1. Presented by: Mr NM Jack Date: 23 May 2012 1

2. Purpose This presentation will cover progress made by Pixley ka Seme District Municipality in terms of its Accreditation since inception. We will focus on; 1. A background of the District. 2. Integration of the Housing Unit into the District Municipality 3. Intergovernmental Relations 4. Projects 5. HSS and Needs Register 6. Plans and Policies 7. Challenges 8. Conclusion 2

3. Map of Pixley ka Seme District 3

4. Background – Demographics o The Pixley ka Seme District lies in the south-east of the Northern Cape Province and shares its borders with three other provinces, namely, the Free State Province to the east, the Eastern Cape to the south-east and the Western Cape to the south- west. o It is one of five district municipalities in the province and is the second largest covering a total surface area of 102 727 km 2. o It consists of 8 category “B” municipalities, namely, Ubuntu, Emthanjeni, Siyancuma, Siyathemba, Kareeberg, Renosterberg, Thembelihle and Umsobomvu. o The total population in Pixley ka Seme District is of 182 006 which represents 16,49% of the population of the Northern Cape. o The population density of the district is 1,6 persons per km 2 which is less than the provincial population density of 2,27 persons per km 2. 4

5. Demographics – Cont. o These are low to medium capacity municipalities, with serious capacity challenges especially in their technical sections/departments. o All these municipalities but three have Engineers in their technical departments o None of these Municipalities have planning capacity and these functions are either out sourced or performed by the District Municipality’s Shared Services Department. 5

6. Integration o Since February 2006 when the conditional level one accreditation was granted, the district municipality began the creation and integration of a housing unit into the district municipality’s functions. o Engagements with labour started through the Local Labour Forum and agreement was reached. o The Organisational structure was reviewed and tabled before council for approval. o The Housing unit has since been populated by a Manager, 4 Housing clerks, 1 Supervisor (Housing Specialist) and 2 Building Inspectors. o The Clerks are in the main responsible for HSS, Needs Register and consumer Education. o The building inspectors ensure that there is proper quality control, and their work is further monitored by the PMU technicians and engineers. o The shared service giving us assistance in terms of planning. 6

7. Current Organisational Structure 7 Senior Manager Corporate Services Housing Manager H. Nel Technical Specialist Serviced by PMU Building Inspector (x2) Mr. Makhubalo & Ngcingwane IT Specialist Vacant Housing Specialist Mrs. Duthie Housing Clerk (x4) Dwane, Jansen, Siningisi

8. New Organisational Structure 8 Municipal Manager Dep. Infrastructure, Development and Housing Dep. Of Corporate Services Dep. Of Corporate Services Dep. of Finance Senior Manager: Corporate Services Chief Financial Officer Personal Assistant to the Municipal Manager Sen io r Manager: Infrastructure, Development and Housing Internal Audit Unit Senior Manager: Shared Serv i ces Centre Shared Services Centre Senior Manager: Office of the Executive Mayor Office of the Executive Mayor Administrative Assistant/ Receptionist

9. Intergovernmental Relations o Inter governmental relations are lead by the executive mayor through the district IGR Forum which includes all the District Mayors and Municipal Mangers. o This Forum is supported by the technical IGR that is lead by the District Municipal Manager, the forum is made up of the districts technocrats which discusses all the shared services and assistance given by the district to the locals o These structures meet regularly on a quarterly bases and the technical IGR can even be called when ever something urgent come up. o Workshops were held to engage with local municipalities on the process of drafting the housing plans and of formalising our relationships in the form of a MOU/SLA that has been signed with all our locals. o All of the above forms part of the district shared services department program where the district gives support to local municipalities. 9

10. Finances - Income The following allocations were made to the municipality for: Accreditation Assistance 2009/10 – R 1,500,000.00 2010/11 – R 1,700,000.00 2011/12 – R 1,900,000.00 [R 441,000.00 not yet received] 2012/13 - R 0 [according to correspondence received from Province] Ouboks Capital Expenditure [Actual as per AFS] 2009/10- R 22,093,485.00 2010/11- R 31,420,793.00 2011/12- R 18,001,266.00 [May 2012] 10

11. Finance - Expenditure These grants were used for the creation and establishment of proper offices The procurement of IT equipment. Drafting of an organogram with job descriptions. Appointment of staff Drafting of Housing plans for all Category B Municipalities and the District Integrated Housing Plan Housing Demand Database Research – Appointment of volunteers Drafting of policies. Workshops with Municipalities and Councillors Acquisition of vehicles for site visits. Daily administration Site Inspections and visits 11

