Ratepayer groups are questioning the fairness of sanitation tariffs in Cape Town, which are based on water meter sizes. Cape Town oversight bodies and ratepayer groups are once again criticizing the municipality's fixed water and sanitation charges, wondering who benefits from the latest tariff proposals and the decision to link fixed sanitation charges to the size of a property's water meter.
The civil organization STOP CoCT argues that while larger meters may justify higher fixed charges because they can supply a greater volume of water, this same principle does not apply to sanitation services. Sandra Dixon, founder of STOP CoCT, emphasized that water meters do not discharge wastewater from the property.
She explained that 'wastewater is discharged through a separate sewage connection. Sanitation costs depend on the volume of wastewater, the number of users, the capacity of the sewer system, and the type of effluent, not simply on the size of the drinking water meter.' Dixon noted that while it makes sense to link the fixed water charge to the meter size due to greater throughput, this argument is not applicable to sanitation.
Dixon provided examples indicating a disproportion: a property with a 25mm meter pays almost 2.8 times more in fixed sanitation charges than a property with a 22mm meter, and a 40mm meter attracts over seven times the charge. She asked: 'Where is the engineering or cost study that shows these properties generate 2.8 or seven times more fixed sanitation costs?'
In her view, using meter size to calculate the fixed sanitation charge is likely due to administrative convenience rather than an accurate reflection of sewerage costs. She demanded that the City explain the direct and proportional link between the size of the drinking water meter and the actual fixed cost of wastewater removal from that property.
In response to Dixon's comments, Mayco Finance member Siseko Mbandezi stated that the Council-approved water and sanitation tariff structure includes both a fixed and a volumetric charge, which are part of a single tariff. Mbandezi clarified that the fixed charge is intended to cover the constant costs of providing the service, while the volumetric charge compensates for costs related to water consumption and wastewater generation.
He reported that the majority of the costs for providing water and sanitation services are fixed, accounting for about 90%, with variable costs making up only 10%. To ensure affordability, fairness, and cost recovery, the City covers approximately 17% of these costs through fixed charges and 83% through volumetric charges. The purpose of the fixed charge is to cover the costs of maintaining and supporting the sanitation infrastructure, regardless of the volume of wastewater discharged.
Mbandezi added that using meter size as a basis for fixed charges is one of the established principles of municipal tariff setting both locally and internationally. The volumetric charge for sanitation reflects the actual wastewater generation and is currently calculated for residential properties based on 70% of measured water consumption according to the approved tariff.
Previously, the City announced the publication of amendments to its budget for 2026/27 for public consultation following a Western Cape High Court ruling regarding tariff structures. The proposed amendments, reviewed from May 27 to June 10, stipulated reverting fixed water and sanitation charges to the size of the water meter connection.
It should be noted that the South African Property Owners Association and co-owner AfriForum had previously successfully challenged municipal tariffs based on property value in the Western Cape High Court. In April, the court ruled that the City's fixed charges for refuse collection and sanitation were illegal and unconstitutional.
The Ombudsman identified five major failures in municipal service delivery by the City of Cape Town, finding that residents in the Langa Flats and Khayelitsha areas were denied constitutionally guaranteed services, and ordered mandatory corrective measures.
Ombudsman Kholeka Gqaleka stated that the results of the systemic investigation confirmed complaints regarding low quality of service. In her view, the municipality's actions qualify as improper conduct, inefficient management, and bias against affected residents.
Gqaleka emphasized that providing basic municipal services is not merely an administrative function but a fundamental constitutional obligation that directly impacts the human dignity, safety, and well-being of South African citizens.
The investigation was initiated by complaints received from residents during the annual outreach events of the South African Ombudsman in the Western Cape in March 2022 and April 2023. Gqaleka checked whether the City provided services progressively and effectively, as required by the Constitution and law, and confirmed that the assertion of non-compliance with the Constitution and law in the provision of basic services was justified.
Five critical areas were identified where the City failed to meet its constitutional and legislative obligations:
The Ombudsman discovered that the City of Cape Town had not concluded lease agreements with all residents of Langa Flats while continuing to collect monthly rent. This failure to formalize agreements undermined residents' housing guarantees, exposing them to uncertainty, disputes, and potential eviction.
Furthermore, it was found that the sewage infrastructure had not been fully repaired, and structural defects and fire safety equipment remained unresolved. Gqaleka noted that the City's inability to repair and maintain fire safety equipment directly affects constitutional rights to life, dignity, and adequate housing.
Residents of the SST-Mariana area continued to face inadequate access to water, and non-functional high lighting masts created safety risks for communities. The report indicated that the City violated the right to sufficient water, guaranteed under Section 27(1)(b) of the Constitution, by failing to provide water access to SST-Mariana residents.
It was also established that the City did not consult Eskom before relocating residents, resulting in some families being left without electricity. According to the report, this violates the City's positive obligations under Sections 152(1)(b) and (d) of the Constitution to ensure sustainable service provision and create a safe environment.
The investigation showed that the Mathew Goniwe and Town Two clinics lacked smoke detectors and CCTV systems, putting patients, staff, and visitors to the medical facilities at risk. The Ombudsman noted that the City's inability to install smoke detectors affects the municipality's constitutional obligation to ensure safe access to medical services.
