UTHUKELA
DISTRICT MUNICIPALITY
PROFILE
1
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1.
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
2.
2.1
2.2
2.3
2.4
2.5
2.6
3.
4.
4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.1.3
5.
6.
7.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
INTRODUCTION
Overview
Municipalities within the District
Political and Administrative Leadership and Seat of District
Political Representation
SERVICE DELIVERY
Household Infrastructure
Sanitation
Water
Electricity
Refuse Removal
Service Provider
AUDIT OPINIONS
STATE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSESSMENT
Overview of findings on assessment in the Municipality
Governance
Financial Management and Viability
Service Delivery
INFRASTRUCTURE PRIORITIES IN TERMS OF THE MUNICIPAL
TURN-AROUND STRATEGY
MIG PROJECTS
VULNERABILITY CLASSIFICATION
2
3
4
4
5
5
6
7
7
7
8
8
8
8
8
9
9
9
9
10
10
11
15
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Uthukela region has an abundance of natural resources and opportunities,
including the Drakensberg, Tugela River, N3 and N11 national roads and industrial
developments in Ladysmith and Estcourt. The Uthukela area is characterized by a low
revenue base, poor infrastructure, limited access to services, high levels of poverty and
unemployment, skills shortage, lack of resources, low level of education,
underdeveloped land and settlement patterns that make it difficult to plan for effective
service delivery. The district includes five local municipalities.
With regard to basic service delivery, Uthukela has made great strides in reducing the
water backlog to 30% and the sanitation backlog to 36%. A high number of 42% of
households do not use electricity as a means of lighting. Uthukela district has an
average access to infrastructure amongst the districts in the province. An overview of
household access to infrastructure in the district shows a slight improvement from 42%
in 1996 to 50% in 2009.
The Uthukela District municipality and three of the local municipalities have improved
their audit outcomes over time to a financially unqualified with other matters opinion.
The audit outcomes of Indaka and Okhahlamba remain poor.
Uthukela District Municipality has been identified in the KwaZulu-Natal State of Local
Government Assessment as one the municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal affected by
political instability, facing serious challenges in the political and administrative interface,
as well as serious financial management challenges. The District was further identified
as experiencing serious service delivery challenges.
In terms of its Municipal Turn-Around Strategy the Uthukela District Municipality
identified political contestations as the main cause for the disruption of service delivery
The political dynamics in the district also played a major role in the breakdown in
intergovernmental relations in the district. Poor services in the most rural municipalities
need to be addressed, as well as the contestations about water services between the
district and local municipalities.
Three of the five local municipalities in the Uthukela District have been classified as in
the category of most vulnerable by DCoG in terms of functionality, socio-economic
profile and backlog status. This profile confirms that infrastructure delivery in Uthukela
District require an improved governance and intergovernmental relations environment.
The improvement in access to electricity has been negligible and requires concerted
effort, while increased access to piped water should also be prioritised.
3
1.
INTRODUCTION
1.1 Overview1
The district is rich in history, with a wealth of historical buildings, battle sites and
memorials. Uthukela District Municipality derives its name from one of the major rivers
in KwaZulu-Natal, the uThukela River that rises from the Drakensberg and supplies
water to a large portion of KwaZulu-Natal as well as Gauteng. The district municipality
includes five local municipalities, namely Emnambithi, Indaka, Umtshezi, Okhahlamba
and Imbabazane.
Uthukela District Municipality is 11 326.12 sq km in extent and has a population of 723
844. The area is characterized by a low revenue base, poor infrastructure, limited
access to services, high levels of poverty and unemployment, skills shortage, lack of
resources, low level of education, underdeveloped land and settlement patterns that
make it difficult to plan for effective service delivery. The attraction of investors, tourists
and skilled human resources is a challenge due to Uthukela’s location away from the
two major cities, namely Durban and Johannesburg.
The following priority issues were identified:
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
Backlogs in the provision of sustainable infrastructure, water and sanitation services.
