Thanks for that. That went places I didn’t expect.
There’s a point made in that discussion, that folks will spew venom about [whatever] around the braai but ask them to take 5 minutes to post their objection on a web site that says it will take your concerns to government and then the flesh is weak.
Which is really how I got directed to that website. I am trying to start a discussion in my suburb about the electricity tariffs (there are other increases, but I can only die on one hill at a time, and electricity is what will hit me the hardest). At the moment the tariffs are proposed, not actual, and there are public feedback sessions (required by law) in the next couple of weeks. So I am trying to get people to think about these things and then go to one of these sessions. If we don’t tell the City what we think, we can’t get cross when they disregard what we didn’t say (but we will anyway).
Our local councillors have actually been calling for a greater public participation in the whole local governance process. They just aren’t very keen to tell us what meetings are happening when and how one may attend.
Clearly there ARE ways of getting council, or at least the people who apply the by-laws, to sit down and listen to your concerns and maybe to even go you the green light. This is evident to anybody who lives where I live because residents of several adjacent blocks managed to get permission to put up entry control systems on roads and even to physically close some roads outside of peak hours. A demonstration of what people can achieve when they get organised beyond complaining on Facebook.
But I am giving up hope. The councillors alternate between being clueless - they don’t tell us anything - and knowing everything according to what suits them. Where I live is opposition party land, and their main strategy just seems to get folks angry, even if it means that they have a not well defined relationship with the truth*. And their idea of public participation is “vote for us”.
I’ve said some disparaging things here. I must say that most of them seem to work very hard for the stipend they get from the City when the lights go out and the City (as usual) is not providing any information.
But I am regretting the whole business now. Too many of my residents are taking a belligerent but also uninformed response. It’s clear that most haven’t read the existing tariffs, let alone the proposals. They have no desire to actually engage with the municipality.
OK… they do in a way. We had such a session a while back, arranged by one of our councillors (the suburb is split across multiple wards) and although the City Power guys were trying to field questions, it quickly descended into “questions” that were actually just profanities and insults handed out by “engineers” (I didn’t know we had so many in the neighbourhood) or parents thereof. I get the anger and anguish from people whose businesses are taking a pounding, but what went on was not helpful at all. I was hugely impressed that the leader of the City Power delegation didn’t take his team out of there and punch somebody on the way out.
Anyway, I now have to go to that meeting on the 10th otherwise it will be noted that big gob himself wasn’t there.
So far my posting to dearsouthafrica.co.za has bought forth an appeal for funding and a chance to turn what I typed in a box asking me what I thought about the tariffs into a campaign. If I had known about the connection to the politician you refer to, I wouldn’t have bothered.
Anyway, I thank you all for your kind and helpful responses. Typically, I think, of this forum, the bigger, complete picture is being seen, and that’s something I sometimes lose sight of.
* example 1. In 2016 we got a DA mayor heading a minority local government with some sort of supply and confidence deal with - wait for it - the EFF. He was mayor, he got to appoint the executive committee (the people who can actually tell City Power what to do and who set the budgets). He made one of his priorities the improvement of a particular substation what was failing with boring regularity. He got in “experts” who drew up a list of work and a budget. He got his committee to approve the budget. The work was done. The substation kept on failing. Last year, the DA, now in opposition, published a report showing how all the wrong things at that station were fixed and the money should have spent on some other list of things. Conveniently forgetting to mention that they had oversight at the time, approved the budget and all went down there to get their selfies with their own grinning mayor and that it was them that had spent that money so badly.
Example 2. Now recently I posted that since 2016 we had nine mayors and nine city governments, none of the mayors representing a party that had a majority. Last year coalition #8 got overthrown when one of it’s member parties switched sides. Also there was a controversial increase in property rates. The majority party in the recently voted out coalition goes on the warpath about what crooks (coalition #9) are doing to our property rates. But nearly all of the re-valuing process (and the valuations are not done by council, but by professionals who are not in the employ of the City) happened on their watch. But they don’t tell you that bit. The last step, over which they did not preside, was the presenting of the updated valuations roll to the Mayor. So the valuations had already been set in stone before they were thrown out.
Now, I actually get that the City is in a financial mess and needs to get some money in. It hurts my pocket as much as anybody else’s, but something has to give here. I am pretty sure that the valuations would have been the same no matter who was mayor at the time. This impression was reinforced when OUTA got outraged and said they had a deal with a specialist property valuation firm who would give you a valuation (at a very reasonable cost) that you could use in your fight against the tyranny. I took the bait. The valuation arrived suspiciously quickly and was within 100K of the City’s.
None of the outrage, in the end, was about the actual quantum of the increase. It was about who could get blamed for it. Our leaders and would-be leaders are not telling us what we SHOULD hear, they are telling us what they guess (often correctly) we WANT to hear.