Weaknesses in municipal governance were found, including inadequate application of bylaws, illegal construction on sewer easements, frequent sewage blockages, illegal dumping, and accumulation of waste. Illegal constructions hindered service provision by interfering with the operation of the sewerage infrastructure.
In addition, despite regular waste collection, the accumulation of refuse and illegal dumping continued to negatively affect residents.
The City's inability to resolve service provision issues over a prolonged period was deemed a pattern of improper conduct. The report indicated that the municipality's failure to implement reasonable measures within available resources, coupled with an inadequate response to three years of documented service deficiencies despite numerous promises, forms a pattern of improper conduct.
Gqaleka acknowledged the City's challenges, such as aging infrastructure, vandalism, land invasions, rapid urbanization, and competing demands for service provision. However, she stated that resource constraints cannot indefinitely postpone the realization of residents' constitutional rights.
Gqaleka issued mandatory corrective measures against the City of Cape Town, requiring the elimination of the identified shortcomings. The Municipality must ensure water access for SST-Mariana residents within 30 days, complete the repair of sewerage infrastructure in Langa Flats and Khayelitsha within 120 days, restore high mast lighting, resolve electricity issues for relocated families, and improve safety measures in clinics.
Monitoring compliance with these requirements has been assigned to the MEC for Local Government in the Western Cape. The Ombudsman stressed that municipal difficulties cannot justify persistent failures in basic service delivery, insisting that the Constitution requires progressive implementation and accountability.
The City welcomed the Ombudsman's recognition of its close cooperation with the office during the investigation and stated that it has already taken steps to address many of the raised issues. It also expressed approval of the findings concerning the National Treasury and the Department of Human Settlements, noting that the report acknowledged the financial and infrastructural difficulties faced by municipalities.
The Municipality clarified that the investigation concerned part of the N2 Gateway residential complex, the relocation of 10 families to SST-Mariana for sewer repairs, and safety measures in two municipal clinics. The City maintained that basic services are provided in the N2 Gateway complex, and that relocated families have access to water and sanitation.
In response to the remarks, the City reported that waste collection, sewer maintenance, and fire safety measures have already been implemented, and further updates to the sewer infrastructure are planned. It was noted that 94 valid lease agreements exist, but many residents have refused to sign or renew the agreements, which may require legal formalization.
Mayor Geordie Hill-Lewis's announcement that the unfinished Foreshore bridge in Cape Town will be completed has drawn mixed reactions from taxpayers and local engineer Gareth Ramsey.
Gareth Ramsey is interested in developing this site as part of the Capetrain Express Project. However, the Western Cape Town Economic Council (TECSA) argues that despite Hill-Lewis acknowledging the bridge's location on the city's busiest stretch, its completion will not solve traffic problems but merely create additional bottlenecks while the rail network remains paralyzed.
In response to Cape Argus, the mayor stated that proposals for completing the Foreshore bridge would be presented in September. He said: 'We plan to complete the unfinished bridges that we all grew up with as Cape Town residents. We will publish initial proposals for public comment in September, while work continues in the background.'
The mayor added that the project requires detailed design and engineering work, but the intention to complete it remains because 'the CBD and greater Cape Town need investment to ensure smoother traffic flow in the city centre.'
In 2023, the City confirmed that the bridge, which is over 40 years old, had not been forgotten in the budget, and work was underway on future solutions. Previously, former Minister of Transport Fikile Mbalula answered parliamentary questions, forecasting that the cost of completing the highway would be R1.8 billion at that time.
The Foreshore bridge earned the nickname 'unfinished bridge,' which has served as a filming location for many movies and commercials. The bridge's design began in the 1960s, and construction started in the 1970s, but it was halted in 1977 due to budget constraints.
Ndodana Khadibe, chairperson of TECSA Western Cape, stressed that funds should be directed to other areas during the housing and public transport crisis. She addressed the City of Cape Town with critical questions, stating: 'The Mayor admits that this is already the busiest and most congested intersection in Cape Town. Completing the bridge will not solve the traffic problem; it will just accelerate how quickly cars reach a dead-end bottleneck. Pouring capital into private car infrastructure while the rail network is paralyzed and public transport is underfunded is an insult to the working class.'
Khadibe demanded an immediate halt to planning until a fair economic impact assessment for the entire metropolis is published.
Last year, Cape Argus reported that Gareth Ramsey, a developer engineer, planned to create a Sky Train system in Cape Town, now known as the Capetrain Express Project. He proposed using the historic unfinished Foreshore section, while the City objected that it was not economically viable. In response to the mayor's announcement, Ramsey noted that Hill-Lewis is aware of the project, and the new plans are not feasible.
Ramsey also noted that the main argument in favour of completing the Foreshore Highway is reducing congestion at Cape Town's busiest intersection (at the bottom of Bo-Kaap Street). The Cape Taxpayers' Association (CTCRA) considers this an ideal solution, noting that since they have seen no projects or cost estimates, it is difficult to offer substantive commentary other than that the current traffic problem in Cape Town needs solving.