Economic development.
Prevention of ill health and promotion of wellness.
Financial and administrative capacity.
Accountability and public participation institutions.
Public safety and security.
Tenure security and shelter.
Coordination of services.
Addressing the injustices of the apartheid past.
The population of Uthukela is relatively young, with more than 60% being 5–34 years of
age. Nearly 34% of households do not have any income, with more than 46% falling
below the minimum living level of R22 452 per annum. According to the KwaZulu-Natal
Income Dynamics Survey conducted in 2004, 22% of households in KwaZulu-Natal
were chronically poor, with 31% being momentarily poor. The families within Uthukela
are therefore far worse off than the average households in the rest of KwaZulu-Natal.
With regard to basic service delivery, Uthukela has made great strides in reducing the
water backlog to 30% and the sanitation backlog to 36%. However, 18% of households
still do not have access to sanitation. What is encouraging though is that the bucket
latrine system is being phased out with just under 1% of households still using this type
of sanitation system. A staggering 42% of households do not use electricity as a means
of lighting. The percentage of households that use candles as a source of lighting
Source: Gaffney’s, November 2009: Local Government in South Africa 2009 – 2001, Official Yearbook:
p 847 - 849
1
4
stands at 38%, with the remainder using gas, paraffin and solar power as a source of
lighting. Refuse is a serious environmental health issue, with 18% of households having
no means of waste disposal.
The Uthukela region has an abundance of natural resources and opportunities,
including the Drakensberg, Tugela River, N3 and N11 national roads and industrial
developments in Ladysmith and Estcourt. The natural beauty of Uthukela should be
turned to advantage through marketing and the maintenance of infrastructure in order to
secure a lucrative tourism industry. Uthukela has developed the multicultural centre
concept to gain some benefits from the 2010 Soccer World Cup but requires funding
and buy-in. The proposed cableway in the Mweni Valley, linking KwaZulu-Natal and
Lesotho, will also promote tourism in the district and investigations are underway to
establish a tourism development (chalets and hotel) at the Woodstock Dam. An initial
viability study was also completed for the Big Five Game Reserve/Bridge to Nowhere
initiative, which has the potential to create 4 000 jobs.
1.2
Municipalities within the Uthukela District
The details of the five local municipalities within the District are tabled below:
Table 1: Statistics of the Uthukela District and Local Municipalities
Municipalities within the
District
Uthukela District Municipality
Emnambithi-Ladysmith Local
Municipality
Imbabazane Local Municipality
Indaka Local Municipality
Area (km²)
in 2009
Area (km2) after 2011
Local Govt Elections
& % change
Population
No. of
Households
Poverty Rate
11,326.12
11,326.12
-
723,844
141,481
68.00%
2,964.84
2,964.84
-
239,703
50,887
54.11%
985.24
1,426.31
44.77%
142,505
24,865
76.79%
991.54
991.54
-
102,819
21,343
82.54%
Okhahlamba Local Municipality
3,475.48
3,970.98
14.26%
153,341
28,865
70.71%
Umtshezi Local Municipality
Uthukela District Management Area
(Giants
Castle Game Reserve
1,972.45
1,972.45
-
84,954
15,422
53.05%
521
100
70.00%
1.3
To be incorporated into
936.57
the local municipalities
Political and Administrative Leadership and Seat of District2
Political Leadership: Executive Mayor: Ms DCP Mazibuko
Administrative Leadership: Acting Municipal Manager: Mr J N Madondo
The head office of the District is located in Ladysmith.
