The City of Johannesburg was and remains committed to a comprehensive and integrated budget and city development planning process. This chapter outlines the background to the 2001/2002 City Development Plan and the process that was embarked upon, following the election of the Executive Mayor and the appointment of the Mayoral Committee in December 2000.
2.1 What is a City Development Plan?
The Municipal Systems Act (32 of 2000) stipulates that each local authority must, within a prescribed period, adopt a single, inclusive strategic plan for the development of the municipality which:
- Links, integrates and co-ordinates plans and takes into account proposals for the development of the municipality
- Aligns resources and capacity with the implementation of the plan
- Forms the policy framework and general basis on which annual budgets must be based
It should be noted that the Municipal Systems Act refers to the compilation of an Integrated Development Plan (IDP), which is, from the point of the City of Johannesburg, the same as the City Development Plan (CDP). All future references will thus be to the City Development Plan (CDP) only and it will contain the same information and follow the same process as that of the IDP.
A CDP reflects the following:
- The vision, emphasising the most critical development and internal transformation needs
- An assessment of the existing level of development, specifically referring to communities without access to basic services
- Council's development priorities and development strategies
- A spatial development framework, including provision of basic guidelines for a land-use management system
- Council's operational strategies
- Applicable disaster-management plans
- A financial plan (three-year budget projection)
- Performance indicators and targets
2.2 Background to the city development planning process
Introduction:
Since the formation of Johannesburg's first democratically elected Council following the 1995 local government elections, the new Council found itself confronted with the challenge of running an institution which was technically bankrupt, whose infrastructure and service-delivery programme was in decline. At the same time, the Council had to confront the daily reality that despite the city being the heart of the South African economy, its people were largely poor, that poverty was not being successfully addressed, and that unemployment was high and worsening.
Finding itself in this situation, Council through the Transformation Lekgotla initiated two processes designed to deal with the challenges of restoring the city administration (iGoli 2002) into an effective agent for delivery and governance, while at the same time developing a longer-term strategy (iGoli 2010) to fundamentally review what the vision for the city should be, and what actions need to be implemented in order to deliver on that vision.
While in the short term the iGoli 2002 process was of necessity the priority to restore the city to financial health and create the basic institutional foundations from which to implement the strategy, both processes were carefully designed to complement each other. So while iGoli 2002 was about ensuring that the city has the means to act, iGoli 2010 maps out where the city should be acting and how.
The iGoli 2010 framework:
The iGoli 2010 framework was the result of an intensive process conducted under the auspices of the iGoli 2010 Partnership established by the Transformation Lekgotla, represented by all parties in Council, together with key-stakeholder groups from organised business, labour and civic and ratepayers' associations. The final proposals were a result of the detailed data-driven process conducted by a wide-ranging team of sectoral experts.
The basic approach to develop the iGoli 2010 Framework can be referred to as an "outcomes-based approach" which involved a number of steps:
Step 1: The development and clarification of a vision for Johannesburg to determine the scope of what the city is attempting to achieve (what Johannesburg wants to look like in 10 years). The vision was therefore a critical point of departure for analysis, discussion with key stakeholders, and assessing and measuring success.
Step 2: The translation of the vision into a measurable set of desired outcomes/goals.
Step 3: Comparison against current outcomes in the city (the current situation - describing the current outcomes).
Step 4: Defining the gap by comparing the current outcomes to the desired outcomes - this gap represents the challenge which lies ahead for the city in order to achieve its vision.
Step 5: In order to understand what needs to be done to meet the gap, the current system was analysed. This required a review of both the broad platform for both the economy and human development, as well as the key sectors and human development delivery systems which will be driving future growth, development and prosperity.
Step 6: Describing the limits of the current system and aspects of the type of system required to meet the desired outcomes.
Through employing the above approach systematically, and the testing of current outcomes and outputs against those desired, the strategic challenges that emerged were found to fall largely into three categories:
- Challenges that deal with negative outcomes and outputs such as poor health conditions, inadequate access to basic services
- Challenges that ensure strengths in the system which are key to realisation of the vision (such as good infrastructure for trade and communications) are maintained and supported, and
- Challenges that ensure that new pieces are added to the system which are currently missing or under-supplied (such as advanced infrastructure), and without which the desired outcomes and outputs cannot be delivered.
The proposed framework thus indicated an approach to making a set of choices which balances the allocation of resources and effort across the total set of challenges. The challenges derived from this process were all key to delivering on the vision. The City of Johannesburg thus had to allocate effort and resources across these options.
The proposed strategic agenda of the iGoli 2010 framework thus suggested that the vision can only be realised if based on the foundations of safety, infrastructure and service delivery. In addition, there needs to be a clear activist approach to stimulating growth through competitiveness as well as to stimulating human development through empowerment. In the absence of any of the above, Johannesburg will continue along its current path of stagnant growth, rising unemployment and poverty. The City, therefore, cannot only rely on simply working on its core mandate of infrastructure and service delivery.
The iGoli 2010 Framework is currently being finalised as the long-term City Development Strategy.