12. Financial Management Auditor’s General’s report on the Municipality 2007/08 = Qualified Report 2008/09 = Qualified Report 2009/10 = Qualified Report 2010/11 = Unqualified, with matters of emphasis: Predetermined Objectives Irregular Expenditure Grant under spending [MIG & Re-graveling] Roll-over to next financial year by the sponsored municipality Caused by project implementation delays Soil conditions Weather conditions 12

13. Projects o Pixley ka Seme District has been given full developer Status in the Ouboks project (ISUP) in Colesberg in Umsobomvu Municipality o This is a 1848 unit development with 200 rental units o The municipality is also playing some form of supporting role to Renosterberg, Siyathemba and Siyancuma Municipalities on their housing projects o With the Level two accreditation and the signing of the IP the municipality will play a much more active role in Human Settlements projects in the districts. 13

14. Projects – Cont. o The municipality is also involved in municipalities in the following areas 1. NHBRC Registration 2. Closure of old projects 3. Drafting of Business Plans 4. Unblocking of all blockages in projects or planned projects 5. Provisioning of inspectorate 14

15. Projects 15

16. HSS and Needs Register o The municipality has HSS Online since 2006 but the system has been a major disappointment since inception due to unreliability, o The system is currently operating at a snail space and the problems have been reported to the department. o The Regional and Provincial offices of the Department have been approached so as to allow the municipality to do capturing in their offices, this arrangement makes it possible for the municipality to catch up on the backlogs. o The Needs register is operational with all the challenges that have now been exacerbated by the fact that the consultants who used to work with the program where dismissed without proper staffing at national department. 16

17. Relations with Dept. Quarterly Task team meetings are held to ensure that all accredited municipalities receive the necessary support and sharing of best practices. There used to be HSS support group meetings were challenges experienced with the system were discussed and best practices shared The department is also going the extra mile in ensuring that the municipality is systematically introduced to current running projects. The municipality is accounting on a monthly bases on progress made with regard to accreditation process. MINMEC meetings being attended by the Housing Manager 17

18. Challenges o THE MAJOR CHALLENGES ARE: o The uncertainty around the funding model and inadequate funding [Provincial] o The Housing Unit not funded as from 2012/13 financial year o The Housing Quantum - one size fits all o HSS online – Not really operator friendly o Needs Register there are to many changes and not properly communicated o In house planning capacity – few planners available o Nationals focus on Metros [USDG] o Ad hock allocations – No MTEF (DORA) o Lack of housing capacity in local Municipalities 18

19. Challenges (Continue) o Provincial Department by-pass the Accredited District Municipality and communicate allocations directly to local municipalities – District act as fire fighters o Shortage of Regional Bulk Infrastructure o Lack of Investments o The role and responsibilities between the Department and accredited municipalities not clearly defined o Changing of Beneficiaries by Local Municipalities o Housing allocations not aligned with the backlogs, which will have a huge financial implication due to construction costs. 19

20. Conclusion o The municipality is labeled as one of the poorest in the province but Pixley ka Seme District Municipality has seen it as their responsibility to pull them selves out of the doldrums of poverty. o Housing as a function did not just add to the functions of the District but has rather improved the lives already of more than a thousand people in accelerating the delivery of Houses to those who so desperately needs proper shelter. o In the process the municipality has contributed in making the promised better life to our people a reality, through the creation of jobs and by so doing fighting poverty. o With the proper implementation of BNG in this region we will not just be removing the last hurdles of apartheid but will also be bringing hope to the peoples of this region 20

21. Conclusion o The municipality has moved in leaps and bounds in the integration of housing into its daily functions in the short five years from moving the district municipality with no Housing section to a fully functional and capacitated housing unit. o The decision taken to accredit the district especially in this province was the best decision taken by a National Department about the Northern Cape as our province is not like any and our solutions need a fresh mind set and thinking outside the box. o Our District Municipalities are best placed to deliver Housing functions as some of our category B municipalities do not have the capacity nor will it be sustainable for some to increase the capacity hence the decision of a Shared Services. 21

22. Conclusion o Pixley ka Seme District Municipality has been a District at work never been fazed by the massive challenges and is still Ready and willing to Serve its community in the provisioning of proper Human Settlements in an accelerated way. Thank you 22