2
Source: Uthukela DM; August 2011
5
1.4
Political representation3
Table 2: Local Government Election 2006 / Provincial and National Elections 2009
comparison:
Leading
Parties in
the
Elections
1st
2nd
3rd
4th
Local Government Elections 2006
Party
Party Votes and
Ward Votes and
%
%
IFP
ANC
DA
ACDP
Other
Totals
68,855
53,349
5,366
2,180
3,997
133,747
51.5%
39.9%
4.0%
1.6%
3.0%
100%
69,019
52,606
5,209
2,003
4,830
133,667
51.6%
39.4%
3.9%
1.5%
3.6%
100%
Councillor Seats
Party
Seats %
IFP
ANC
DA
16
12
2
Other
Totals
30
53.3%
40.0%
6.7%
%
%
100%
Provincial Elections 2009
Party
Votes and %
National Elections 2009
Party
Votes and %
ANC
IFP
DA
MF
Other
ANC
IFP
DA
MF
Other
111,584
75,382
6,996
1,235
5,196
200,393
55.7%
37.6%
3.5%
0.6%
2.6%
100%
Figure 1: 2011 Local Government Election results and seat allocations:
3
UPDATE Aug’09: DC40 seats - IFP(50%) 6 seats, ANC(42%) 5 seats, DA(8%) 1 seat, Total 12 DC40 seats
6
115,975
71,879
8,139
1,143
6,445
203,581
57.0%
35.3%
4.0%
0.6%
3.2%
100%
The ANC is the leading party in terms of proportional DC40 Seats in Uthukela, with 7
seats of 13 seats.
2.
SERVICE DELIVERY4
2.1
uThukela District Municipality Household Infrastructure
Household Infrastructure Overview
KZN - DC23 Uthukela District Municipality
0.80
0.70
0.60
0.50
Index
0.40
0.30
0.20
KZN - DC23…
South Africa
0.10
0.00
1996 1997 1998 1999 2000 2001 2002 2003 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009
Source: IHS Global Insight Regional eXplorer version 574
Uthukela district has got an average access to infrastructure amongst the districts in the
province. An overview of household access to infrastructure in the district shows a slight
improvement from 42% in 1996 to 50% in 2009.
2.2
Sanitation
With regard to access to sanitation, the district municipality’s household access to
hygienic toilets has gone up from 35% in 1996 to 59% in 2009. The improvement in
access to sanitation in general in the Municipality is mainly due to the increase in the
use of pit latrines with ventilation.
4
Sources: IHS Global Insight Regional eXplorer version 574 and Municipal Demarcation Board, 2008:
National Report on Local Government Capacity, District and Local Municipalities, MDB Capacity
Assessment, 2007/2008.
7
2.3
Water
Access to piped water above RDP level increased by only 5%, from 51% in 1996 to
56% in 2009. Similarly, there has been a slight increase as well in access to piped water
below RDP level. About 25% of the households do not have access to this service.
2.4
Electricity
While electricity connections are the biggest infrastructure achievement in most of the
municipalities around the country, household access to electricity connections in the
district increased by a percentage from 43% in 1996 to 44% in 2009.
2.5
Refuse removal
Access to formal refuse removal service in the district has been lower since 1996
(27%). By 2009, some of the formal refuse removal services in the district were reduced
to community removal. While this is the case, personal refuse removal went up over the
years reaching 60% in 2009. The district is rural and the low levels of formal refuse
removal must be taken in the context of low settlement densities, where on-site disposal
or backyard burning of waste is sometimes appropriate.
2.6
Service provider
Uthukela district does not have authority and does not perform the electricity reticulation
function. The district, however, has authority and performs potable water and sanitation
functions. The district has no authority and is not performing the refuse removal, refuse
dumps and solid waste disposal function.
3.
