to deal with the disgruntled residents when they fail to deliver.”
Siseko Mbandezi, the City’s Mayco member for finance said the City disagrees with the activists, saying this year, "due to the more than 50 community meetings we had and other grassroots engagements, the majority of the comments were submitted via the community meetings.
"He said the budget cycle starts eight months ahead of the statutory public participation period already and the City has an open door policy, and engages with residents and organisations throughout the year and not only during public participation periods.
"Engagements happen with Subcouncils, who engage Community Based Organisations and Ward Committee members to identify priority areas for the particular wards. Much work starts early on in the process to see what is the most affordable and fair proposals that can be made without jeopardising the services that need to be delivered as well as the investments required for a growing future-fit city. Therefore, the wiggle room to lower it substantially, despite public calls, is limited as the City must provide a sustainable service. Already the cost of service provision is not adequately covered by the tariff income and it is completely unaffordable for instance for the City not to have tariff increases when it is faced with the massive increases from Eskom. To totally absorb the big increases, it would be unaffordable for the City, and in fact Cape Town’s ratepayers. This is an example of considering comments, but feasibility, affordability requirements simply cannot give commentators what they are requesting."