2.3 City development planning and budgeting process
The Executive Mayor was elected and in turn appointed the members of the Mayoral Committee, at the inaugural meeting of the City of Johannesburg on 12 December 2000. Subsequesntly, a workshop was held on 13-14 December 2000 that was attended by the Executive Mayor, the Speaker, Members of the Mayoral Committee and senior officials. Since this was the first workshop for the new political leadership, a number of critical issues were discussed including:
- The iGoli 2002 plan
- The iGoli 2010 strategic framework
- The new political system
- The relationship between the council and the utilities, agencies and the corporatised entities
- The fianancial plan; and
- The strategic planning and budget process 2001/2002
The first workshop reviewed the city's ongoing transformation process, highlighted key issues and set the agenda for a strategy-driven process towards achieving its political mandate.
On 8-9 February 2001, the first Budget Lekgotla was held. The purpose of this session was to set out the parameters of the budget for 2001/2002 such as the growth of the budget and the increase in tariffs. The Budget Lekgotla also determined 'indicative allocations', i.e. the capital and operating allocations for each council function. At the meeting, key debates ensued on the financial relationships between the council and its arm's length entities (utilities, agencies and corporatised entities). All line functions and UACs were instructed to prepare detailed budgets conforming to the indicative allocations and within a specified time frame. Formats for the preparation of the 2001/2002 budget and action plans were also distributed to all council functions. The Lekgotla was thus the 'launching pad' for the full-scale budget process in the council.
Shortly after the Budget Lekgotla, a Mayoral Committee workshop was held from 21 to 23 February 2001. The key objectives of the workshop were:
- To consolidate a common understanding of the challenges facing the city and to agree upon a strategic framework to grapple with these challenges
- To ensure alignment between iGoli 2002, the iGoli 2010 strategic framework and the ruling party's mandate
- To closely examine the desired outcomes, programmes and action plans for each portfolio/function for the short and medium term
As a result, political portfolio heads presented templates of their functions to the workshop that included the political mandate, the relationship to iGoli 2010, the outcomes, the strategy, targets and specific actions. Each of the templates were thoroughly discussed and debated.
The workshop was succesful in comprehensively defining the challenges and the strategic framework for each of the functions. The workshop also defined the council's top six priorities, which were confirmed by the Executive Mayor as the six key strategic priorities.
The process resulted in a number of distinctive products which are outlined below.
- The City's key strategic priorities
- City development strategy
- City development plan
- Budget process
2.4 Consultative process
During March 2001 the Mayoral Committee resolved that a public launch of the City Development Planning and budget process for 2001/2002 be hosted on 17 March 2001. The launch comprised two parts, namely a closed stakeholders session where the Executive Mayor presented the six priorities, followed by responses from stakeholders, and an open session where a report-back was given on the closed session and the budget process was publicly launched.
As the initial session was attended by representatives from organised groups only, with limited time to respond, it was maintained that a broader process be embarked upon to consult a wider range of stakeholders.
The follow-up City Development Plan and Budgeting consultation process was undertaken in two parallel thrusts namely, consultative sessions for representatives from organised institutions and consultative sessions at a ward level. The consultative sessions with representatives from organised institutions were hosted in the Council Chamber and ward consultations at accessible venues in or close to each ward.
Metro-wide sectoral sessions
Sectoral consultation sessions were held in the Council Chambers from 26 to 29 March 2001. Issues discussed included: metro-wide priorities, budget allocations per function and the city development planning process.
Meetings per sector took place as follows:
- Business - 26th March
- Labour - 27th March
- Residents, ratepayers and civic organisations - 28th March, and
- NGOs and academic institutions - 29th March.
Ward/ local sessions
Councillor-driven ward consultation sessions took place from 26 March 2001 to 6 April 2001. Issues discussed included: metro-wide priorities, priorities and budget allocations per function, and process and programme. All ward councillors were briefed, supplied with speaker notes (e.g. metro and functional priorities, process issues, etc.), posters and pamphlets.
2.5 Management of drafting process
In the case of the City of Johannesburg, the Executive Mayor and the Mayoral Committee were directly involved in the management of the process. However, the drafting of the CDP was managed by the Corporate Planning Unit in consultation with the Office of the City Manager and the Office of the Budget.
2.6 What will happen after the CDP is approved?
The City Manager will submit a copy of the adopted CDP to the MEC for Development Planning and Local Government. The MEC may within 30 days of receiving a copy, request the council to adjust or amend the plan or to comply with the process. Council must consider the MEC's proposals and within 30 days of receiving the MEC's request, react in writing.
The CDP will be reviewed annually in accordance with an assessment of its performance measurements and to the extent that changing circumstances so demand in accordance with a prescribed process.
2.7 Status of the CDP
An adopted CDP
- Is the principal strategic planning instrument which guides and informs all planning and development, and all decisions with regard to planning, management and development;
- Binds the municipality in the exercise of its executive authority, unless inconsistent with provincial/national legislation, in which case such legislation prevails;
- Binds all other persons to the extent that those parts of the CDP that impose duties or affect the rights of those persons have been passed as a by-law; and
- The spatial development framework contained in the CDP prevails over a plan as defined in the Physical Planning Act