AUDIT OPINIONS
Table 3: Audit Opinions of the District and Local Municipalities
Municipality
Audit
Opinion
2005/6
uThukela DM
Financially
unqualified
with other
matters
Emnambithi/Ladysmith Qualified
LM
Imbabazane LM
Financially
unqualified
Audit
Opinion
2006/7
Qualified
Financially
unqualified
with other
matters
Qualified
8
Audit
Opinion
2007/8
Financially
unqualified
with other
matters
Financially
unqualified
with other
matters
Financially
unqualified
Audit
Opinion
2008/9
Financially
unqualified
with other
matters
Qualified
Financially
unqualified
Audit
Opinion
2009/10
Financially
unqualified
with
findings
Financially
unqualified
with
findings
Financially
unqualified
with other
matters
Disclaimer
Disclaimer
Qualified
with other
matters
Indaka LM
Qualified
Qualified
Okhahlamba LM
Disclaimer
Adverse
Umtshezi LM
Qualified
Financially
unqualified
with other
matters
Source: Auditor-General 2009 and 2011, see. www.agsa.co.za
with
findings
Disclaimer
Disclaimer
Financially
unqualified
with
findings
with
findings
Adverse
Qualified
Financially
unqualified
with
findings
From 2005/6 to 2009/10 Indaka and Okhahlamba have shown no improvement in their
audit outcomes. In 2007/8 and 2009/10 uThukela district, Emnambithi, Imbabazane and
Umtshezi secured financially unqualified audit results.
4.
STATE OF LOCAL GOVERNMENT ASSESSMENT
4.1
Overview of findings on assessment in the municipality
Uthukela District Municipality was identified in the KwaZulu-Natal State of Local
Government Assessment as one of 19 municipalities that recorded serious challenges
in most of the focus areas and prioritised for immediate intervention.
4.1.1 Governance
Uthukela District Municipality was one of 17 municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal affected by
political instability. The Provincial Report lists a number of causes of political instability
including: the lack of understanding and adherence to the roles and responsibilities of
political office bearers, interference in council matters from the regional and provincial
political structures, a lack of deliberations on matters in council, domination of some
councils by politically powerful administrations, power struggles between political office
bearers from same party and a lack of communication and public participation
frameworks creates environment for uncoordinated interaction with community.
Uthukela District Municipality was one of 8 municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal facing
serious challenges in the political and administrative interface. According to the
Provincial Report the most recorded complaint by stakeholders is the tendency to
appoint politically aligned Municipal Managers and Section 57 Managers. Some of the
other reasons for a poor relationship between the political and administrative
components which negatively affects service delivery are: councillors getting over-ruled
by officials; political office bearers interfering in administrative function; lack of strategic
direction on service delivery by council due to poor leadership and focus on political rule
in council; and staff forced to show political alliance to ensure job security.
4.1.2 Financial Management and Viability
Uthukela District Municipality was also one of 30 municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal that
were facing serious financial management challenges. The Provincial Report lists some
9
of these concerns, including: poor financial planning, inadequately skilled staff
appointed, lack of proper financial controls, poor financial competencies of elected
representatives, and unemployment and poverty had a negative effect on credit control
and income. There is also a general perception that councils are not transparent when it
comes to financial policies and activities and that the reason for this is to hide their
corrupt practices from the public.
4.1.3 Service Delivery
Twenty municipalities in KwaZulu-Natal, including Uthukela District Municipality, were
experiencing serious service delivery challenges. The Provincial Report was of the view
that the allocation of powers and functions between the different categories of
municipalities is impeding service delivery. This factor, coupled with the lack of
adequate funding and objective prioritisation of needs, appear to be the major factors
giving rise to service delivery challenges.
5.
INFRASTRUCTURE PRIORITIES OF THE MUNICIPAL TURN-AROUND
STRATEGY
The Uthukela District Municipality identified political contestations as the main cause for
the disruption of service delivery in its evaluation of the MTAS issues in the Uthukela
family of municipalities. The political dynamics in the district also played a major role in
the breakdown in intergovernmental relations, especially between the District
Municipality and the Emnambithi Local Municipality. The Uthukela District identified the
challenges and actions per municipality in terms of MTAS implementation.
Table 4: Infrastructure delivery in terms of the MTAS
Challenges
INDAKA LM
EMNAMBITHI
LM
IMBABAZANE
LM
UMTSHEZI LM
Municipality is
rural and has
limited capacity
The municipality
sometimes
provides water
which is a district
function and
hence faces
audit query
issues.
