Abstract:
The main objectives of this article is to gauge to what extent metropolitan
governments have led to the improvement of service delivery and to investigate
how the existing governing and institutional frameworks are working for metros.
Evidence suggests that the creation of widely drawn single-tier municipalities
encompassing the whole city is a better governing model than the two-tier system.
It has also led to the embodiment of the one city, one tax base slogan. It has also
contributed to improved service delivery although there are still backlogs due to inmigration.
There is evidence to suggest ordinary councillors are not communicating
effectively with their constituencies. Part of the problem is that they do not have
delegated powers and functions, even though they have constituencies to which they
are accountable. The local government electoral system of 50% ward councillors
and 50% proportional representation (PR) councillors has led in some cases to
bloated councils with a number of PR councillors contributing little to the governing
function. While there are some ward committees that are functioning, the evidence
suggests that the majority of these structures are not working particularly well. They
are too politicised and do not appear to promote public participation. Literature
suggests that there is limited public participation in integrated development
plans. Community Development Workers do bring some benefits to metropolitan
municipalities and support councillors in some instances. However, there is some
concern about their relationship with elected councillors and the implications for
democratic accountability.