Political
contestations
prevail on
service delivery.
Political
contestations on
service delivery
The whole
municipality is
characterized by
lack of services
There are
political
manifestations in
the delivery of
services.
MTAS Municipal The Municipality
Actions
should
The Municipality
has a focused
10
Water is the
District function;
The Council is
not specific on
implement the
strategy with all
stakeholders as
indicated
including
COGTA; Energy,
Eskom and WA
MTAS which has
to be
implemented as
such.
however, the
strategy does not
indicate how the
District
Municipality will
be engaged to
facilitate delivery.
how and on
which problem
areas the District
Municipality will
be engaged on
water delivery
The Municipality
does not indicate
how the issues
of refuse
removal and
access roads will
be addressed.
6.
MIG PROJECTS)5
Table 6: MIG projects
Municipality
Project name
Okhahlamab
a LM
Kwaxaba Road
Ward 4
Langlook
Community Centre
Mamfefetheni
Service Centre
Winterton Tarred
Roads
PMU
Moyeni/ Zwelisha
RWSS Ph. 4
(Dukuza /
Hoffenthal) (AFA)
MIS 172338
Roosboom
Sanitation Project
Phase 2 (AFA)
MIS 167203
Jononoskop
Sanitation (AFA)
MIS 188292
Mcitsheni
Sanitation Phase 2
Driefontein
Complex Bulk
Emnambithi/
Ladysmith
LM
MIG funds
Actual expenditure
in
the
2010/11
financial year
Project
status
(Registered/design/
tender/constructio
n)
Project
category
(e.g.
water,
sanitation, PMU)
R 2,306,613.55
R 111,541.13
Completed
R 4,180,000.00
R 4,180,000.00
Completed
R 5,586,000.00
R
R14,300,000.00
R 5,586,000.00
Completed
Road & Stormwater
Multi purpose
community halls
Multi purpose
community halls
R 1,608,274.28
R 55,203.28
Completed
Road & Stormwater
Other
R56,013,761.00
R 18,149,901.40
Construction
Water
R11,316,207.00
R 30,086.26
Completed
Sanitation
R 17,300,960.00
R 5,988,755.00
Construction
Sanitation
R 18,036,858.00
R 7,758,395.69
Construction
Sanitation
R126,101,362.00
R 20,457,536.48
Construction
Water
5
According to the June 2011 monthly non-financial report on Municipal Infrastructure Grant, KwZulu-Natal has not
adopted the new format of reporting on MIG projects. As a result, it becomes a challenge to track the
implementation of MIG projects in that province.
11
Indaka LM
Umtshezi LM
Water Supply
Pedestrian/
Vehicular Bridge
Steadville to
Ndomba Cemetery
Pedestrian Bridge
Ezakheni to
Esidakeni
Pedestrian Bridge
Watersmeet to
Burford
Ezakheni Surfaced
Roads and
Stormwater
Construction of
Emahhukwini
Community Hall
Peacetown Taxi
Rank
Establishment of a
New Landfill Site
Vehicular Bridge
Baldaskraal to
Lucitania
Construction of
Ezakheni Sports
Complex
Mbondwane Road
Cwebelele Road
Ilenge Road
Phase 3
Emachibini Road
Waaihoek Road
Phase 1
Mgejakazi Road
Phase 2
Inkinga Road
Phase 2
Ezihlabathini Road
Phase 1
Limehill Access
Phase 2
Ilenge Road
Phase 4
Nazareth
Sanitation Phase 2
Fitty Park
Umhlumayo
Extensions
Kwahlathi
Sanitation (AFA)
MIS 167210
Intabamnyama
Gravel Road
Ingavusa Gravel
Road (AFA) MIS
177090
Ncujana gravel
road
Mimosadale
Gravel Road –
R 4,774,000.00
R 183,483.17
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 1,600,000.00
R 1,205.98
Design & Tender
Road & Stormwater
R 1,600,000.00
R 1,205.98
Design & Tender
Road & Stormwater
R 50,000,000.00
R 18,526,530.94
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,000,000.00
R 66,959.14
Construction
Multi purpose
community halls
R 2,239,850.21
R 1,793.51
Design & Tender
R 16,479,865.73
R 814,102.50
Design & Tender
Taxi Ranks
Solid waste disposal
site
R 1,412,405.28
R 96,816.55
Registered
Road & Stormwater
R 21,443,400.00
R 1,100,000.00
R 1,100,000.00
R 1,466,279.40
R 407,216.94
R 85,917.73
Registered
Construction
Construction
Sport Facility
Road & Stormwater
Road & Stormwater
R 880,000.00
R 1,320,000.00
R 27,097.56
R 74,052.12
Construction
Construction
Road & Stormwater
Road & Stormwater
R 2,500,000.00
R 2,412,797.86
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,500,000.00
R 2,455,117.02
Registered
Road & Stormwater
R 2,000,000.00
R 1,965,301.46
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,000,000.00
R 2,000,000.00
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,500,000.00
R 2,237,436.52
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 3,300,000.00
R 3,066,262.50
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,225,654.00
R 2,225,366.50
Design & Tender
Sanitation
R 15,700,000.00
R 4,119,847.40
Registered
Water
R 15,142,933.00
R 2,334,046.00
Completed
Sanitation
R 3,621,530.08
R 455,905.90
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 1,819,200.00
R 96,458.86
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,250,000.00
R 1,375,432.49
Completed
Road & Stormwater
R 2,775,000.00
R 78,523.30
Construction
Road & Stormwater
12
Imbabazane
LM
Rehabilitation
Colita Gravel
Road –
Rehabilitation
(AFA) MIS 182353
Cornfields Clinic
Access Road
(AFA) MIS 184583
Wembezi DSection Gravel
Road –
Rehabilitation
(AFA) MIS 184627
Frere Creche
Ward 6
Mhlumba Creche
Mahashini Creche
Ward 2
Mshayazafe
Community Hall
Brynmbella Gravel
Access Road
Rehabilitation
Nkaseni Gravel
Access Road
Rehabilitation
Esiphetwini Gravel
Roads Rehabilitation
Gomba gravel
access road –
Rehabilitation
Mzobotsheni
Gravel Road Rehabilitation
Chieveley Gravel
Road Rehabilitation
(Ward 6)
Ganahoek Gravel
Road Rehabilitation
(Ward 5)
Imbabazane LM
Ward 12
Sanitation Project
BhekuzuluEpangweni
Community Water
Supply (AFA) MIS
201661
Nyezane
Sanitation Project
Silimangamehlo /
Emodolobheni
Sanitation Project
(AFA) MIS 188307
Ntabamhlophe
Water Supply
Phase 4 to 13
Edashi Sanitation
R 2,407,024.10
R 351,794.88
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 1,201,130.40
R 220,712.08
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,178,760.98
R 239,410.10
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 725,000.00
R 725,000.00
R 75,159.63
R 60,438.24
Design & Tender
Design & Tender
Child care fac
Child care fac
R 725,000.00
R 60,438.24
Design & Tender
R 2,405,000.00
R 132,000.00
Design & Tender
Child care fac
Multi purpose
community halls
R 3,375,000.00
R 1,253,374.08
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 1,377,000.00
R 961,405.27
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,030,400.00
R 157,477.32
Registered
Road & Stormwater
R 2,142,000.00
R 1,466,791.72
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,907,000.00
R 476,670.16
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,180,000.00
R 433,434.36
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 5,250,000.00
R 843,131.21
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 22,150,856.00
R 617,400.00
Registered
Sanitation
R239,235,494.74
R 930,000.00
Design & Tender
Water
R 4,267,859.00
R 4,190,971.50
Design & Tender
Sanitation
R 12,088,177.00
R 3,927,298.00
Construction
Sanitation
R 70,891,154.00
R 10,016,516.00
R 30,549,651.41
R 425,834.53
Construction
Completed
Water
Sanitation
13
Project Phase 2
(AFA) MIS 167200
Emahlutshini
Sanitation Phase 2
(AFA1) MIS
167221
KwaDlamini
Sanitation Project
Phase 2 (AFA1)
MIS 167212
KwaMkhize
Sanitation Project
Phase 2 (AFA)
MIS 167214
Community Hall
Ward 10
Mahlubi-Mangwe
Gravel Road
Thamela Gravel
Road
Mbhaza Gravel
Road
Pedestrian Bridge
Sobabile/
GoodhomeNtabamhlope
Pedestrian Bridge
Lomode/ Loskop
Pedestrian Bridge
- Silimangamehlo/
Ngodini - Loskop
Injeza Low Water
Pedestrian Bridge
Ward 8
Jikeleza Gravel
Road
Zakwe Access
Gravel Road
Rehabilitation
Ward 3
Msimango Access
Gravel Road
Rehabilitation
Ward 5
Scelukwedlula
Gravel Road
Rehabilitation
Ward 8
Ngunjini / Dabe
Low Water
Pedestrian Bridge
Ward 9 and 10
Emadabeni /
Mpolombeni Low
Water Pedestrian
Bridge Ward 9
De Klerk Clinic
Low Water
Pedestrian Bridge
Ward 4 and 5
Source: All MIG projects, June 2011
R 9,977,616.00
R 27,339.00
Completed
Sanitation
R 3,344,318.00
R 4,806.89
Completed
Sanitation
R 2,454,326.00
R 421,818.03
Completed
R 1,665,470.00
R 71,933.97
Construction
Sanitation
Multi purpose
community halls
R 4,500,000.00
R 89,151.39
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 4,500,000.00
R 75,163.51
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 1,125,000.00
R 42,948.72
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 800,000.00
R 789,842.90
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,000,000.00
R 910,440.62
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,000,000.00
R 915,658.83
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,400,300.00
R 2,376,561.48
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 1,875,000.00
R 1,008,540.82
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,625,000.00
R 1,741,478.03
Registered
Road & Stormwater
R 3,375,000.00
R 2,145,273.75
Registered
Road & Stormwater
R 4,500,000.00
R 2,611,719.94
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,000,000.00
R 827,820.30
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 2,400,300.00
R 794,983.79
Construction
Road & Stormwater
R 907,000.00
R 438,381.24
Construction
Road & Stormwater
14
The June 2011 non-financial report on MIG states that Uthukela district and its locals
did not submit their MIG reports for the month of June. In Emnambith/Ladysmith,
Umtshezi and Imbabazane most MIG projects are about roads and stormwater. The
aforementioned municipalities have most of their projects at a construction stage. In the
case of Okhahlamba there are already a number of projects that have been completed.
7.
VULNERABILITY CLASSIFICATION
The DCoG Municipal Spatial Classification System was designed to develop municipal
profiles according to spatial location, based upon results from indicator sets on
functionality, socio-economic profile and backlog status. Its purpose is to inform a
differentiated approach to municipalities.
The four municipal classifications developed by DCoG are:
Class 1: Most vulnerable (57 local municipalities)
Class 2: Second most vulnerable (58 local municipalities)
Class 3: Second highest performing (58 local municipalities)
Class 4: Highest performing (58 local municipalities)
The five local municipalities in the Uthukela District can be classified as follow:
Table 6: Vulnerability Classification
Local Municipality
EmnambithiLadysmith
Imbabazane
Indaka
Okhahlamba
Umtshezi
Classification
Second highest
performing
Most vulnerable
Most vulnerable
Most vulnerable
Second highest
performing
From this table it is evident that three of the five local municipalities in the Uthukela
District fall into the most vulnerable category.
15